Condos Occupied Before City’S Ok Cda Won’T Evict Tenant, Vows To Work With Developer To Help Project Comply

The same developer who once wanted to build condominiums on the east side of Tubbs Hill has illegally allowed tenants to move into his uncompleted building nearby.

Following a three-year legal battle with the city, Joe Chapman built a three-story condominium building on East Lakeshore Drive along Sanders Beach despite complaints from neighbors.

Charles Sargent, 87, said he moved in two weeks ago to the ground floor of the condos, which the city says are not legally ready for occupancy.

“It’s great. It’s got a beautiful view,” said Sargent, a retired civil engineering professor. “The city came by and put up a sign that said we couldn’t live here.

“Joe took it down and said he would take care of it.”

Chapman did not return a message left at his office Tuesday.

Dan Yake, the city growth services director, said Chapman has not received a certificate of occupancy for the building near 12th Street and East Lakeshore Drive, which is a necessary document indicating that Chapman has met all requirements for everything from safety to proper zoning.

“Ideally, we want all of our property owners to live in safe, appropriate structures. That’s our objective here,” Yake said. “The bottom line is we want Mr. Chapman to obtain a certificate of occupancy for the structure.”

Inspectors have been working this week to determine what Chapman needs to do to get proper approval, Yake said.

Two issues not resolved are landscaping and platting - which defines ownership details such as whether the condos will be sold or rented.

City building official Bob Rudio said the Chapman condos have forced the city to balance between allowing him to fix the problems and enforcing the letter of the law.

Regardless, the city will not force Sargent to move out, he said.

“To occupy the building falls on the side of being illegal,” Rudio said. “But we want to do everything we can to expedite getting him in a legal condition.”

Chapman started trying to obtain a building permit for the condos in 1996. His original application was denied by the city building department, on the grounds that the zoning only allowed a single-family residence.

The City Council later overturned that decision, saying the zoning hadn’t been changed to a more restrictive status until a day after Chapman applied to build the condominiums. Also in 1996, Chapman proposed building condominiums on the south side of East Lakeshore, along Sanders Beach. That building permit was denied.

A year later, Chapman obtained a permit to begin building a two-bedroom home on the beach. The city initially granted permission, then rescinded the building permit after being sued by the Sanders Beach Preservation Association. That prompted Chapman to file a $235,000 suit against the city.

In June 1998, Chapman suggested dropping his lawsuit against the city if it would swap his 100 feet of Sanders Beach property for the land at the base of Tubbs Hill and rezone the land near Tubbs from residential to commercial.

The city received hundreds of letters against the plan, scores of residents voiced complaints to the planning commission about it and more than 2,000 signed a petition opposed to the idea. Then in October 1998, Chapman again proposed a swap. This time it was for his beach property and dropping the suit if the city would give him $82,500 and a small piece of ground downtown.

The City Council voted 4-1 to deny that plan.

Chapman then demolished his home in the fall of 1999 and started working on the current condominiums.

Last November, the city issued a stop-work order against Chapman after neighbors complained the building was too high.

Rudio said planners investigated and determined that the three-story structure was in violation of a height-restriction ordinance.

Chapman’s crews kept working despite the stop-work order.

“We had to define what we meant by `Stop work,”’ Rudio said.

“We ordered all work stopped except that to replace the roof trusses.”

Chapman replaced those roof trusses, which reduced the building’s height.

“That is one of the things we need to confirm - whether it meets the height ordinance,” Rudio said.

Neighbor Nona Kay Barclay said in an earlier interview that she and her husband, Dick, have objected to Chapman’s condos because they don’t fit with the neighborhood and they believe the building will hurt the Barclays’ property values.

Rudio said neighbor complaints first alerted the city to both the height concerns and tenants moving into the building.

“It’s not like Mr. Chapman is the only one who does that or has done that,” Rudio said. “It’s improper. But we will work with the situation so that we have a safe, viable and hopefully prosperous project.”