L.A. declares uncleared properties a ‘public nuisance,’ including a mansion from HBO’s ‘Succession’

Los Angeles Times ^ | V | Tony Briscoe

[E. Pluribus Unum]

• Eight Pacific Palisades properties, including a mansion featured in the HBO show “Succession,” were declared public nuisances for failing to clear toxic fire debris by Oct. 2.

• All of the owners either opted out of the federal cleanup programs, or were deemed ineligible.

• Owners must now remove the ash and rubble themselves or prepare for city contractors to come and clear the lots, and then send a bill.

A burned-down hilltop mansion once featured in HBO’s “Succession” is one of eight Pacific Palisades properties declared a public nuisance by Los Angeles city officials who alleged the owner still hasn’t removed fire ash and debris.

The Los Angeles Board of Building and Safety Commissioners, a five-member committee that adjudicates public nuisance cases, voted that the fire debris at the eight properties — a mix of luxury estates, multifamily apartments and businesses — constituted a public nuisance and could pose a risk to public health and safety. City officials alleged the owners of these properties failed to meet the Oct. 2 deadline to clear hazardous fire debris.

The board’s vote pressures owners to clean up the toxic debris — or prepare for a city contractor to step in, clear their lots and send them a bill for the work.

“Once a property is declared a public nuisance, the owner has the right to abate the nuisance until the department solicits bids for the work,” said Gail Gaddi, a spokesperson for the L.A. Department of Building and Safety. “A process or timeline has not been established for when the department will begin to solicit bids.”

The board voted to cite a burned-down mansion in the 1600 block of North San Onofre Drive, which was the filming location in season 4 of the HBO drama “Succession” as the luxury estate of the Roy siblings...

[Da Coyote]

So, the city, through it’s practiced and unequalled incompetence, allowed that area to burn. And then they ask the owners to clean up? In a just world, the “leaders” of that city would be thrown into a fire. A hell of a hot one. With massive cheering. LA voters, get to it.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

How long before they start stealing “public nuisance” properties via eminent domain?

[packrat35]

So they are now making their move to seize these properties?

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

Communist Democrat Karen Bass’ troops are looking to extract either 1) more money from the victims, or 2) acquiring property for “friends” via penalty accrual.

[Semper Vigilantis]

So, the city, through it’s practiced and unequaled incompetence, allowed that area to burn. And then they ask the owners to clean up? In a just world, the “leaders” of that city would be thrown lowered into a fire slowly. A hell of a hot one. With massive cheering. LA voters, get to it.

Fix it for ya. ;)

[gnarledmaw]

Im not speaking specifically to these properties but the laws or the trigger to activate them must not be as clear cut as one might think.

There is a house and a bar across the street from each other at an intersection in a residential area in a nearby town. 30+ years ago these were both viable buildings that someone would have wanted to own and use. Small town, everyone knows about these buildings.

For some reason both were allowed to stand derelict with no action this whole time. Objects on the property dont seem to have moved since the early 70s.

In the last couple of years both seem to have been breached by rot and are now decaying. Same objects in the windows at both suggest that nothing inside has moved.

They are becoming a haven for rats, raccoons, and any other local critter that wanders into town and as I said, this is within a residential area not some factory or abandoned farm.

As much as I dislike abuse of eminent domain, we have to let local government step in once something becomes a significant nuisance.

[Waverunner]

Remember in California it’s , “Show me the money”.

[RetiredTexasVet]

Maybe those 8 owners could apply for some of that 100 million raised from Fire Aid to clear the properties ... oh wait, those funds were stolen.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Maybe those 8 owners could apply for some of that 100 million raised from Fire Aid to clear the properties ... oh wait, those funds were stolen.

"All of the owners either opted out of the federal cleanup programs, or were deemed ineligible."

[cpdiii]

The real question is why did the city declare a burned out home toxic waste? It is all about control of private property. Does a house have some toxic metals in it from appliances, computers, damn solar panels, etc? Yes they do.

It is all about concentration to a danger level. Los Angeles public water has many toxins in it. They are very low concentrations and of no danger to the public just as those burned out homes are not a danger.

As mentioned above, It is all about control.

[RetiredTexasVet]

Their properties did burn but were deemed ineligible.

[cpdiii]

I forgot to add this. Developers lust for this land. Why has it not been cleaned up and rebuilt? That is a good question to ask Governor “Good Hair” Newsom and the mayor of Los Angeles, AKA Mayor “Bad Hair.”

[Marko413]

Your house burned down, now we are going to fine you.