Ypsilanti City Council to consider giving developer $25,000 break on fines owed for Starkweather House
Ron Rupert wants the Ypsilanti City Council to forgive $25,000 in fines that have accumulated because the city says he hasn't made repairs to The Starkweather House.
Tom Perkins | For AnnArbor.com
Ypsilanti’s City Council will have to decide whether to give a local developer a break on $25,000 in fines for not repairing a historic home on time.
Ron Rupert was supposed to renovate much of the Starkweather House, once a stop on the Underground Railroad, by Nov. 1, 2009, or face fines of $50 per day under a contract he signed with the city in April 2009. Some of the work remains to be done, and last week Rupert said he hoped to have more of the house renovated by the end of the year.
Assistant City Attorney Karl Barr told council members during a presentation Dec. 1 that they have three options. The council could strictly enforce the contract; it could consider the renovations complete and waive the fees; or it could give an extension on the deadline.
Council is expected to vote on the issue Feb. 1.
Under a contract signed in October 2007 when Rupert bought the dilapidated home, he was to make structural and exterior repairs. He does not need to have the home fit for occupancy, though he hopes to eventually renovate the interior and possibly rent it out as apartments. He asked council for an extension on some work in March 2009, and his request was approved.
The modified agreement signed in April 2009 required that some parts of the exterior be completed by July 31 or Rupert would face a fine of $50 per day. It stipulated that roof, door, trim, windows, frames, siding and all other exterior repairs be completed by Nov. 1, 2009. A December 2010 memo from City Planner Teresa Gillotti to the city's Historic District Commission stated that the roof was not completed, the frames and some siding hadn't been replaced, and windows remained broken.
Additionally, temporary support beams still propped up the roof over the home’s two porches.
The front porch and door to the Starkweather House.
Tom Perkins | For AnnArbor.com
Rupert acknowledged that there was work to be done but said the home is in much better condition than when he bought it three years ago. He said he's trying to renovate the home to make to look exactly as it did in 1844 when it was built, and that type of restoration can be a lengthy process.
Rupert also required surgery on his elbow following an injury and remains in physical therapy, which slowed work, he said.
A city building inspector last year deemed the building structurally sound. A memo from city staff states that siding had been replaced, the exterior painted, part of the roof repaired and general improvements made throughout the structure.
“All that’s really left is detail and cosmetic stuff,” Rupert said. “It has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the structural integrity.”
Rupert added that it was his understanding that the purpose of the project was to stabilize and save the house, not for the city to make money through fines.
“I hope that they go along with that and don’t hold my feet to the fire on this,” he said.
Rupert disagreed with Assistant City Attorney Barr’s assessment that the house needs more work to complete what is required by the contract.
“I have completed my work," he told the council at the Dec. 1 meeting.
Barr said that “depends on your definition of ‘finished.’” He said he was looking for direction from the council on how to proceed.
The building is a Greek revival farmhouse built in 1844 that sits near the corner of Cornell Street and Huron River Drive. Ypsilanti developer Arthur Campbell owned it in 2005 and had planned to demolish it.
When the Historic District Commission learned of those plans, it proposed a special historic district around the house’s property called the “Starkweather Historic District”, which City Council approved.
A beam supporting the roof of the front porch.
Tom Perkins | For AnnArbor.com
Campbell then donated the home to the city, for which he received a $75,000 federal tax deduction. The city then put out a request for proposals, asking developers to offer plans for renovating the property. Stewart Beal and Rupert were the only developers to submit offers, and council voted 4-3 to approve a sale to Rupert for $9,000 in September 2007. Part of the terms of the sale was that the house was to be renovated within 18 months.
Council member Brian Robb, then-council member Lois Richardson and then-Mayor Pro Tem Trudy Swanson-Winston voted against the sale. Robb said he didn’t think the city “should be in the business of flipping houses.” Richardson declined last week to comment on the continuing debate over the house.
Although porch work is listed as completed in city memos, two old, cracked porches built in the 1940's that have temporary support beams helping prop up the roof remain in the front and back. Rupert said he plans to remove the back porch and replace the front porch with a replica of the original.
He said he wants to replace current windows with the kind of windows the home originally had. He also needs to have a door custom made, which he also said is a challenge, as is replacing the decorative trim.
The exterior renovations are expected to cost $55,000.
Robb expressed frustration over the situation and said he voted against the deal so a delay like this wouldn’t happen. He also questioned why regular notice of Rupert’s increasing fine wasn’t sent to him. Barr said he was unsure why those notices weren't sent.
"When this started three to four years ago, we never foresaw this happening and here we are with egg on our face for a lack of oversight,” he said.
Robb said he's concerned that if the council waives the fee it will appear the members are doing a favor for Rupert.
“We can waive that fee, and that would go over really well because he’s done work for me and he’s friends with everyone on council,” Robb said.
He later pointed out that council had just voted to revoke a tax abatement for Beal because he was late on paying $5,000 in taxes, but is now considering letting Rupert "off the hook" for $25,000 in fines.
Robb added that there is a contract between Rupert and the city and he doesn't think council "should have vote to say if the work is complete".
A side view of the Starkweather House. Rupert plans to remove the side porch.
Tom Perkins | For AnnArbor.com
Rupert said he has lived in Ypsilanti for 20 years and been building here for 30 years so he knows or has had conversations with all council members except Richardson and Ricky Jefferson. But he said he doesn’t maintain a relationship with them beyond city-related projects or events.
Mayor Paul Schreiber said he favors waiving the fines, adding that the home had been saved from demolition, which was the most important task. He said he would review the issue before the next vote, but was pleased with the renovation’s progress. He also pointed out that the project has not cost the city any money.
“The reason we went through this process is to ensure it will be fixed up, and it’s in the process of being fixed up. Maybe not as quick as possible … but it’s not a dangerous building and it’s not in danger of being demolished by neglect,” he said. “It seems now that this is a victory for historic preservation.”
Council members Mike Bodary and Pete Murdock said they were undecided on the fines and needed to gather more information.
“I don’t see a good, clear path on this,” Bodary said.
Comments
marylea
Sat, Jan 15, 2011 : 12:35 p.m.
Agree with Mick52. If the building is worth preserving (I think it is) and the developer bought on terms he agreed to, then I don't understand why the city waited so long to hold him accountable. If an exception was to be made, new terms should have been determined much sooner.
BobbyJohn
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 11:46 p.m.
Ypsilanti should not have gotten involved in this in the first place. Also, it is crazy to not have given him an ultimatum earlier than than did. Have set up a total lose/lose situation with no good answer. So sad.
Jim Fink
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 9:40 p.m.
While technically correct,"then-council member Lois Richardson" implies current council member Richardson is no longer on City Council. She is.
average joe
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 6:05 p.m.
I'd like to see pictures of what it looked like before he bought it. Also, even with his injury, when was the last time he actually completed any work on the property? Some things could be completed even without any cost, such as triming back the over growth on the front porch. It didn't grow that much in just one summer.
Mick52
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 5:44 p.m.
My two cents: $.01 If this guy is a developer, I would want to know if since the agreement, has he put $ into other holdings of his that could have gone into this home that needs to be preserved. If so, then I say demand the $25k. $.02 Why does the city wait until the amount owed is $25K? Why not start knocking on this dudes door when it reaches $1500.00? That would be 30 days. $3000 is 60 days. But no, wait until he owes $25k. Almost a year and a half later. One would think that a fine of $50/day indicates the city wants some pronto action. Reminds me of Governor Granholm waiting to appoint a financial director to Detroit Public schools until the deficit is $250 million, rather than one or two rocks, which to me is a lot of $$. How about taking the house back and see if WCC has a construction skills class that can work on this place?
treetowncartel
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 5:08 p.m.
Where is this house at anyhow? Any idea how it was used in the underground railroad? Is there one of those pivoting walls or a trap door?
Snehal
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 4:51 p.m.
Even if the city forgives the penalty and grants him extension then also what is the guarantee that he will finish off in time. And also he is disagreeing to what is defined as finished. I think he should pay the penalty and then the restoration work should be handed to some other contractor/builder.
frozenhotchocolate
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 2:04 p.m.
totally agree, the underground railroads are vital. That is why most my family lives in Toronto.
joe golder
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 1:47 p.m.
fumble....fumble.....fumble....bad call....dropped pass.....fumble...would someone hold on to the ball and run in the right direction please.
Patricia Briggs
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 1:27 p.m.
Someone should step in to renovate the house as it is part of history of the Underground Railroad system.
MGoYpsi
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 12:55 p.m.
So,let's just keep letting these developers off the hook without paying. The city can just raise taxes on us actual homeowners that pay our taxes. We need to make sure that the developers make money. Soon we will hear again how the City of Ypsi has no money and needs to make more cuts.
ypsilantian
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 12:15 p.m.
First, The City should have a least verified that Mr Rupert had the means to fix the home, which it appears that he didn't. Secondly, there are enough historic districts and restrictions already in Ypsilanti and the City Council should have stayed out of it in the first place. Watch for these same issues coming with the Thompson building and Beal.
Annie
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 11:56 a.m.
So, I'm confused. What does the Council want Mr. Rupert to do with the house? It certainly looks better than MANY of the houses in Ypsilanti Township...and if he's done the structural repairs and has "fixed" the exterior. What are they still looking for? Give Mr. Rupert a list of what they want to be finished and a certain amount of time to get the fixes done, otherwise, take the house back and let it waste away like the rest of Ypsilanti...
pseudo
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 10:39 a.m.
once again, this city council combined with terrible legal advice and contract structure over reached and got themselves into a loose loose situation. They treat this developer well and it feels like favoritism. They slam the guy - they can risk loosing the house and another strike (what is now, #5) against them as being hostile to developers even in an economic mess - which continues to make it impossible to sell a portion of Waterstreet without clear zoning. My suggestion would be to seek new legal council for the next deal. Clearyy the current advice hasn't had good outcomes for the city. Have this guy put something in escrow with some sort of deadline in the future (say a year or two). and then figure out what you really want with water street and zone it appropriately. Its not really big enough for PUD developments anyway.
jondhall
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 10:03 a.m.
I'm not sure who I agree with more, just tell the city anything,but do as you please. One can always beg for forgiveness or more tax breaks. Let's take a vote, and I'm betting "give him more time" loses! Bonding is a great idea,most of these "developers " could never get bonded unless their Daddy did it!
Terrin
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 9:03 a.m.
The City should give the guy more time. If it doesn't the guy will not be able to continue. The house will further fall apart. Another eye sore in Ypsilanti. The fact the guy took on the project is and of itself amazing. With historical homes, there are so many rules on what you can and cannot do it would drive a normal person crazy.
Killroy
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 8:09 a.m.
Is it any real surprise given that most Americans don't care about their own history or the historic structures that helped make U.S. history? Look at Fort Wayne, look at the Starkweather house, and countless other examples in Michigan alone that are in ruins? Surprised? No, sad? Yes. This developer needs to be made an example of. Period.
average joe
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 7:54 a.m.
When the city sold it to Mr. Rupert, "...part of the terms of the sale was to renovate it within 18 months". That was in sept. of 2007, or 3 1/2 years ago. It seems to me that the city has given this guy plenty of time to make "structural repairs". If he can't get that part of the renovation done by now, how long will it take before he finishes the inside too? Since these terms were part of the deal, and even with extensions that have been granted already, he hasn't followed through on his part, I believe it's time for the city to take the property back & re-sell it to somebody else, maybe even a historic commitee. Maybe volunteers could make more head way on this. If the city can't legally "foreclose" on this property, then they should get a differant attorney than who wrote the original deal. A bond to cover the costs to complete the minimum renovations should have been required at the time of the original sale.
jondhall
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 7:27 a.m.
Why does one get the impression that no respectable developer can do business in the City of Ypsilanti? It is sometimes called Millage rates most often referred to as taxes! I'm so tired or,hearing about these "want a be developers", lower the taxes Vern, they will come in uninvited. It's really not that hard to figure out. Giving special breaks to wanna bee, is not the answer. Give the masses the consideration not the taxes. Look what they did to Michigan Avenue, way to go "Council ".
dading dont delete me bro
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 7:11 a.m.
the current owner say's it's structurally sound. he's also had a surgery. if he's showing diligent progress, give him a break and grant his extensions. but no more.
Steve Hendel
Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 7:11 a.m.
If there are several support beams propping up the roof, then the rest of the work is hardly cosmetic fluff, as claimed by Mr Rupert, the developer. Why is Council even spending five minutes on this issue? Either you enforce the agreement or you don't. They have already cut the developer plenty of slack.