A prominent downtown property has been moved to the city’s official “blighted” list after safety and structural problems were recently discovered.

The new label for 56 S. Market St. comes as part of the latest update to the city’s blighted property and property watch list. The building was previously listed as a watch property, meaning “one with the potential to become blighted.” The property was moved to the blighted category as of the Sept. 29 updated list.

The list, and corresponding code enforcement process, is one of several approaches the city is using to ensure the South Market Street building is either demolished or shored up. Two engineering reports, one commissioned by the city and one by property owner Suitland Road LLC, each called for either demolition or supports to address severe structural problems.

In an interview Monday, Frederick Mayor Randy McClement pointed to the combination of code violations, structural analysis and recent hearings in Frederick County District Court as evidence of the city’s commitment to force repairs to the long-vacant, dilapidated building.

“Whatever steps we can take to force the issue, we’ll force the issue,” McClement said.

Suitand Road LLC, which lists Montgomery County resident Tarek Aly as its principal, has planned to redevelop the site at 56-70 S. Market St. as a two-building apartment complex with first-floor commercial space.

Plan of action

The city has established a timeline for the property owner to resolve outstanding violations, complete repairs, and stabilize or demolish the building.

The city last week gave permission to the property owner to demolish a free-standing brick wall at the rear of the property, bypassing the Historic Preservation Commission’s review typically required for demolition in the Frederick Town Historic District. Both engineering reports recommended that the wall be demolished immediately.

Aly had until Friday to complete the demolition. The wall was demolished as of Tuesday afternoon, although the bricks and rubble still remained on the property.

Had the owner failed to meet the deadline for demolition, the city would have hired a contractor to complete the work and placed a lien on the property for the cost.

The city also required that the property owner begin the application process to repair or demolish the entirety of the building. The property owner previously received the HPC’s blessing to demolish the rear, two-story portion of the building and the adjacent free-standing facades.

Aly on Monday resubmitted that application, seeking HPC permission to demolish the rear section and facades without first submitting a replacement plan for approval, according to information provided by Patti Mullins, city spokeswoman. The city’s guidelines for demolition in the historic district typically prevent demolition until a replacement plan has also been approved.

The HPC will on Oct. 13 consider the request to remove the conditions it placed on its prior approvals.

Aly also plans to seek approval for demolishing the front, three-story section of the building, according to Abdullah Hijazi, an attorney representing him. The earliest the HPC could consider that request is its Oct. 27 meeting.

Although both engineering reports described the need to address safety issues as “imperative” and “urgent,” the monthlong wait before the HPC can weigh in will not exacerbate the potential safety hazards, according to Tracy Coleman, city engineer.

“The building is going to fall down someday. Is it going to be today, or 30 years from now? No engineer would know the answer to that,” Coleman said in an interview Monday.

McClement also noted that the building remained standing through historic snowfalls last winter, and recent heavy rain.

If the property owner does not follow through with the necessary applications, as some of his past actions might indicate, McClement said he was prepared to double down on enforcement measures. He did not have a specific plan for what or how the city would force the issue as of Tuesday, however.

Upping the ante

The city may soon have another option to force progress on the building under a proposed expansion to the city’s receivership program.

The Board of Aldermen on Thursday will vote on changes to the receivership ordinance to increase the situations in which the city can take ownership of a blighted or condemned property. Specifically, the amendment submitted by Alderwoman Donna Kuzemchak would include owners of condemned properties or those that have not complied with court-ordered repair of property violations.

If approved, the South Market Street property would qualify. A Frederick County District Court judge previously ordered the property owner to seek approvals and permits to demolish or repair the problems identified by city code enforcement within a certain time frame.

The receivership program was established through an ordinance approved in 2013. The program gives the city the ability to take the owner of a habitually vacant, unsafe and nuisance property to court. The court can either force the owner to make upgrades, or take the property from the owner and sell it to a qualified owner, with requirements attached to fix up the property in a set time period.

The original receivership ordinance defined eligible properties under specific criteria. Those include properties that are fire hazards, have unsecured windows and doors, or attract illegal activity and calls for police service.

The city has not pursued the receivership option for any property since the policy was enacted, according to Brittany Parks, assistant manager of code enforcement.

McClement said he was open to pursuing the receivership option with the 56 S. Market St. property. He emphasized, though, that the property must meet the ordinance requirements, and get the go-ahead from court, for the city to seize the property.

“If it rises to that level, we’ll consider it,” he said. “But it’s not just up to us. There’s a whole set of things that have to happen.”

Follow Nancy Lavin on Twitter: @NancyKLavin.

Follow Nancy Lavin on Twitter: @NancyKLavin.

Nancy Lavin covers social services, demographics and religion for The Frederick News-Post.

(13) comments

KellyAlzan

Tear it down already. No one cares. Life will go on

AnotherFineMess

But it's a contributing resource! Contributing to blight and economic disaster. It must be saved or people will stop coming to Frederick!

DickD

Sounds like the Mayor is trying to make this as difficult as he can, instead of going ahead and doing what needs to be done.

Dwasserba

Saying that this building stayed up during rain and snow is an irrelevant past tense statement. Tomorrow a bird could rest on it or a car pass with booming bass and it suddenly collapse on anyone and anything. Oh the lawsuits. Shoring those up is a waste of effort, money and potential. Then we do nothing and it stays nothing.

Whatsup

As I understand this:
• The receivership program was established through an ordinance approved in 2013. The program gives the city the ability to take the owner of a habitually vacant, unsafe and nuisance property to court. The court can either force the owner to make upgrades, or take the property from the owner and sell it to a qualified owner, with requirements attached to fix up the property in a set time period.
• The city has not pursued the receivership option for any property since the policy was enacted, according to Brittany Parks, assistant manager of code enforcement.
• …..bypassing the Historic Preservation Commission’s review
• Of the nine still listed, two — the 56 S. Market St. building and 123-125 N. Market St., commonly referred to as the Asiana building — are labeled as blighted.

So, what is the problem with the Asiana building? Get the ball rolling, this has gone way beyond reasonable.

AnotherFineMess

The Asiana is in full compliance! No open violations! The City let the Ro's go without ever mandating the building be brought up to code as required in the original Notice Of Violation. You'll never get a court to approve receivership when the City wiped the slate clean!

56S never had significant violations until April and then that was because of citizen action. There has never been any code enforcement action other than the recent violations of which only the one for the roof is significant. You'll never get s court to take someone's property without a history of non compliance! 9 months is not a history!

There's no unsafe structure violation in spite of the fact that it's been inspected and is in danger of collapse! Brittany Parks (code manager) is incompetent and as such presents a significant danger to the community. The City will never get receivership on properties that never get cited for major violations!

Forget receivership! It will never happen!

The building is dangerous because the city failed for decades to address anything! No enforcement action was taken or ignored. You can't take someone's property when the offender is the city! There's no track record of violations!

City Hall is full of it!

DickD

And we are going to spend all kinds of tax payer money to attract people to downtown Frederick and our boondoggle convention center and Plamondon hotel. Yet, the career politicians allow this, while trying to rip us off for corporate welfare.

MAVRICKinc7

AND has been for decades. WE are the problem for putting up with this, and voting in elected governance, family and their ASSIGNED members to maintain the Status Quo while Frederick crumbles under it own weight, by way of rot, ancient foundations and preserving, not history, but business ventures that own property in Frederick but REFUSE to do anything about it as our elected officials have chosen to accomplish for decades. We need a new Historic Preservation Commission, and the only way to do that is stop voting for our current elected government. Both are attached at the hip and will continue to WATCH Frederick crumble around itself as the the slum lords they currently represent.

Anyone out there have a different opinion on how to best make Frederick somewhere to go instead of somewhere to avoid? How many times in the last year, have we documented blight in the City? How many times have our current elected officials done anything about BLIGHT other than paying lip-service to the NOTION their hands are tied from doing anything about blight, and have for decades accomplished NOTHING to preserve the HISTORY of Frederick, Maryland.?

What does it feel like to be scammed by our own elected governance?

Fredmd21704

Just tear down the eyesore already. enough is enough

Duhh

Better yet, sell the property to someone who is truly going to restore the property. This guy has no intentions to doing so or does not have the capital to do so.

Fredmd21704

the property is beyond restoring, its crumbling, and the only true answer is to tear it down, it has been an eyesore for decades, and this is one of the first things people see when they come into downtown.

AnotherFineMess

Our Mayor is slightly misinformed. It was a citizen that filed the code complaints that forced the problems to court. It was a citizen that demanded a structural engineering report because the City ignored this property for 40 years!

Code Enforcement recently claimed they didn't want to burden the developer and the Mayors assistant Nikki Bamonti claimed the city had no idea there were any problems with the building because nobody ever complained!

Now, thanks to a concerned citizen and 1 Alderman we know the building is far worse than anyone officially knew and in imminent danger of collapse!

The City engineer says it can stand for 30 years or come down tomorrow? What an idiot!

The problem is not when it comes down, it's WHEN it comes down people will be smashed and the City wants to putz around and essentially take no protective measures?

The lunatics have taken over the asylum!

DickD

Career politicians have taken over, but I am being redundant.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, insights and experiences, not personal attacks. Ad hominen criticisms are not allowed. Focus on ideas instead.
TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
No trolls. Off-topic comments and comments that bait others are not allowed.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
Say it once. No repeat or repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.