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.
Last updated
Was this helpful?
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.
Neighbors peppered the city representatives with questions once the update was completed. There were a number of well founded concerns expressed and discussed in some detail. Attendees shared ideas that extended beyond what the SE-NSC is working on. Those ideas ranged in type from "carrot" to "stick" including: more research with departments at City Hall; engaging the Mayor's office for support and looking for other opportunities to influence a positive outcome from a variety of angles. After the City reps left neighbors dedicated about 30 minutes to discuss tactics and plans going forward.
Attendees from the UM area included Chris Stevens, Fatima Razic, Jenny Peer, Valerie McPherson, Jason McCaffery, Dale O'Dell, Mary Charipar and Rome Celli.
The following is an excerpt from an email sent to the president of UMNA, Rome Celli, from the City of Rochester's Southeast Neighborhood Service Center Administrator, John McMahon.
"I checked out the 4 properties on Crosman Terrace and it was pretty alarming. These are now super high priority to me as they are perfect examples of what neighborhood preservation needs to address.
"I have talked to the Inspector, Anita and to Anne Wallace, Manager of Code Enforcement as well as Mike Furlano in the Law Department. I wanted Law to seek an abandonment action where the city takes the houses but they are not candidates due to the fact that they are being kept secure by the owner. If they come to a point where the city has to secure them, we might be able to go the abandonment route.
"For now, the plan is to step up code enforcement and fines to a point where repairing and occupying (or selling) the properties is the only option that makes financial sense.
"Three out of the four have been cited for failure to register with the vacant building registry and the fourth one will be. There was no open case for 320 but there is now and violations will be added this week. Thanks to Ms. McPherson for leading the effort and please share my contact information with her."
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.
Advocate for code enforcement on all four properties <>
Notify the City of Rochester about the (vacant building) status of all four properties <>
A group of concerned neighbors will meet to discuss current situation on Friday, March 28, 2025. , will be in attendance.
Neighbors met in the living room of a private home in Upper Monroe near the site of four long-vacant homes on Crosman Terrace to discuss options & ideas for improving the situation with , and his deputy, Manuel Ortolaza. McMahon started with a detailed update on the status of these properties and outlined a new, more aggressive plan of action including escalating fines for code violations. He pledged to develop and share a dedicated spreadsheet with neighbors that will serve to inform our community as the new plan takes affect.
