Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC2000-004 Memorandum From Debra K. Weldon, To Tony Bozyski 08/26/2003OFFICE OF I][][][E CITY ATTORIVE PEIV�.� Little Rock, Arkansas � AUG 2 7 2003 MEMORANDUM Byz TO: Tony Bozynski Director Housing and Neighborhood Programs FROM: Debra K. Weldon(-Dv-w Deputy City Attorney Re: Demolition Authority DATE: 26 August 2003 After researching the federal, state and local laws regarding the authority of historic preservation districts, I was unable to find any language in support of a mandatory COA for demolition or for any other alteration of structures. In addition to statutes and ordinances, I also reviewed all published cases involving historic district COA's in the United States and could not find any references to forced demolition, except by means of a city's nuisance abatement procedures. The purpose of the Arkansas Historic Districts Act is "to promote the educational, cultural, economic, and general welfare of the public through the preservation and protection of buildings, sites, places, and districts of historic interest through the maintenance of such as landmarks in the history of architecture of the municipality, of the state, of the nation, and through the development of appropriate settings for such buildings, places, and districts." Ark. Code Ann. § 14-172-202 (Michie Repl. 2002). This emphasis on the preservation of structures is reflected in the special procedure for granting a COA for demolition of a structure within the MacArthur Park Historic District. If after six calendar months of considering demolition alternatives, the Commission has not found a viable alternative to demolition of the structure, the Commission must reschedule the matter for public hearing and make its final determination as to the application. LRC § 23-133(c-d). It is apparent that the Commission's role is to allow demolition as a last resort, not to require it. For this reason, I am not able to provide you with any language to the effect that demolition pursuant to a COA must be carried out by the petitioner. In Arkansas, there are several means by which demolition or closure of a building may be required. 1. Cities may remove, repair or raze a structure that does not meet the minimum building code standards. Ark. Code Ann. § 14-56-203 (Michie Repl. 2002). 2. If there have been multiple convictions of municipal code violations, the city attorney may also bring an action to abate a nuisance pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 14-54-1504. This would be an action for an injunction to abate and prevent the continuance or recurrence of the nuisance. The injunction may provide for the closing of a building, if it is the least restrictive alternative available to effectively accomplish the abatement. 3. In addition, the Arkansas General Assembly has declared that any premises, building, or place used to facilitate the commission of a continuing series of three or more criminal violations of Arkansas law is detrimental to the law-abiding citizens of the state and may be subject to an injunction, a court -ordered eviction, or a cause of action for damages. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-74-109 (Michie Repl. 2002). The court's order may require that the building be closed, if it is determined to be the least restrictive alternative available to effectively accomplish the abatement. I am not able to advise you concerning the feasibility of any of these nuisance abatement procedures under the circumstances at issue. If you feel that one or more of these approaches might be applicable to the house in question and you wish to pursue an enforcement action, please contact Bill Mann for additional advice from our litigation section. Please contact me if you have any questions.