Neighbors push for action on problem property

More than 14 years after the city issued a permit for the construction of a pool at 1445 Flower Drive, a city attorney appeared in court to argue the city had a right to enter the property and bring an end to the work.

The city emerged victorious from the March 13 hearing in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court, with a judge upholding an order the city’s code compliance special magistrate issued in November 2017. The magistrate determined the owners of the house at 1445 Flower Drive had irreparably violated the city code. The order, which property owners Tollyn and Robina Twitchell challenged in court, said the city was entitled to remove the pool.

However, the judge’s decision didn’t bring a resolution to the fight over the unfinished pool. Assistant City Attorney John Shamsey said one count of the property owners’ lawsuit was still pending; a decision could take a few more months. And the property owners could challenge any outcome in appellate court, extending what has already been a protracted case.

“This situation has dragged on longer than any code compliance situation I’ve ever dealt with,” Shamsey said.

Residents in the Harbor Acres neighborhood have watched for more than a decade as the city attempted to address issues with construction at the Flower Drive home. It’s a source of consternation for neighbors, who say in addition to being an eyesore, the unfinished house is a hub for mosquitoes and rodents because of the unfinished pool and unkempt landscaping.

“Owners next door and across the street have taken their properties off the market,” Harbor Acres resident Joyce Cloutier wrote to City Attorney Robert Fournier in a Dec. 3 email. “Realistically, no one would purchase a home anywhere near this disaster.”

The Twitchells first obtained a permit to construct a two-story addition to the home in 2002. The city first issued a notice of a code violation for the construction in 2007, with staff citing the property for an accumulation of trash and overgrown landscaping. A special magistrate upheld that decision, which the Twitchells challenged in court in 2008.

The city and the Twitchells eventually reached a settlement stipulating the Twitchells would work to make the home appear as finished from the exterior. Residents have reached out to the city to share their concern about the appearance of the property, but the city believes the property is currently compliant in that regard.

Shamsey said he understood neighbors’ objections to how the property looks, but resident dissatisfaction isn’t enough to issue a citation.

“If something doesn’t meet their standards, it doesn’t automatically mean it’s a code violation,” Shamsey said.

The length of the construction — and the repeated challenges to any effort to bring the property into compliance after the city issues a code violation — has triggered questions from neighbors about the Twitchells’ motives. In a response to Cloutier, Fournier said the city had negotiated with the Twitchells’ attorney throughout 2018 on a potential settlement to address the pool.

Fournier said the Twitchells declined to sign an agreement at the “11th hour ... for reasons still not clear to (him).” On March 12, attorney Morgan Bentley filed a motion to withdraw as counsel for the Twitchells, citing “irreconcilable differences between counsel and plaintiffs.” Cloutier asked why the Twitchells were willing to foot the bill for legal challenges but not to finish the construction on the property.

“This is what they’ll fight for?” Cloutier said. “I don’t get it.”

A representative for the Twitchells could not be reached for comment. In the 2017 challenge to the magistrate’s order to remove the pool, Bentley contended the Twitchells had complied with the city’s request to make the home appear finished from the exterior. The document argued the Twitchells were not obligated to finish the pool because it was not visible from the outside.

Although that argument failed, it’s still unclear when the property may be brought into compliance. Shamsey said the city is intent on pursuing a resolution to the outstanding issues — something neighbors have been eager to see for some time.

“I don’t know how it could go this long,” said Joe R. Hembree, who lives next door to the Twitchell house. “I just don’t understand that.”