Case: Vacant Properties on Crosman Terrace

In August, 2024 Several neighbors along Crosman Terrace invited UMNA to see four properties that have become vacant on the street and discuss ideas for addressing property code compliance concerns.

• 314 Crosman Terrace

• 320 Crosman Terrace

• 324 Crosman Terrace

• 330 Crosman Terrace

All four properties are owned by the same entity: "South Wedge Properties, LLC". A cursory inspection from the public sidewalk reveals numerous code violations in plain view.

UMNA rep, Rome Celli, shared research on the properties obtained from the City of Rochester website. In some cases the research showed outstanding violations have been recorded by the City code enforcement department.

Action Steps

• Identify these four properties as "High Priority" for action by UMNA

• Advocate for code enforcement on all four properties <LINK>

• Notify the City of Rochester about the (vacant building) status of all four properties <Vacant Building Registry>

• Follow-up with the City in mid-October, 2024 on property owner compliance related to the report filed below on September 11, 2024

Update on September 11, 2024

• 314 Crosman - The property was officially marked as VACANT by the City in April of this year. However, the owner has not yet registered the property as vacant and, therefore, has not paid the fee associated with keeping a property vacant. (The owner must register a vacant property voluntarily. The fee is $100/year if there is an intent to re-rent in the near term or $500/year if the owner does not intend to re-rent anytime in the foreseeable future. Failure to register voluntarily results in a penalty on top of the annual fee.) Notices calling for action by the owner went out by email and by US mail. The C of O is current and in force until the fall of 2026. This does not absolve the owner of responsibility to address new issues/violations. Numerous violations have been cited. No workplan has been established. If the owner files a workplan, the clock stops on fines but another clock starts on the workplan. Failure to adhere to the workplan results in fines.

• 320 Crosman - The property had NOT YET been marked as VACANT. Our calls have resulted in a work order to send out the code inspector and establish its status as a vacant property. This triggers an immediate exterior inspection to cite violations. (Apparently, such inspections took place at 314, 324, 330 hence the violations noted on those properties.) An interior inspection may result as well - depending on the owner's (lack of) responsiveness. Like 314, the C of O is current and in force until the fall of 2026 and, again, this fact does not absolve the owner of responsibility to address new issues/violations. No current violations because there hasn't yet been an inspection related to the property's current status (vacant).

• 324 Crosman - Similar status as 314 CROSMAN except this property was marked VACANT in May of this year.

• 330 Crosman - Similar status as 314 CROSMAN except this property was marked VACANT but the notes from this conversation weren't clear on the date.