I don't have a lot of sympathy for these absentee apt. owners. They think they have it so bad, but didn't give a rip about those of us that were displaced from that building - like me. They didn't even have the decency to show up for several days after everyone was evacuated to try to help in some way or to show concern - other than for themselves. At least THEY had a place to live while all of this was going on - as I reminded them on more than one occasion.
***
The way I see it is that the land the building is on is theirs, and there was an obvious drop after the tree line, so why is it all the city's fault? After that terrible, soaking, storm, a huge tree with it's long root system was the thing that went over the edge with all the land included. You should see the joke of a system they are using to make sure no other land erodes - rolls of plastic held in place with rocks - very scientific. And it doesn't look like it's been touched since last August, either. Nobody is even trying to prevent more from happening, but the owners sure want to blame someone for it. It's not all the problem of the city. The owners even tried telling me that the city planned on having the building open to rent this summer - not likely. There is no sane person that would move in with only about 12 feet of land between the building and the "hole."
***
And no, these apartments are not 30-40 years old - you must be thinking of the red brick ones next door. These are newer - only about 14-15 years old. The landslide was in the Arbor Heights apts. next to the funeral home.

I think the point is that they want the city to release the property from limbo.

I don't think it's the city's responsibility to bail them out. but the owners may be between a rock and a hard space. The owners are suing because the city won't let them rent out the property, well what if the city did allow them to rent and the building slid down the hill, then everybody would be suing the city for letting people live in such an unsafe structure. Now if the ownwers are hoping the city will condemn the building for insurance purposes. why did they get an engineering report showing at least one possible way to repair or control the slope. Do they expect the city to repair the property?? It was the owners decision to build or buy a building that close to a gravel pit, a soils report at time of building should have alerted at least the possibilty of landslides.

007 - These apartments have been around for at least 30-40 years. They are not brand new. Chances are the land was stable back then, so the city engineer could not have known what was going to happen.
-
The owners are not asking to be bailed out. They are asking for compensation because they feel the city has 'taken' the building and land from them. They have lost money for the last year because the city told the tenants to vacate the property. Since the property has not been condemned, the owners cannot file a claim with their insurance for the lost income.
-
Not sure if I believe in making the city repair the damage. It would have to come down to who owns what, and where the property line is located.

Where was the city engineer when the plans for this building were presented?

Sounds to me like the apartment owners are SOL. This land sat vacant for many years because of this vision. A good engineer could have told you the flow of rain water from the roofs and parking lot had to go somewhere. So you chased the almighty dollar and failed, why is it the cities responsibility to bail you out?