Pictured here is an aerial view of Hotel Marysville’s current state. Photo courtesy of the City of Marysville

MARYSVILLE, CA (MPG) - An administrative hearing that could determine the future of the Hotel Marysville has been scheduled for 9 a.m. Friday, Sept. 6 in the council chambers at Marysville City Hall.

The hearing is open to the public.

The owners of the five-story hotel have appealed the City of Marysville’s notice of violation of the city’s ordinance related to structures that are a public nuisance because they pose an imminent threat to the public.

Since the June 15 fire that ravaged the 100-year-old five-story structure, the City of Marysville has made multiple attempts to convince the property owners into address the building, which poses a threat of collapsing, according to two different engineering reports, and is riddled with friable asbestos.

A fenced security perimeter exists around the building, blocking the two northbound lanes of Highway 70 in front of the hotel and hampering normal operations for several businesses.

On Aug. 1, the City issued a Notice of Violation and Penalty Order, citing both the longtime neglect and the damage caused by the fire, and demanding the public nuisance be abated, either by shoring it up or demolishing it. The notice was issued to Feather River Plaza LLC, a limited liability company that has owned the Hotel Marysville but failed to develop it for 17 years.

Principals of the LLC received notices of the violation at addresses in Rhode Island and Los Angeles. A Los Angeles real estate attorney has been representing the property owners, who have not been to Marysville to explain what they intend to do with the hotel since the fire.

The limited liability company appealed the notice on Aug. 15.

The hearing will be conducted by three building officials not affiliated with the city. The officials will receive testimony about the structure’s condition and will be provided an opportunity to view the structure before determining whether the public is a public nuisance that needs to be abated.

The city also sent notice on Aug. 15 warning the owner the owner that it would be in violation if they did not prevent contaminants from entering the city’s storm drain system in the event of rain. The owners Counsel rebuffed this notice on Aug. 23, stating, among other things, that, “The Owner has not engaged in—and is not threatening to engage in—any illegal discharge of any kind into the city’s storm drain.”

On Saturday, Aug. 24, a torrential thunderstorm dumped more than a half inch of rain onto the building’s exposed fifth floor in the matter of a few minutes. Pictures and videos evidenced water running off the building and into city streets with storm drain outlets covered in charred debris from the building. City crews were on site attempting to mitigate the discharge as much as possible.

The city has since sent a second correspondence to the owners Aug. 28 demanding they address the asbestos issue.