The URL can be used to link to this page

98-855ORlGINAL Ptesented Referred To Council File # q�' r J S Green Sheet # 60799 Committee Date ia 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the September 15, 2 1998 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following 3 addresses: 4 Propert�Ap e aled A�pellant 5 1285 Hamline Avenue North (I,aid over from 8-4-98) Robert Davis, Jr. 6 Decision: I,aid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 7 1148 Seventh Street West (Laid over from 8-18-98) 8 Decision: Appeal denied. 9 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-1-98) Louis Sudheimer and Margaret Lynden 10 Decision: Variance granted on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the City whereby the 11 owner would relieve the City of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent 12 owners might experience as the result of this variance being granted. 13 2000 Seventh Street West #114 14 Decision: Appeal denied. Gloria Westphal 15 370-372 Fulier Avenue Terrance Luther 16 Decision: Laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meering. 17 629 North Street # 1 �h�s ��rt� Donald Callahan 18 Decision: Appeal denied. L,o�� dver - �o Es �.�t , q�g C C��.� �. ` M�. , 19 96Q Juno Avenue Ronald Staehel�' 20 Decision: Laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 21 80 West Iawson Avenue 22 Decision: Appeal denied. 23 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432,1434, 1436 Case Avenue; and 24 1741, 1751, 1761 Sims Avenue �`c'C�e�t�.c�, e� — `� l a 3 � �8' RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Thomas Fruetel Robert McClay for Garden Acquisition Limited Partnership 25 Note: Some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals 26 wete denied because the actions of the Fire Depariment are credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case 27 Avenue was granted. The appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims 28 Avenue aze denied. Green Sheet 60799 � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 The decisions are as follows: oR��N�� q g_g� 1424 Case: Appeal denied. 1428 Case: Appeal granted as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case: Appeal denied. 1432 Case: Appeai denied. 1434 Case: Appeai denied, but the DefaciencylCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibility; the enhy door to Unit #4 can be repaired or repiaced. 1436 Case: Appeal denied. 1741 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. Tf air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims: Appeal denied, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air condirioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1761 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the Deficiency/Correction list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" 16 1564 Upper Afton Road (Laid over from July 14, 1998) Robert & Marion Dufresne/Susanne Bothke 17 Decision: Laid over to the November 3, 1998 Legislative Heaxing. 18 Note: 79 Virginia Street has been rescheduled to the October 6 Properry Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman � Hazris f Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lancry ✓ � � 26 Adopted by Council: Date ��fh� �.?��$' 27 Adoption 28 By: 29 Approved 30 By: Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attomey � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council 2 city coun�il JNfACT PERSON & PFKKJE Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 UST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA BY (DAT� Septembex 23, 1998 OA�E�N�faf� . , .; TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET oe...R,rarowECrort qg•gsS No 60799 InIflaVDah arvcauxca ❑ q1YATTORNEY ❑ tlIYCLFRK ,__ ❑ F+w�uu.aEaRVCCSme. ❑ wi,xau.uwinccro ❑rAronloa4sssT4%n ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the 9-15-98 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcemen appeals for the following addresses: 1285 Aamline Avenue North;1148 Seventh Street West; 439 Portland Avenue; 2000 Seventh Street West 11114; 370-372 Fuller Avenue; 629 Noxth Street l�l; 960 Juno Avenue; 80 West Lawson Avenue; 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue. PLANNING CAMMfSS10N qB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION OFTRANSACTION SOURCE Hasthis P��rm everworkM under a conUact Torthis deparlmeM7 YES NO Has thie Pe��rm e.�erteen a citY emPbYce? YES NO Dces this pe�rm poeseas a sloll �wt rarmaltyposaesseU 6y arry cuRen[ city employee7 YES NO Is Mia pe(saMrtn a fargeted vendoR VES NO Ld�'��,F',w4� �+w,.�`�fP ��`� S�P � 6 (CIRCLEON� VES NO ACTNITYNUMBER INFORMATON (EXPWM y8- ��s t2 MINU'I'ES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING September 15, 1998 Room 330, Ciry Hall Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: John Conway, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Karl Johnson, Public Works; Tom L.eClair, LIEP; Phillip Owens, Fire Prevention; James Prill, Code Enforcement; Paula Seeley, Code Enforcement; Maynard V1nge, Code Enforcement; Don Wagner, LIEP Gerry Strathman called the meeting to order at 1:31.m. 1285 Hamline Avenue Nortb (L,aid over from 8-4-98) Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. Mr. Strathman spoke to the owner Robert Davis today who indicated he had filed a petition for an encroachment pernut from the City. Th1s layover will give the owner time to get this pernut. 1148 Seventh Street West (L.aid over from 8-18-98) (Note: the appeai on this property was originally heard on 7-14-98. It had been laid over to 8-4-98, 8-18-98,and 9-15-98.) No one appeazed representing the properry. Phil Owens reported nothing has been done to proceed with this property, therefore, he requested the appeal be denied. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the owner has had ample time to deal with the situation. 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-i-98) Louis Sudheimer, owner, appeared to request the ability to extend the sewer and water connection from the rear of the house to a new carriage house that he received pernussion to build from the Zoning Depaztment and the Heritage Preservation Commission. The gazage will be torn down. The project will take about 45 feet of additional length of sewer and water lines to connect from the house to this building. The Sewer Department feels the new line violates the State building code, and the existing pipe will not be able to handle the load of the two units and might fail. The new building will be a two bedroom home with a four car garage. Mr. Sudheimer plans to convert his present duplex back to a single family home as it originally was and then move the second unit to the carriage house. Mr. Sudheimer stated the State Building code does grant local governing authorities the flexibility to grant variances when necessary. Regazding The Sewer AepartmenY s contention it will be an additional load, there actually is not The pipe as it exists now has 6een handling two units for decades. There does not seem to be anything wrong wath the exisring system. The present pipang system is high quality, heavy duty cast iran. The system proposed by the Sewer Department will be r-/8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 2 light weight piasfia The same danger of failure exists for either system. In addition, the tunneling and trenctung the City is requiring, wiil be disruptive to the home. Mr. Sudheimer showed a map of the house and explained in detail what the City's plans and his plans aze for the system. Mr. Sudheimer says his plans do not include disrupring the City's planrings nor disrupting the omamental gardens in his own yazd. The City has also suggested he tie into his existing line, wluch would allow him fo avold the extra costs of digging up Portland Avenue, but he would be exposed to different charges. Tn addition, he would have to hire City workers to do the wark. He then would have to pay contractors to repair the Ciry's streets. Another alternative is Arundel Street. He would have to pay for the costs of tearing up that street as well. Mr. Sudheimers solution is the least expensive. Louis Sudheimer showed pictures to Gerry Strathman of his properry. Karl Johnson reported Public Works usually handles from the City main to the building. LIEP handles it from there. The initial services was built in 1885. Waste from the new structure would be entering a system that is over 100 years old. A failure in that secfion would resuit in backup inside the main house. Construction of a manhole where the old and new service would be combined would not necessitate construction in the street. This would involve digging under the existing service in front of the house and construcfing a manhole where the pipe from the existing structure and the new structure enter and continue out into the street. Thomas I.eClair distributed a copy of State Iaw 4715.0310, Use of Public 5ewer and Water Systems Required, which reads in part "Every building must have iY s own independent connecrion with a public or private sewer, except that a group of buildings may be connected to one or more manholes which aze conshucted on the premises, and connected to a public or private sewer. These manholes must conform to the standazds set by the local sewer authority." Gerry Strathman asked about consequences if Louis Sudheimer's proposal for service should fail. Thomas I.eclair responded it would be a larger expense for the homeowner to install the manhole then instead of now. Karl7ohnson responded Mr. Sudheimer's basement would be the recepticle for sewage from both structures. Mr. Strathman asked when the service from the street to a residence fails and the residence suffers sewer damage, is that considered the homeowner's problem or does the City have some responsibiliry. Mr. 7ohnson responded it is considered the responsibility of the homeowner from the main to the building. Gerry Strathman asked Louis Sudbeimer would he be willing to stipulate in writing to the City that should the proposed system fail, he would have no recourse to the City in regazds to any damages, injury, or losses that he would suffer. Mr. Sudheimer responded he would be willing to put that in wrifittg and indemnify the Ciry of Saint Paul. Thomas L.eClair stated any indemnity clause should be part of the deed when a house is sold to another person. Mr. Strathman agreed. Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the Ciry wherehy the owner would relieve the Ciry of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent owners might experience as the result of this ��'-8� S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 4-15-98 Page 3 variance being granted. The detemunations the City has made are conect and in conformance with City ordinances and the building codes. However, the City does have the authority to grant variances under certain circumstances, and there needs to be some fler.ibility for this property. This is a historic district and what the owner plans to do is con�uent with preserving that district. 2000 5eventh Street West#114 No one appeazed representing the property. Pat Fish reported this unit was condemned by the inspector for tenant sanitarion. The tenant was given time to remove excess combusribles. The inspector went there to meet with the attorney to explain what had to be removed from the aparhnent. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 370-372 Fuller Avenue Terrance Luther, owner, appeazed and stated he is getting unfair treatment. This property was troubled with drugs and prosritution. Mr. Luther was not able to safely access the property until 3une 30 because he had filed an unlawful detainer against the people that lived there. Since then, over $5,000 has been spent on the property. Thirty yards of trash has been taken out. The basement was emptied. At that rime, the inspector came by and took photographs. The gaz was cleaned up on Monday. Gerry Strathman stated the orders he has in front of him list seven violafions and asked which aze still outstanding. Terrance Luther responded only Violations 1 and 7 aze left. Violation 1, Replace the bathroom electric outlet with a G.F.C.I. outlet, is not done. Regarding Violarion 7, Mr. Luther has a letter from a company that will clean and inspect the furnace when their schedule allows. Mr. Strathman asked about long term plans for the G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Mr. Luther responded he is willing to fix it, but it may take 6 months. Before �xing the G.F.C.I., he would like to do other things before winter comes. Maynard Vinge reported the G.F.C.I. needs to be done. An extension can be given for six months for a G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Gerry Strathman stated of the seven items here, five have been resolved, and there is a contract on the sixth. He asked when the electrical contractor will do the work. Terrance Luther responded he has not picked one yet. Mr. Strathman asked was someone living there. Mr. Luther responded yes and the property has been tharoughly inspected. Geny Strathman laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting citing most items have been done and only one item is left. 9�- 85S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 4 629 North Street # 1 Donald Callahan, owner, appeazed and stated he is looking for a short extension to get his house refinanced. He needs the electricity tumed back on. He started making payments in May. The payment in July was late and the electricity was turned off. James Prill reported Code Enforcement received a routine notice from Northem States Power that the electricity was off at this properiy. Code Bnforcement sent a notice to the owner to restore the electricity. When it was not restored, Code Enforcement proceeded with the condemnation. Gerry Strathman asked would the condemnation be lifted when the electriciry is restored. Mr. Prill responded yes. Mr. Suathman asked how long it will be before the electricity will be restored. Donald Callahan responded the bill will probably be paid in two weeks and the electriciry will be turned on at that time. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. His decision will not be effective until September 23 when the City Council approves it. In the meantime, the enforcement of this order is suspended. 960 Juno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeared. He provided a 3 ring binder with photographs and paperwork to Gerry Strathman and stated he is appealing most of the Code Compliance Inspection report. Every time he has to deal with anyone at Yhe bualding department, he is told the items deal with the maintenance code. The scope of the building code is it only applies to construcuon, alterarion, moving demolition, or repair of any building or structure. More than half of the things on the code compliance report does not exist in Chapter 34. Ronald Staeheli went over the items on the Code Compliance report as follows: Building Item 1- There has been settlement of the sh Chapter 34 says notlung about a settled sttucture. Building Item 2- Replace badly broken and unlevel cellar floor. ChapCer 34 does not mention anything about a cellar floor at all. Building Item 3- Provide permanent type support posts under main beam complete with adequate footings on approved soil. 'I`hey are permanent under the building code. If the threads are peened on ihe temporary type, they then become permanent and meet the code. Building Item 4- Evidence of water in the cellar at one Ume, raise grade on exterior...with gutters... Chapter 34 does not mention gutters, but they have to be kept up if they are there. Building Item 7- Rebuild rear entry steps and(or proper materials, eta He would like this one rewritten so he can repair the stairs. Building Item 13 - Relevel sttucture. "L.evel" does not appear in the maintenance code. Electrical Item 1- Add outlet in living room and rear bedroom. There are three outlets in the living room which is about 10' by 11' and there aze two outlets in the bedroom, which is about 9' X 9'. Electrical Item 4- Install smoke deCector to U.B.C. There is a hard wired smoke detector with battery back up outside of the sleeping room, there aze smoke detectars in each bedroom, and in the basement. Plumbing Basement Item 1- Water heater-no union between gas shutoff valve and appliance. q8�855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 5 There is an extra union further up the line that srill isolates the warer heater that was missed. It is flazed copper so that works as a union. Chapter 34 does not bring anything up to piumbing code except for saying it cannot leak. Plumbing Basement Item 3- First Floor bathtub waste arm is backpitched. It is noi backpitched. First Floor Item i- No water shutoff on water closet. This is not required under the maintenance code. Ronald Staeheli stated every foundation settles. He has a letter from a neighbor who says that the exterior of the foundation has remained unchanged for the ten yeus he has been there. Donald Wagner stated he handles the vacant building program. The housing code does not address specifics, such as how much settling. The housing code says all exterlor surfaces will be maintained in a professional state of maintenance and repair. Gerry Strathman asked why he believes it is settling. Mr. Wagner responded that on the east and west walls there was a major erack that was closed up. The window above is as much as 1'/z inches out of wack. There is about a 5 to 6 inch difference from the center of the basement floor to the outside wall. It was heaved in the center and cracked wide open. Mr. Staeheli was given an option to seek an engineer; an engineer's evaluation 3s acceptable. A little dirt around the foundarion may have helped. Mr. Strathman asked do many houses settie. Mr. Wagner responded this property has the most extreme foundation condifion he has ever seen and is crearing a risk to the integrity of the structure. Geny St�athman asked about the other issues. Donald Wagner responded the watex shutoff item is not necessary and that variance could be granted. There is a new law for smoke detectars. If more than $1,000 of work is done on a property, a smoke detector is required on each level. Gercy Strathman asked would there be any value in further discussion with Ronald Staeheli on site to see if a mutual understanding can be met. Donald Wagner responded he would be glad to go over items besides the foundation. Mr. Staeheli responded he would be willing to make repairs to anything that is a specific vlolation in the maintenance code. He does not want to tear out a foundation and driii to bedrock just because the code says general maintenance. If it is done the way Mr. Wagnet suggests, then the building will be condemned. If a new foundation is built, then Mr. Staebeli has to meet new codes because that is specifically in the law. A structural engineer is not going to sign off on it. Gezry Strathman stated if something cannot be worked out, the appeai will be denied, then Ronald Staeheli can pursue this with the Ciry Council. Mr. Staeheli responded he would like to frame this in such a way so that Don Wagner understands the only code he has is the maintenance code. Mr. Strathman stated if Mr. Staeheli only wants to pursue the principle of the matter, the appeal will be denied. Don Wagner stated Mr. Staeheli has stated a number of untruths, therefare Mr. Wagner cannot work with him any longer. He suggested John Conway work with Mr. Staeheli. Gerry Strathman asked John Conway would he be willing to work with Ronald Staeheli. Mr. Conway responded he would. Gerry Strathman laid this over to the November 17, 1498 Property Code Enforcement meeting. y� g55 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 6 80 West Lawson Avenue No one appeared representing the property. Paula Seeley from Code Enforcement appeazed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 1424 1428 1430 14321434 1436 Case Avenue• and 1741 1751 1761 Sitns Avenue Robert McClay for Garden Acquisi6on Limited Partnership appeared. Gerry Strathman stated the best starting point would be the orders that have been annotated by Pat Fish. Robert McClay stated he did not haue the annotated copy. Mr. Strathman explained Ms. Fish noted if each item was appealed previousiy or if the item was new. It is Mr. Strathman's view that anything on the arders that the City Council decided on are not appealable a second time to the City, however there are other avenues of appeal after that. The other items are appealable and can be discussed here. Robert McClay stated the properties on Sims were converted from two bedroom to four bedroom units in approximatelp 1990. By design the units provide housing for large funilies with many children. The Case properties were constructed in 1983 and also aze designed for larger families. They are three bedroom units and there are 24 units in the particulaz complex. The properties were foreclosed and operated by Fannie Mae for a number of years. Mr. McClay's client purchased the properties in 1945, a little less than three yeazs ago. The scope of managing the properties was far more involved than they anticipated. In 1998, they expended over $50,000 in efforts to get the properties in a suitable condition. Additionally, they have evicted or failed to renew leases on perceived probiem tenants. Of the 24 units on Case, five of them continue Co be vacant for this reason. Additionally, three of the properties that are presently under lease ue subject to unlawful detainer acrions which will have heazings this Thursday. Of the 18 units on Sims, four of them aze vacant for the same basis. Over the past three months, the owners have committed additional resources, money, and people to the maintenance of the two complexes and have made great progress. Mr. McClay requests that Mr. Strathman deternune the following issues: whether the deficiencies noted are sustained, what deficiencies remain,and does the present conditions warrant revocation of the certi�cate of occupancy. First, it should be deternuned whether an item is on a prior list and on this list. Second, deternune whether the deficiency noted is within the scope of the building maintenance code, Chapter 33, ar the property maintenance code, Chapter 34. Mr. McClay stated he is here with Jim Crockarell who is associated with the management group and is knowiedgeable as to each of the units. He will advise to the particular deficiencies noted, and whether the item has been corrected. After Mr. Strathman heazs the evidence, Mr. McClay believes q g- �ss PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEE1`ING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 7 it wili show the present condition of the units does not wazrant revoking the certificate of occupancy, the appeal should be granted, and the proposed acrion by the City denied. Pat Fish stated the City and the Fire Department have spent an exorbitant amount of time on these properties. Ms. Fish presented a booklet of photographs to Gerry Strathman of the properties taken over time. Some photographs were taken today. Ms. Fish does not feel the appellants should be granted this appeal simply on technicalities and resents having to argue these technicalities again. Tt should not be the responsibility of the Fire Department to have to tell a management company to cleanup the gazbage and replace the tile in the entry. Over a period of a year, ongoing orders have been issued on this properry. None of the items listed here are unreasonable. Most aze common sense maintenance items. The arguments presented here are uru-easonabie and petty. Gerry Strathman asked was a copy of the annotated version supplied to Robert McCiay. Pat Fish responded it was not. Mr. Strathman stated there will be a recess in order to provide Mr. McClay a copy of the annotated document and to review them plus the photographs. (Recess 3:04 to 3:18 p.m.) Robert McClay suggested each item be gone through to deternune if it has been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated he does not have the authority to take tesdmony on matters the Council already has ruled on. Robert McClay responded some of the items were remedied and then reaccurred. Therefare, it wouid be subject to a new appeai. Mr. Suathman stated he operates under Chapter 8 and it does not put him in the position of second guessing City officials. Rather, his authority is whether the City officials have given proper notification to the owner, whether an opportunity to correct has been provided, and whether the actions aze reasonable. This is a legislative review of an administrauve process. For example, Mr. Strathman cannot decide whether or not the floars are dirry because he is not a hyer of fact. Robert McClay stated if Mr. Strathman's role is to determine whether the action is reasonable, he cannot deternune that without considering the condition of the properry today. Pat Fish stated she made an appoantment, the management and the owner knew what time she would be there, and they had copies of the deficiency list. At least far the inspection, the condirion shouid have been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated it is appropriate for him to make a decision as to whether he finds Pat Fish's findings credible. He will hear from her as to what she saw on August 2& and he will hear from Robert McClay as to what he saw on the 28`�. What the condition is today or some other day, Mr. Strathman has no way of knowing. Mr. McClay stated he disagreed. Mr. Strathman responded the record will show his arguments. 1424 Case Avenue James Crockazell went through the items as follows: y� 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNCz NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 8 Item 1- The hallways and stairwells were cleaned the morning of the inspection. There is now a contract with an outside firm to clean. Residents will ciean also. Item 2- The carpeting does not need to be replaced. It has been shampooed, dyed, and it would pass Section 8 certification. Item 3- The broken tile in the entry has been replaced. Pat Fish stated Item 2 was put on at the request of maintenance because she made a comment about the carpefing being in bad condition. The cleaning of the hallways and stairwells was not sufficient. Ms. Fish has no objection to appealing the tile. She was not told by maintenance people they had been cleaned. James Crockazell stated cleaning is now done six days a week. Gerry Strathman stated cleaning is a reoccurring event. It is not possible to know if the lack of cleanliness from July 14 is the same lack of cleanliness on August 25. All three items are subject to appeal. Robert McCiay stated the condition of the carpeting in the unit is the responsibility of the tenant. Pat Fish responded this refers ta the carpeting in the hallway and was clearly explained to the maintenance people. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1424 Case Avenue. 1428 Case Avenue Pat Fish reported this unit is not vacant, but occupied as a workroom. It wili haue to be approved and inspected befare being occupied again. As long as it is not occupied as a residence, she will not pursue the matter. The certificate is not revoked on this building. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case Avenue James Crockarell stated the tenant in Units #1 and 4 are being evicted. It is best to fix those items when they leave. Mr. Crockarell went through the items as follows: Item 1- The hallways and stairwells aze clean. The broken tile has been replaced. Item 2- The missing screens in Unit #4 have been replaced. Item 7- There is now a screen on the bedroom window in Unit #4. Item 8- The torn screens have been repaired. Fat Fish stated she talked to the tenants in Unit #4 who said the oven is srill not working. The certificate was revoked because of the number of violarions and the condition of the buildang. James Crockarell stated these are not the same 8 items as on the previous inspection. The children tear the screens on a regular basis. Ten screens have been tom since August 26. Gerry Strathman stated he believes the violations were there on Aua st 26. It is justification to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Robert McClay stated on August 14 there were 2& items and �• : PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 1VOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 9 on the last inspection there were eight items. There are things that occur at these properties each day. Mr. Strathman stated the revocation is based on a growing sense of repeated failures to get the remedies maintained. These items by themselves may not normally consritute basis for revocarion of certificate of occupancy. However, given the totality of the record, it constitutes sufficient basis for action. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 143Q Case Avenue. 1432 Case Avenue Item 1- James Crockarell stated tenants take down the certificate of occupancy notice repeatedly. All six items on the list are done now. Pat Fish stated one of the windows is gazden level. The plastic covering was fragile. Regazding the aarbage in Item 6, when Pat Fish was at the complex, there were two dumpsters. There was gazbage and trash in front of the dumpsters so the tenants could not get close. On the west end of the compiex is the previous dump site; it had mattresses and bags broken away and there were many flies around. James Crockazell stated trash is picked up three times a week, and they are billed for three pick ups a week. Gerry Strathman suggested the owners check to make sure the trash is being picked up. Gerry Strathman stated there seems to be sufficient basis for revocation. It is a failure of the property owner to resoive some matters such as broken bedroom windows. It is reasonable to fix a windows in 12 days. Robert McClay stated it was not easy to find tradespeople to do work thls summer. James Crockarell responded the windows are custom made because the windows opening are unique. Mr. Strathman stated he is not persuaded by the inability to repair the windows. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1432 Case Avenue. 1434 Case Avenue 7ames Crockareli went over the items as foliows: Item 1- A new certificate of occupancy has been placed. Item 2- The hallways were clean on the day of the inspecUon. Item 3- The kitchen cabinet doors have been fixed. Item 4- The cabinet doors are fixed. Item 6- Water damage is not on the previous list. Item 7- Cleaning the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's job. Item 8- Replacing the carpeting is unreasonable. Item 11 - The screens have been installed again in Unit #4. Item 12 - Mr. McClay stated the doar is not in such a state that it needs to be replaced. Mr. Strathman asked why it needed to be replaced. Pat Fish responded the door has lost the security y a' �'S 5 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOT'ES OF 9-15-98 Page 10 aspect. The maintenance people agreed wiffi her. Mr. Strathman stated if it is based on someone else's judgement, it should read `Yepair or replace" the door. Regazding Item 5, Robert McClay stated Unit 2 is not rented, and the items will be repaired before it is rented again. Regazding Item 3, Pat Fish stated the repairs have not been done in a professional manner. Gerry Strathman asked why does the carpeting have to be replaced instead of cleaned or repaired. Pat Fish responded it is given as an altemative. The entire apartment was so severely stained that it was not cleanabie. Item 3 did not have the correct hinges. Gerry Suathman denied the appeal on 1434 Case Avenue, but the DeficiencyfCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpering in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibiliry; the entry door to Unit #4 can be repaired or replaced. 1436 Case Avenue James Crockarell and Robeft McClay went over the items as follows: Item 1- Mr. Crockazell stated the certificate of occupancy was taken down. Item 3- Mr. McClay stated holes in the carpeting is the owner's responsibility. Item 5- Mr. Crockarell stated the patio door is not broken, but the screen needs to be fixed. Pat Fish agreed. Given the short list of deficiencies, Gerry Strathman asked why the certificate of occupancy was revoked. Ms. Fish responded if the certificate was revoked in June and with the lengthy appeals process extending the time, each rime the owners were sent a letter, they were also sent a revocation lettec because it is still revoked. Robert McClay stated the City and his client entered into a consent agreement. This is conhary to the agreement that was approved by the court. There was a hearing on this following the City Council hearing. The owner was upheld at that heating. A judicial officer detemuned that the owners did not violate that consent aa eement. Given that, Barb Cummings actions were an illegal aberration of her authority. She did things she did not have the authority to do. Gerry Strathman stated this letter is reiterating a decision made in June and asked do these things observed on August 25 and 26 consfitute a basis for revocation. Pat Fish responded the certificate of occupancy was revoked because of non compliance with the property maintenance code and the agreement previously made. Just because the building is inspected on August 25 and the letter says the certificate is revoked, it may have been revoked six months ago. Mr. Strathman asked was it Ms. Fish's detemunation on August 25 that what she observed sufficient reason to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Ms. Fish responded yes. Regarding Item 3, Pat Fish stated if the owner wants to hold the tenants responsible, that is between the owner and the tenant. James Cockarell stated Section 8 inspected the unit and did not find the tear befare the tenant moved in. y8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETIIVG NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page ll Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1436 Case Avenue citing Pat Fish's conciusion is not unreasonable, however he has some concerns about whether these violations are sufFcient for revoking a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Strathman wiil not subsUtute his judgement for the judgement of Ms. Fish who was on site and saw these violations. 1741 Sims Avenue James Cockazell stated Items 9 through 12 are new. Items 2 and 9- Inspector Barb Cumtnings is requiring them to replace air condirioners throughout the building. It is not the owner's responsibility under the lease or under Section 8 rules to provide an air conditioner. Items 3 and 4- Mr. Cockazell stated the carpeting has been shampooed, therefore it does not need to be replaced. To satisfy Bazb Cummings, carpeting was taken out of four units, and the floors were sanded. Gerry Strathman stated Item 3 mentions water damage. Mr. Cockarell stated it was dirty. Mr. Strathman suggested different language on this item and is concemed about ardering replacement of carpeting. Pat Fish stated worn carpeting is not an issue unless it is a tripping hazazd. In many units in the City, some managers go to tile ar hardwood floors. Mr. Strathman asked would Ms. Fish be willing to amend anything on the list. Ms. Fish responded she would rather not. Mr. McClay stated the property passed Section 8 inspecrion. Ms. Fish stated Section 8's standards are a lot lower than the City's standards and have nothing to do with the certificate of occupancy inspecrion. Mr. Strathman stated it is the owner's responsibility to make sure the people who live there maintain the property in a safe manner. Item 5- James Cockarell stated the owners have spent over $1,000 replacing new cabinet drawers. Item 7- Mr. Cockarell stated a carpenter took caze of the cupboard doors. James Crockarell stated the owner should not be required to repiace cazpeting and sand floors while the tenants are in the unit. Regarding the air conditioners, Robert McClay stated tbe code requires they be operating if they are prov3ded, but they do not have to be allowed. Pat Fish agreed with this. Mr. Cockarell stated he would like to meet with appropriate Ciry representauves to either put sheetrock, plywood, ar whatever is appropriate to replace the air conditioners. Mr. McClay stated he has a proposal to bring before Ms. Fish for approval. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1741 Suns Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims Avenue Unit 2- James Cockareil stated the carpeting has been shampooed and does not need to be replaced. Unit 3- Mr. Cockazell stated Unit 102 is not occupied, therefare the air conditioner does not need to be replaced. 9g- 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 12 Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1751 Sims Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be repaired if they aze removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Mr. Strathman stated he is not in a position to lmow if the cazpeting needs replacement. 1761 Sims Avenue James Crockarell went over the iYems as follows: Item 1- The chimney has been repaired adequately. Barb Cummings may have added this as a mistake. Item 2- The metal duct has been properly sealed. Item 3- St. Paul Plumbing put in a new hot water heater, however Barb Cummings said she could not find evidence of the pernut being granted. Item 9- The fire extinguisher has been repaired. Item 12 - Tenants have been toid bicycies cannot be kept in the hallway. Item 13 - The strike plate for the fire doar has been replaced. Items 4, 6, 7, 11 - He cannot sand the floors of 18 units while the tenants are there. The tenants have to be housed in hotels, furniture has to be moved into the hallway or vacant units. The owners are prepared to make the floors conform to City requirements when the tenants leave the unit. Robert McClay asked about the compliance dates on some items. Pat Fish responded some of the items were cited on previous orders. Gerry Strathman asked is it usual practice to order carpets replaced. Pat Fish responded it depends on how bad it is; this carpeting was beyond cleaning. Mr. Strathman stated the code says that floors should be kept in a safe and clean fashion. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1761 Sims, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the DeficiencyiCorrecfion list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" Note: Regazding the appeals by Robert McClay, some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals were denied because the actions of the Fire Department aze credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue was granted. With a few amendments, the appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue are denied. 79 Vireinia Street Gerry Strathman rescheduled tlus to the October 6 Property Code Enforcement mee6ng. The meeting was adjoumed at 5:18 p.m. rrn 9 $-555 MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF 9-IS-98 Guy Wiliits reported orders were mailed on three times for the dilapidated garage with a compliance da[e of May 30, 1448. The garage was removed by the Ciiy on July 9, 1998. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. � Provertv Code Enforcement Anpeal for 1564 Uvaer Afton Road No one appeared representing the property. Page 4 Thomas LeClair reported he talked to the owner this morning. The owner says he found a sketch that shows a trench system on his septic system. This is completely different than what is on the annuai inspection report. The owner wants six weeks to verify the information that he has. The report could be sustained or amended depending on what is found. Mz. Dufresne plans to use an infrazed detector system on the ground to substantiate tt�e trench system. Mr. I,eClair is agreeable to a six week layover. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the November 3, 1998 I.egislative Heazing. 1904 .Tefferson Avenue Gerry Stralhman recommendeci laying over to the October 6, 1998 Legislative Hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn ORlGINAL Ptesented Referred To Council File # q�' r J S Green Sheet # 60799 Committee Date ia 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the September 15, 2 1998 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following 3 addresses: 4 Propert�Ap e aled A�pellant 5 1285 Hamline Avenue North (I,aid over from 8-4-98) Robert Davis, Jr. 6 Decision: I,aid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 7 1148 Seventh Street West (Laid over from 8-18-98) 8 Decision: Appeal denied. 9 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-1-98) Louis Sudheimer and Margaret Lynden 10 Decision: Variance granted on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the City whereby the 11 owner would relieve the City of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent 12 owners might experience as the result of this variance being granted. 13 2000 Seventh Street West #114 14 Decision: Appeal denied. Gloria Westphal 15 370-372 Fulier Avenue Terrance Luther 16 Decision: Laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meering. 17 629 North Street # 1 �h�s ��rt� Donald Callahan 18 Decision: Appeal denied. L,o�� dver - �o Es �.�t , q�g C C��.� �. ` M�. , 19 96Q Juno Avenue Ronald Staehel�' 20 Decision: Laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 21 80 West Iawson Avenue 22 Decision: Appeal denied. 23 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432,1434, 1436 Case Avenue; and 24 1741, 1751, 1761 Sims Avenue �`c'C�e�t�.c�, e� — `� l a 3 � �8' RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Thomas Fruetel Robert McClay for Garden Acquisition Limited Partnership 25 Note: Some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals 26 wete denied because the actions of the Fire Depariment are credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case 27 Avenue was granted. The appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims 28 Avenue aze denied. Green Sheet 60799 � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 The decisions are as follows: oR��N�� q g_g� 1424 Case: Appeal denied. 1428 Case: Appeal granted as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case: Appeal denied. 1432 Case: Appeai denied. 1434 Case: Appeai denied, but the DefaciencylCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibility; the enhy door to Unit #4 can be repaired or repiaced. 1436 Case: Appeal denied. 1741 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. Tf air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims: Appeal denied, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air condirioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1761 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the Deficiency/Correction list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" 16 1564 Upper Afton Road (Laid over from July 14, 1998) Robert & Marion Dufresne/Susanne Bothke 17 Decision: Laid over to the November 3, 1998 Legislative Heaxing. 18 Note: 79 Virginia Street has been rescheduled to the October 6 Properry Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman � Hazris f Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lancry ✓ � � 26 Adopted by Council: Date ��fh� �.?��$' 27 Adoption 28 By: 29 Approved 30 By: Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attomey � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council 2 city coun�il JNfACT PERSON & PFKKJE Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 UST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA BY (DAT� Septembex 23, 1998 OA�E�N�faf� . , .; TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET oe...R,rarowECrort qg•gsS No 60799 InIflaVDah arvcauxca ❑ q1YATTORNEY ❑ tlIYCLFRK ,__ ❑ F+w�uu.aEaRVCCSme. ❑ wi,xau.uwinccro ❑rAronloa4sssT4%n ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the 9-15-98 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcemen appeals for the following addresses: 1285 Aamline Avenue North;1148 Seventh Street West; 439 Portland Avenue; 2000 Seventh Street West 11114; 370-372 Fuller Avenue; 629 Noxth Street l�l; 960 Juno Avenue; 80 West Lawson Avenue; 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue. PLANNING CAMMfSS10N qB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION OFTRANSACTION SOURCE Hasthis P��rm everworkM under a conUact Torthis deparlmeM7 YES NO Has thie Pe��rm e.�erteen a citY emPbYce? YES NO Dces this pe�rm poeseas a sloll �wt rarmaltyposaesseU 6y arry cuRen[ city employee7 YES NO Is Mia pe(saMrtn a fargeted vendoR VES NO Ld�'��,F',w4� �+w,.�`�fP ��`� S�P � 6 (CIRCLEON� VES NO ACTNITYNUMBER INFORMATON (EXPWM y8- ��s t2 MINU'I'ES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING September 15, 1998 Room 330, Ciry Hall Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: John Conway, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Karl Johnson, Public Works; Tom L.eClair, LIEP; Phillip Owens, Fire Prevention; James Prill, Code Enforcement; Paula Seeley, Code Enforcement; Maynard V1nge, Code Enforcement; Don Wagner, LIEP Gerry Strathman called the meeting to order at 1:31.m. 1285 Hamline Avenue Nortb (L,aid over from 8-4-98) Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. Mr. Strathman spoke to the owner Robert Davis today who indicated he had filed a petition for an encroachment pernut from the City. Th1s layover will give the owner time to get this pernut. 1148 Seventh Street West (L.aid over from 8-18-98) (Note: the appeai on this property was originally heard on 7-14-98. It had been laid over to 8-4-98, 8-18-98,and 9-15-98.) No one appeazed representing the properry. Phil Owens reported nothing has been done to proceed with this property, therefore, he requested the appeal be denied. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the owner has had ample time to deal with the situation. 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-i-98) Louis Sudheimer, owner, appeared to request the ability to extend the sewer and water connection from the rear of the house to a new carriage house that he received pernussion to build from the Zoning Depaztment and the Heritage Preservation Commission. The gazage will be torn down. The project will take about 45 feet of additional length of sewer and water lines to connect from the house to this building. The Sewer Department feels the new line violates the State building code, and the existing pipe will not be able to handle the load of the two units and might fail. The new building will be a two bedroom home with a four car garage. Mr. Sudheimer plans to convert his present duplex back to a single family home as it originally was and then move the second unit to the carriage house. Mr. Sudheimer stated the State Building code does grant local governing authorities the flexibility to grant variances when necessary. Regazding The Sewer AepartmenY s contention it will be an additional load, there actually is not The pipe as it exists now has 6een handling two units for decades. There does not seem to be anything wrong wath the exisring system. The present pipang system is high quality, heavy duty cast iran. The system proposed by the Sewer Department will be r-/8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 2 light weight piasfia The same danger of failure exists for either system. In addition, the tunneling and trenctung the City is requiring, wiil be disruptive to the home. Mr. Sudheimer showed a map of the house and explained in detail what the City's plans and his plans aze for the system. Mr. Sudheimer says his plans do not include disrupring the City's planrings nor disrupting the omamental gardens in his own yazd. The City has also suggested he tie into his existing line, wluch would allow him fo avold the extra costs of digging up Portland Avenue, but he would be exposed to different charges. Tn addition, he would have to hire City workers to do the wark. He then would have to pay contractors to repair the Ciry's streets. Another alternative is Arundel Street. He would have to pay for the costs of tearing up that street as well. Mr. Sudheimers solution is the least expensive. Louis Sudheimer showed pictures to Gerry Strathman of his properry. Karl Johnson reported Public Works usually handles from the City main to the building. LIEP handles it from there. The initial services was built in 1885. Waste from the new structure would be entering a system that is over 100 years old. A failure in that secfion would resuit in backup inside the main house. Construction of a manhole where the old and new service would be combined would not necessitate construction in the street. This would involve digging under the existing service in front of the house and construcfing a manhole where the pipe from the existing structure and the new structure enter and continue out into the street. Thomas I.eClair distributed a copy of State Iaw 4715.0310, Use of Public 5ewer and Water Systems Required, which reads in part "Every building must have iY s own independent connecrion with a public or private sewer, except that a group of buildings may be connected to one or more manholes which aze conshucted on the premises, and connected to a public or private sewer. These manholes must conform to the standazds set by the local sewer authority." Gerry Strathman asked about consequences if Louis Sudheimer's proposal for service should fail. Thomas I.eclair responded it would be a larger expense for the homeowner to install the manhole then instead of now. Karl7ohnson responded Mr. Sudheimer's basement would be the recepticle for sewage from both structures. Mr. Strathman asked when the service from the street to a residence fails and the residence suffers sewer damage, is that considered the homeowner's problem or does the City have some responsibiliry. Mr. 7ohnson responded it is considered the responsibility of the homeowner from the main to the building. Gerry Strathman asked Louis Sudbeimer would he be willing to stipulate in writing to the City that should the proposed system fail, he would have no recourse to the City in regazds to any damages, injury, or losses that he would suffer. Mr. Sudheimer responded he would be willing to put that in wrifittg and indemnify the Ciry of Saint Paul. Thomas L.eClair stated any indemnity clause should be part of the deed when a house is sold to another person. Mr. Strathman agreed. Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the Ciry wherehy the owner would relieve the Ciry of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent owners might experience as the result of this ��'-8� S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 4-15-98 Page 3 variance being granted. The detemunations the City has made are conect and in conformance with City ordinances and the building codes. However, the City does have the authority to grant variances under certain circumstances, and there needs to be some fler.ibility for this property. This is a historic district and what the owner plans to do is con�uent with preserving that district. 2000 5eventh Street West#114 No one appeazed representing the property. Pat Fish reported this unit was condemned by the inspector for tenant sanitarion. The tenant was given time to remove excess combusribles. The inspector went there to meet with the attorney to explain what had to be removed from the aparhnent. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 370-372 Fuller Avenue Terrance Luther, owner, appeazed and stated he is getting unfair treatment. This property was troubled with drugs and prosritution. Mr. Luther was not able to safely access the property until 3une 30 because he had filed an unlawful detainer against the people that lived there. Since then, over $5,000 has been spent on the property. Thirty yards of trash has been taken out. The basement was emptied. At that rime, the inspector came by and took photographs. The gaz was cleaned up on Monday. Gerry Strathman stated the orders he has in front of him list seven violafions and asked which aze still outstanding. Terrance Luther responded only Violations 1 and 7 aze left. Violation 1, Replace the bathroom electric outlet with a G.F.C.I. outlet, is not done. Regarding Violarion 7, Mr. Luther has a letter from a company that will clean and inspect the furnace when their schedule allows. Mr. Strathman asked about long term plans for the G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Mr. Luther responded he is willing to fix it, but it may take 6 months. Before �xing the G.F.C.I., he would like to do other things before winter comes. Maynard Vinge reported the G.F.C.I. needs to be done. An extension can be given for six months for a G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Gerry Strathman stated of the seven items here, five have been resolved, and there is a contract on the sixth. He asked when the electrical contractor will do the work. Terrance Luther responded he has not picked one yet. Mr. Strathman asked was someone living there. Mr. Luther responded yes and the property has been tharoughly inspected. Geny Strathman laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting citing most items have been done and only one item is left. 9�- 85S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 4 629 North Street # 1 Donald Callahan, owner, appeazed and stated he is looking for a short extension to get his house refinanced. He needs the electricity tumed back on. He started making payments in May. The payment in July was late and the electricity was turned off. James Prill reported Code Enforcement received a routine notice from Northem States Power that the electricity was off at this properiy. Code Bnforcement sent a notice to the owner to restore the electricity. When it was not restored, Code Enforcement proceeded with the condemnation. Gerry Strathman asked would the condemnation be lifted when the electriciry is restored. Mr. Prill responded yes. Mr. Suathman asked how long it will be before the electricity will be restored. Donald Callahan responded the bill will probably be paid in two weeks and the electriciry will be turned on at that time. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. His decision will not be effective until September 23 when the City Council approves it. In the meantime, the enforcement of this order is suspended. 960 Juno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeared. He provided a 3 ring binder with photographs and paperwork to Gerry Strathman and stated he is appealing most of the Code Compliance Inspection report. Every time he has to deal with anyone at Yhe bualding department, he is told the items deal with the maintenance code. The scope of the building code is it only applies to construcuon, alterarion, moving demolition, or repair of any building or structure. More than half of the things on the code compliance report does not exist in Chapter 34. Ronald Staeheli went over the items on the Code Compliance report as follows: Building Item 1- There has been settlement of the sh Chapter 34 says notlung about a settled sttucture. Building Item 2- Replace badly broken and unlevel cellar floor. ChapCer 34 does not mention anything about a cellar floor at all. Building Item 3- Provide permanent type support posts under main beam complete with adequate footings on approved soil. 'I`hey are permanent under the building code. If the threads are peened on ihe temporary type, they then become permanent and meet the code. Building Item 4- Evidence of water in the cellar at one Ume, raise grade on exterior...with gutters... Chapter 34 does not mention gutters, but they have to be kept up if they are there. Building Item 7- Rebuild rear entry steps and(or proper materials, eta He would like this one rewritten so he can repair the stairs. Building Item 13 - Relevel sttucture. "L.evel" does not appear in the maintenance code. Electrical Item 1- Add outlet in living room and rear bedroom. There are three outlets in the living room which is about 10' by 11' and there aze two outlets in the bedroom, which is about 9' X 9'. Electrical Item 4- Install smoke deCector to U.B.C. There is a hard wired smoke detector with battery back up outside of the sleeping room, there aze smoke detectars in each bedroom, and in the basement. Plumbing Basement Item 1- Water heater-no union between gas shutoff valve and appliance. q8�855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 5 There is an extra union further up the line that srill isolates the warer heater that was missed. It is flazed copper so that works as a union. Chapter 34 does not bring anything up to piumbing code except for saying it cannot leak. Plumbing Basement Item 3- First Floor bathtub waste arm is backpitched. It is noi backpitched. First Floor Item i- No water shutoff on water closet. This is not required under the maintenance code. Ronald Staeheli stated every foundation settles. He has a letter from a neighbor who says that the exterior of the foundation has remained unchanged for the ten yeus he has been there. Donald Wagner stated he handles the vacant building program. The housing code does not address specifics, such as how much settling. The housing code says all exterlor surfaces will be maintained in a professional state of maintenance and repair. Gerry Strathman asked why he believes it is settling. Mr. Wagner responded that on the east and west walls there was a major erack that was closed up. The window above is as much as 1'/z inches out of wack. There is about a 5 to 6 inch difference from the center of the basement floor to the outside wall. It was heaved in the center and cracked wide open. Mr. Staeheli was given an option to seek an engineer; an engineer's evaluation 3s acceptable. A little dirt around the foundarion may have helped. Mr. Strathman asked do many houses settie. Mr. Wagner responded this property has the most extreme foundation condifion he has ever seen and is crearing a risk to the integrity of the structure. Geny St�athman asked about the other issues. Donald Wagner responded the watex shutoff item is not necessary and that variance could be granted. There is a new law for smoke detectars. If more than $1,000 of work is done on a property, a smoke detector is required on each level. Gercy Strathman asked would there be any value in further discussion with Ronald Staeheli on site to see if a mutual understanding can be met. Donald Wagner responded he would be glad to go over items besides the foundation. Mr. Staeheli responded he would be willing to make repairs to anything that is a specific vlolation in the maintenance code. He does not want to tear out a foundation and driii to bedrock just because the code says general maintenance. If it is done the way Mr. Wagnet suggests, then the building will be condemned. If a new foundation is built, then Mr. Staebeli has to meet new codes because that is specifically in the law. A structural engineer is not going to sign off on it. Gezry Strathman stated if something cannot be worked out, the appeai will be denied, then Ronald Staeheli can pursue this with the Ciry Council. Mr. Staeheli responded he would like to frame this in such a way so that Don Wagner understands the only code he has is the maintenance code. Mr. Strathman stated if Mr. Staeheli only wants to pursue the principle of the matter, the appeal will be denied. Don Wagner stated Mr. Staeheli has stated a number of untruths, therefare Mr. Wagner cannot work with him any longer. He suggested John Conway work with Mr. Staeheli. Gerry Strathman asked John Conway would he be willing to work with Ronald Staeheli. Mr. Conway responded he would. Gerry Strathman laid this over to the November 17, 1498 Property Code Enforcement meeting. y� g55 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 6 80 West Lawson Avenue No one appeared representing the property. Paula Seeley from Code Enforcement appeazed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 1424 1428 1430 14321434 1436 Case Avenue• and 1741 1751 1761 Sitns Avenue Robert McClay for Garden Acquisi6on Limited Partnership appeared. Gerry Strathman stated the best starting point would be the orders that have been annotated by Pat Fish. Robert McClay stated he did not haue the annotated copy. Mr. Strathman explained Ms. Fish noted if each item was appealed previousiy or if the item was new. It is Mr. Strathman's view that anything on the arders that the City Council decided on are not appealable a second time to the City, however there are other avenues of appeal after that. The other items are appealable and can be discussed here. Robert McClay stated the properties on Sims were converted from two bedroom to four bedroom units in approximatelp 1990. By design the units provide housing for large funilies with many children. The Case properties were constructed in 1983 and also aze designed for larger families. They are three bedroom units and there are 24 units in the particulaz complex. The properties were foreclosed and operated by Fannie Mae for a number of years. Mr. McClay's client purchased the properties in 1945, a little less than three yeazs ago. The scope of managing the properties was far more involved than they anticipated. In 1998, they expended over $50,000 in efforts to get the properties in a suitable condition. Additionally, they have evicted or failed to renew leases on perceived probiem tenants. Of the 24 units on Case, five of them continue Co be vacant for this reason. Additionally, three of the properties that are presently under lease ue subject to unlawful detainer acrions which will have heazings this Thursday. Of the 18 units on Sims, four of them aze vacant for the same basis. Over the past three months, the owners have committed additional resources, money, and people to the maintenance of the two complexes and have made great progress. Mr. McClay requests that Mr. Strathman deternune the following issues: whether the deficiencies noted are sustained, what deficiencies remain,and does the present conditions warrant revocation of the certi�cate of occupancy. First, it should be deternuned whether an item is on a prior list and on this list. Second, deternune whether the deficiency noted is within the scope of the building maintenance code, Chapter 33, ar the property maintenance code, Chapter 34. Mr. McClay stated he is here with Jim Crockarell who is associated with the management group and is knowiedgeable as to each of the units. He will advise to the particular deficiencies noted, and whether the item has been corrected. After Mr. Strathman heazs the evidence, Mr. McClay believes q g- �ss PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEE1`ING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 7 it wili show the present condition of the units does not wazrant revoking the certificate of occupancy, the appeal should be granted, and the proposed acrion by the City denied. Pat Fish stated the City and the Fire Department have spent an exorbitant amount of time on these properties. Ms. Fish presented a booklet of photographs to Gerry Strathman of the properties taken over time. Some photographs were taken today. Ms. Fish does not feel the appellants should be granted this appeal simply on technicalities and resents having to argue these technicalities again. Tt should not be the responsibility of the Fire Department to have to tell a management company to cleanup the gazbage and replace the tile in the entry. Over a period of a year, ongoing orders have been issued on this properry. None of the items listed here are unreasonable. Most aze common sense maintenance items. The arguments presented here are uru-easonabie and petty. Gerry Strathman asked was a copy of the annotated version supplied to Robert McCiay. Pat Fish responded it was not. Mr. Strathman stated there will be a recess in order to provide Mr. McClay a copy of the annotated document and to review them plus the photographs. (Recess 3:04 to 3:18 p.m.) Robert McClay suggested each item be gone through to deternune if it has been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated he does not have the authority to take tesdmony on matters the Council already has ruled on. Robert McClay responded some of the items were remedied and then reaccurred. Therefare, it wouid be subject to a new appeai. Mr. Suathman stated he operates under Chapter 8 and it does not put him in the position of second guessing City officials. Rather, his authority is whether the City officials have given proper notification to the owner, whether an opportunity to correct has been provided, and whether the actions aze reasonable. This is a legislative review of an administrauve process. For example, Mr. Strathman cannot decide whether or not the floars are dirry because he is not a hyer of fact. Robert McClay stated if Mr. Strathman's role is to determine whether the action is reasonable, he cannot deternune that without considering the condition of the properry today. Pat Fish stated she made an appoantment, the management and the owner knew what time she would be there, and they had copies of the deficiency list. At least far the inspection, the condirion shouid have been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated it is appropriate for him to make a decision as to whether he finds Pat Fish's findings credible. He will hear from her as to what she saw on August 2& and he will hear from Robert McClay as to what he saw on the 28`�. What the condition is today or some other day, Mr. Strathman has no way of knowing. Mr. McClay stated he disagreed. Mr. Strathman responded the record will show his arguments. 1424 Case Avenue James Crockazell went through the items as follows: y� 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNCz NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 8 Item 1- The hallways and stairwells were cleaned the morning of the inspection. There is now a contract with an outside firm to clean. Residents will ciean also. Item 2- The carpeting does not need to be replaced. It has been shampooed, dyed, and it would pass Section 8 certification. Item 3- The broken tile in the entry has been replaced. Pat Fish stated Item 2 was put on at the request of maintenance because she made a comment about the carpefing being in bad condition. The cleaning of the hallways and stairwells was not sufficient. Ms. Fish has no objection to appealing the tile. She was not told by maintenance people they had been cleaned. James Crockazell stated cleaning is now done six days a week. Gerry Strathman stated cleaning is a reoccurring event. It is not possible to know if the lack of cleanliness from July 14 is the same lack of cleanliness on August 25. All three items are subject to appeal. Robert McCiay stated the condition of the carpeting in the unit is the responsibility of the tenant. Pat Fish responded this refers ta the carpeting in the hallway and was clearly explained to the maintenance people. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1424 Case Avenue. 1428 Case Avenue Pat Fish reported this unit is not vacant, but occupied as a workroom. It wili haue to be approved and inspected befare being occupied again. As long as it is not occupied as a residence, she will not pursue the matter. The certificate is not revoked on this building. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case Avenue James Crockarell stated the tenant in Units #1 and 4 are being evicted. It is best to fix those items when they leave. Mr. Crockarell went through the items as follows: Item 1- The hallways and stairwells aze clean. The broken tile has been replaced. Item 2- The missing screens in Unit #4 have been replaced. Item 7- There is now a screen on the bedroom window in Unit #4. Item 8- The torn screens have been repaired. Fat Fish stated she talked to the tenants in Unit #4 who said the oven is srill not working. The certificate was revoked because of the number of violarions and the condition of the buildang. James Crockarell stated these are not the same 8 items as on the previous inspection. The children tear the screens on a regular basis. Ten screens have been tom since August 26. Gerry Strathman stated he believes the violations were there on Aua st 26. It is justification to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Robert McClay stated on August 14 there were 2& items and �• : PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 1VOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 9 on the last inspection there were eight items. There are things that occur at these properties each day. Mr. Strathman stated the revocation is based on a growing sense of repeated failures to get the remedies maintained. These items by themselves may not normally consritute basis for revocarion of certificate of occupancy. However, given the totality of the record, it constitutes sufficient basis for action. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 143Q Case Avenue. 1432 Case Avenue Item 1- James Crockarell stated tenants take down the certificate of occupancy notice repeatedly. All six items on the list are done now. Pat Fish stated one of the windows is gazden level. The plastic covering was fragile. Regazding the aarbage in Item 6, when Pat Fish was at the complex, there were two dumpsters. There was gazbage and trash in front of the dumpsters so the tenants could not get close. On the west end of the compiex is the previous dump site; it had mattresses and bags broken away and there were many flies around. James Crockazell stated trash is picked up three times a week, and they are billed for three pick ups a week. Gerry Strathman suggested the owners check to make sure the trash is being picked up. Gerry Strathman stated there seems to be sufficient basis for revocation. It is a failure of the property owner to resoive some matters such as broken bedroom windows. It is reasonable to fix a windows in 12 days. Robert McClay stated it was not easy to find tradespeople to do work thls summer. James Crockarell responded the windows are custom made because the windows opening are unique. Mr. Strathman stated he is not persuaded by the inability to repair the windows. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1432 Case Avenue. 1434 Case Avenue 7ames Crockareli went over the items as foliows: Item 1- A new certificate of occupancy has been placed. Item 2- The hallways were clean on the day of the inspecUon. Item 3- The kitchen cabinet doors have been fixed. Item 4- The cabinet doors are fixed. Item 6- Water damage is not on the previous list. Item 7- Cleaning the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's job. Item 8- Replacing the carpeting is unreasonable. Item 11 - The screens have been installed again in Unit #4. Item 12 - Mr. McClay stated the doar is not in such a state that it needs to be replaced. Mr. Strathman asked why it needed to be replaced. Pat Fish responded the door has lost the security y a' �'S 5 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOT'ES OF 9-15-98 Page 10 aspect. The maintenance people agreed wiffi her. Mr. Strathman stated if it is based on someone else's judgement, it should read `Yepair or replace" the door. Regazding Item 5, Robert McClay stated Unit 2 is not rented, and the items will be repaired before it is rented again. Regazding Item 3, Pat Fish stated the repairs have not been done in a professional manner. Gerry Strathman asked why does the carpeting have to be replaced instead of cleaned or repaired. Pat Fish responded it is given as an altemative. The entire apartment was so severely stained that it was not cleanabie. Item 3 did not have the correct hinges. Gerry Suathman denied the appeal on 1434 Case Avenue, but the DeficiencyfCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpering in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibiliry; the entry door to Unit #4 can be repaired or replaced. 1436 Case Avenue James Crockarell and Robeft McClay went over the items as follows: Item 1- Mr. Crockazell stated the certificate of occupancy was taken down. Item 3- Mr. McClay stated holes in the carpeting is the owner's responsibility. Item 5- Mr. Crockarell stated the patio door is not broken, but the screen needs to be fixed. Pat Fish agreed. Given the short list of deficiencies, Gerry Strathman asked why the certificate of occupancy was revoked. Ms. Fish responded if the certificate was revoked in June and with the lengthy appeals process extending the time, each rime the owners were sent a letter, they were also sent a revocation lettec because it is still revoked. Robert McClay stated the City and his client entered into a consent agreement. This is conhary to the agreement that was approved by the court. There was a hearing on this following the City Council hearing. The owner was upheld at that heating. A judicial officer detemuned that the owners did not violate that consent aa eement. Given that, Barb Cummings actions were an illegal aberration of her authority. She did things she did not have the authority to do. Gerry Strathman stated this letter is reiterating a decision made in June and asked do these things observed on August 25 and 26 consfitute a basis for revocation. Pat Fish responded the certificate of occupancy was revoked because of non compliance with the property maintenance code and the agreement previously made. Just because the building is inspected on August 25 and the letter says the certificate is revoked, it may have been revoked six months ago. Mr. Strathman asked was it Ms. Fish's detemunation on August 25 that what she observed sufficient reason to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Ms. Fish responded yes. Regarding Item 3, Pat Fish stated if the owner wants to hold the tenants responsible, that is between the owner and the tenant. James Cockarell stated Section 8 inspected the unit and did not find the tear befare the tenant moved in. y8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETIIVG NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page ll Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1436 Case Avenue citing Pat Fish's conciusion is not unreasonable, however he has some concerns about whether these violations are sufFcient for revoking a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Strathman wiil not subsUtute his judgement for the judgement of Ms. Fish who was on site and saw these violations. 1741 Sims Avenue James Cockazell stated Items 9 through 12 are new. Items 2 and 9- Inspector Barb Cumtnings is requiring them to replace air condirioners throughout the building. It is not the owner's responsibility under the lease or under Section 8 rules to provide an air conditioner. Items 3 and 4- Mr. Cockazell stated the carpeting has been shampooed, therefore it does not need to be replaced. To satisfy Bazb Cummings, carpeting was taken out of four units, and the floors were sanded. Gerry Strathman stated Item 3 mentions water damage. Mr. Cockarell stated it was dirty. Mr. Strathman suggested different language on this item and is concemed about ardering replacement of carpeting. Pat Fish stated worn carpeting is not an issue unless it is a tripping hazazd. In many units in the City, some managers go to tile ar hardwood floors. Mr. Strathman asked would Ms. Fish be willing to amend anything on the list. Ms. Fish responded she would rather not. Mr. McClay stated the property passed Section 8 inspecrion. Ms. Fish stated Section 8's standards are a lot lower than the City's standards and have nothing to do with the certificate of occupancy inspecrion. Mr. Strathman stated it is the owner's responsibility to make sure the people who live there maintain the property in a safe manner. Item 5- James Cockarell stated the owners have spent over $1,000 replacing new cabinet drawers. Item 7- Mr. Cockarell stated a carpenter took caze of the cupboard doors. James Crockarell stated the owner should not be required to repiace cazpeting and sand floors while the tenants are in the unit. Regarding the air conditioners, Robert McClay stated tbe code requires they be operating if they are prov3ded, but they do not have to be allowed. Pat Fish agreed with this. Mr. Cockarell stated he would like to meet with appropriate Ciry representauves to either put sheetrock, plywood, ar whatever is appropriate to replace the air conditioners. Mr. McClay stated he has a proposal to bring before Ms. Fish for approval. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1741 Suns Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims Avenue Unit 2- James Cockareil stated the carpeting has been shampooed and does not need to be replaced. Unit 3- Mr. Cockazell stated Unit 102 is not occupied, therefare the air conditioner does not need to be replaced. 9g- 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 12 Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1751 Sims Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be repaired if they aze removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Mr. Strathman stated he is not in a position to lmow if the cazpeting needs replacement. 1761 Sims Avenue James Crockarell went over the iYems as follows: Item 1- The chimney has been repaired adequately. Barb Cummings may have added this as a mistake. Item 2- The metal duct has been properly sealed. Item 3- St. Paul Plumbing put in a new hot water heater, however Barb Cummings said she could not find evidence of the pernut being granted. Item 9- The fire extinguisher has been repaired. Item 12 - Tenants have been toid bicycies cannot be kept in the hallway. Item 13 - The strike plate for the fire doar has been replaced. Items 4, 6, 7, 11 - He cannot sand the floors of 18 units while the tenants are there. The tenants have to be housed in hotels, furniture has to be moved into the hallway or vacant units. The owners are prepared to make the floors conform to City requirements when the tenants leave the unit. Robert McClay asked about the compliance dates on some items. Pat Fish responded some of the items were cited on previous orders. Gerry Strathman asked is it usual practice to order carpets replaced. Pat Fish responded it depends on how bad it is; this carpeting was beyond cleaning. Mr. Strathman stated the code says that floors should be kept in a safe and clean fashion. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1761 Sims, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the DeficiencyiCorrecfion list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" Note: Regazding the appeals by Robert McClay, some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals were denied because the actions of the Fire Department aze credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue was granted. With a few amendments, the appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue are denied. 79 Vireinia Street Gerry Strathman rescheduled tlus to the October 6 Property Code Enforcement mee6ng. The meeting was adjoumed at 5:18 p.m. rrn 9 $-555 MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF 9-IS-98 Guy Wiliits reported orders were mailed on three times for the dilapidated garage with a compliance da[e of May 30, 1448. The garage was removed by the Ciiy on July 9, 1998. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. � Provertv Code Enforcement Anpeal for 1564 Uvaer Afton Road No one appeared representing the property. Page 4 Thomas LeClair reported he talked to the owner this morning. The owner says he found a sketch that shows a trench system on his septic system. This is completely different than what is on the annuai inspection report. The owner wants six weeks to verify the information that he has. The report could be sustained or amended depending on what is found. Mz. Dufresne plans to use an infrazed detector system on the ground to substantiate tt�e trench system. Mr. I,eClair is agreeable to a six week layover. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the November 3, 1998 I.egislative Heazing. 1904 .Tefferson Avenue Gerry Stralhman recommendeci laying over to the October 6, 1998 Legislative Hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn ORlGINAL Ptesented Referred To Council File # q�' r J S Green Sheet # 60799 Committee Date ia 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the September 15, 2 1998 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following 3 addresses: 4 Propert�Ap e aled A�pellant 5 1285 Hamline Avenue North (I,aid over from 8-4-98) Robert Davis, Jr. 6 Decision: I,aid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 7 1148 Seventh Street West (Laid over from 8-18-98) 8 Decision: Appeal denied. 9 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-1-98) Louis Sudheimer and Margaret Lynden 10 Decision: Variance granted on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the City whereby the 11 owner would relieve the City of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent 12 owners might experience as the result of this variance being granted. 13 2000 Seventh Street West #114 14 Decision: Appeal denied. Gloria Westphal 15 370-372 Fulier Avenue Terrance Luther 16 Decision: Laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meering. 17 629 North Street # 1 �h�s ��rt� Donald Callahan 18 Decision: Appeal denied. L,o�� dver - �o Es �.�t , q�g C C��.� �. ` M�. , 19 96Q Juno Avenue Ronald Staehel�' 20 Decision: Laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. 21 80 West Iawson Avenue 22 Decision: Appeal denied. 23 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432,1434, 1436 Case Avenue; and 24 1741, 1751, 1761 Sims Avenue �`c'C�e�t�.c�, e� — `� l a 3 � �8' RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Thomas Fruetel Robert McClay for Garden Acquisition Limited Partnership 25 Note: Some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals 26 wete denied because the actions of the Fire Depariment are credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case 27 Avenue was granted. The appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims 28 Avenue aze denied. Green Sheet 60799 � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 The decisions are as follows: oR��N�� q g_g� 1424 Case: Appeal denied. 1428 Case: Appeal granted as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case: Appeal denied. 1432 Case: Appeai denied. 1434 Case: Appeai denied, but the DefaciencylCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibility; the enhy door to Unit #4 can be repaired or repiaced. 1436 Case: Appeal denied. 1741 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. Tf air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims: Appeal denied, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air condirioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. 1761 Sims: Appeal denied, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the Deficiency/Correction list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" 16 1564 Upper Afton Road (Laid over from July 14, 1998) Robert & Marion Dufresne/Susanne Bothke 17 Decision: Laid over to the November 3, 1998 Legislative Heaxing. 18 Note: 79 Virginia Street has been rescheduled to the October 6 Properry Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman � Hazris f Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lancry ✓ � � 26 Adopted by Council: Date ��fh� �.?��$' 27 Adoption 28 By: 29 Approved 30 By: Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attomey � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council 2 city coun�il JNfACT PERSON & PFKKJE Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 UST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA BY (DAT� Septembex 23, 1998 OA�E�N�faf� . , .; TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET oe...R,rarowECrort qg•gsS No 60799 InIflaVDah arvcauxca ❑ q1YATTORNEY ❑ tlIYCLFRK ,__ ❑ F+w�uu.aEaRVCCSme. ❑ wi,xau.uwinccro ❑rAronloa4sssT4%n ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the 9-15-98 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcemen appeals for the following addresses: 1285 Aamline Avenue North;1148 Seventh Street West; 439 Portland Avenue; 2000 Seventh Street West 11114; 370-372 Fuller Avenue; 629 Noxth Street l�l; 960 Juno Avenue; 80 West Lawson Avenue; 1424, 1428, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue. PLANNING CAMMfSS10N qB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION OFTRANSACTION SOURCE Hasthis P��rm everworkM under a conUact Torthis deparlmeM7 YES NO Has thie Pe��rm e.�erteen a citY emPbYce? YES NO Dces this pe�rm poeseas a sloll �wt rarmaltyposaesseU 6y arry cuRen[ city employee7 YES NO Is Mia pe(saMrtn a fargeted vendoR VES NO Ld�'��,F',w4� �+w,.�`�fP ��`� S�P � 6 (CIRCLEON� VES NO ACTNITYNUMBER INFORMATON (EXPWM y8- ��s t2 MINU'I'ES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING September 15, 1998 Room 330, Ciry Hall Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: John Conway, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Karl Johnson, Public Works; Tom L.eClair, LIEP; Phillip Owens, Fire Prevention; James Prill, Code Enforcement; Paula Seeley, Code Enforcement; Maynard V1nge, Code Enforcement; Don Wagner, LIEP Gerry Strathman called the meeting to order at 1:31.m. 1285 Hamline Avenue Nortb (L,aid over from 8-4-98) Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 17, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting. Mr. Strathman spoke to the owner Robert Davis today who indicated he had filed a petition for an encroachment pernut from the City. Th1s layover will give the owner time to get this pernut. 1148 Seventh Street West (L.aid over from 8-18-98) (Note: the appeai on this property was originally heard on 7-14-98. It had been laid over to 8-4-98, 8-18-98,and 9-15-98.) No one appeazed representing the properry. Phil Owens reported nothing has been done to proceed with this property, therefore, he requested the appeal be denied. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the owner has had ample time to deal with the situation. 439 Portland Avenue (Rescheduled from 9-i-98) Louis Sudheimer, owner, appeared to request the ability to extend the sewer and water connection from the rear of the house to a new carriage house that he received pernussion to build from the Zoning Depaztment and the Heritage Preservation Commission. The gazage will be torn down. The project will take about 45 feet of additional length of sewer and water lines to connect from the house to this building. The Sewer Department feels the new line violates the State building code, and the existing pipe will not be able to handle the load of the two units and might fail. The new building will be a two bedroom home with a four car garage. Mr. Sudheimer plans to convert his present duplex back to a single family home as it originally was and then move the second unit to the carriage house. Mr. Sudheimer stated the State Building code does grant local governing authorities the flexibility to grant variances when necessary. Regazding The Sewer AepartmenY s contention it will be an additional load, there actually is not The pipe as it exists now has 6een handling two units for decades. There does not seem to be anything wrong wath the exisring system. The present pipang system is high quality, heavy duty cast iran. The system proposed by the Sewer Department will be r-/8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 2 light weight piasfia The same danger of failure exists for either system. In addition, the tunneling and trenctung the City is requiring, wiil be disruptive to the home. Mr. Sudheimer showed a map of the house and explained in detail what the City's plans and his plans aze for the system. Mr. Sudheimer says his plans do not include disrupring the City's planrings nor disrupting the omamental gardens in his own yazd. The City has also suggested he tie into his existing line, wluch would allow him fo avold the extra costs of digging up Portland Avenue, but he would be exposed to different charges. Tn addition, he would have to hire City workers to do the wark. He then would have to pay contractors to repair the Ciry's streets. Another alternative is Arundel Street. He would have to pay for the costs of tearing up that street as well. Mr. Sudheimers solution is the least expensive. Louis Sudheimer showed pictures to Gerry Strathman of his properry. Karl Johnson reported Public Works usually handles from the City main to the building. LIEP handles it from there. The initial services was built in 1885. Waste from the new structure would be entering a system that is over 100 years old. A failure in that secfion would resuit in backup inside the main house. Construction of a manhole where the old and new service would be combined would not necessitate construction in the street. This would involve digging under the existing service in front of the house and construcfing a manhole where the pipe from the existing structure and the new structure enter and continue out into the street. Thomas I.eClair distributed a copy of State Iaw 4715.0310, Use of Public 5ewer and Water Systems Required, which reads in part "Every building must have iY s own independent connecrion with a public or private sewer, except that a group of buildings may be connected to one or more manholes which aze conshucted on the premises, and connected to a public or private sewer. These manholes must conform to the standazds set by the local sewer authority." Gerry Strathman asked about consequences if Louis Sudheimer's proposal for service should fail. Thomas I.eclair responded it would be a larger expense for the homeowner to install the manhole then instead of now. Karl7ohnson responded Mr. Sudheimer's basement would be the recepticle for sewage from both structures. Mr. Strathman asked when the service from the street to a residence fails and the residence suffers sewer damage, is that considered the homeowner's problem or does the City have some responsibiliry. Mr. 7ohnson responded it is considered the responsibility of the homeowner from the main to the building. Gerry Strathman asked Louis Sudbeimer would he be willing to stipulate in writing to the City that should the proposed system fail, he would have no recourse to the City in regazds to any damages, injury, or losses that he would suffer. Mr. Sudheimer responded he would be willing to put that in wrifittg and indemnify the Ciry of Saint Paul. Thomas L.eClair stated any indemnity clause should be part of the deed when a house is sold to another person. Mr. Strathman agreed. Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that the owner provide a binding indemnification to the Ciry wherehy the owner would relieve the Ciry of any responsibility for any damages that the present owner or any subsequent owners might experience as the result of this ��'-8� S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 4-15-98 Page 3 variance being granted. The detemunations the City has made are conect and in conformance with City ordinances and the building codes. However, the City does have the authority to grant variances under certain circumstances, and there needs to be some fler.ibility for this property. This is a historic district and what the owner plans to do is con�uent with preserving that district. 2000 5eventh Street West#114 No one appeazed representing the property. Pat Fish reported this unit was condemned by the inspector for tenant sanitarion. The tenant was given time to remove excess combusribles. The inspector went there to meet with the attorney to explain what had to be removed from the aparhnent. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 370-372 Fuller Avenue Terrance Luther, owner, appeazed and stated he is getting unfair treatment. This property was troubled with drugs and prosritution. Mr. Luther was not able to safely access the property until 3une 30 because he had filed an unlawful detainer against the people that lived there. Since then, over $5,000 has been spent on the property. Thirty yards of trash has been taken out. The basement was emptied. At that rime, the inspector came by and took photographs. The gaz was cleaned up on Monday. Gerry Strathman stated the orders he has in front of him list seven violafions and asked which aze still outstanding. Terrance Luther responded only Violations 1 and 7 aze left. Violation 1, Replace the bathroom electric outlet with a G.F.C.I. outlet, is not done. Regarding Violarion 7, Mr. Luther has a letter from a company that will clean and inspect the furnace when their schedule allows. Mr. Strathman asked about long term plans for the G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Mr. Luther responded he is willing to fix it, but it may take 6 months. Before �xing the G.F.C.I., he would like to do other things before winter comes. Maynard Vinge reported the G.F.C.I. needs to be done. An extension can be given for six months for a G.F.C.I. in the bathroom. Gerry Strathman stated of the seven items here, five have been resolved, and there is a contract on the sixth. He asked when the electrical contractor will do the work. Terrance Luther responded he has not picked one yet. Mr. Strathman asked was someone living there. Mr. Luther responded yes and the property has been tharoughly inspected. Geny Strathman laid over to the October 20, 1998 Property Code Enforcement meeting citing most items have been done and only one item is left. 9�- 85S PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 4 629 North Street # 1 Donald Callahan, owner, appeazed and stated he is looking for a short extension to get his house refinanced. He needs the electricity tumed back on. He started making payments in May. The payment in July was late and the electricity was turned off. James Prill reported Code Enforcement received a routine notice from Northem States Power that the electricity was off at this properiy. Code Bnforcement sent a notice to the owner to restore the electricity. When it was not restored, Code Enforcement proceeded with the condemnation. Gerry Strathman asked would the condemnation be lifted when the electriciry is restored. Mr. Prill responded yes. Mr. Suathman asked how long it will be before the electricity will be restored. Donald Callahan responded the bill will probably be paid in two weeks and the electriciry will be turned on at that time. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. His decision will not be effective until September 23 when the City Council approves it. In the meantime, the enforcement of this order is suspended. 960 Juno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeared. He provided a 3 ring binder with photographs and paperwork to Gerry Strathman and stated he is appealing most of the Code Compliance Inspection report. Every time he has to deal with anyone at Yhe bualding department, he is told the items deal with the maintenance code. The scope of the building code is it only applies to construcuon, alterarion, moving demolition, or repair of any building or structure. More than half of the things on the code compliance report does not exist in Chapter 34. Ronald Staeheli went over the items on the Code Compliance report as follows: Building Item 1- There has been settlement of the sh Chapter 34 says notlung about a settled sttucture. Building Item 2- Replace badly broken and unlevel cellar floor. ChapCer 34 does not mention anything about a cellar floor at all. Building Item 3- Provide permanent type support posts under main beam complete with adequate footings on approved soil. 'I`hey are permanent under the building code. If the threads are peened on ihe temporary type, they then become permanent and meet the code. Building Item 4- Evidence of water in the cellar at one Ume, raise grade on exterior...with gutters... Chapter 34 does not mention gutters, but they have to be kept up if they are there. Building Item 7- Rebuild rear entry steps and(or proper materials, eta He would like this one rewritten so he can repair the stairs. Building Item 13 - Relevel sttucture. "L.evel" does not appear in the maintenance code. Electrical Item 1- Add outlet in living room and rear bedroom. There are three outlets in the living room which is about 10' by 11' and there aze two outlets in the bedroom, which is about 9' X 9'. Electrical Item 4- Install smoke deCector to U.B.C. There is a hard wired smoke detector with battery back up outside of the sleeping room, there aze smoke detectars in each bedroom, and in the basement. Plumbing Basement Item 1- Water heater-no union between gas shutoff valve and appliance. q8�855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 5 There is an extra union further up the line that srill isolates the warer heater that was missed. It is flazed copper so that works as a union. Chapter 34 does not bring anything up to piumbing code except for saying it cannot leak. Plumbing Basement Item 3- First Floor bathtub waste arm is backpitched. It is noi backpitched. First Floor Item i- No water shutoff on water closet. This is not required under the maintenance code. Ronald Staeheli stated every foundation settles. He has a letter from a neighbor who says that the exterior of the foundation has remained unchanged for the ten yeus he has been there. Donald Wagner stated he handles the vacant building program. The housing code does not address specifics, such as how much settling. The housing code says all exterlor surfaces will be maintained in a professional state of maintenance and repair. Gerry Strathman asked why he believes it is settling. Mr. Wagner responded that on the east and west walls there was a major erack that was closed up. The window above is as much as 1'/z inches out of wack. There is about a 5 to 6 inch difference from the center of the basement floor to the outside wall. It was heaved in the center and cracked wide open. Mr. Staeheli was given an option to seek an engineer; an engineer's evaluation 3s acceptable. A little dirt around the foundarion may have helped. Mr. Strathman asked do many houses settie. Mr. Wagner responded this property has the most extreme foundation condifion he has ever seen and is crearing a risk to the integrity of the structure. Geny St�athman asked about the other issues. Donald Wagner responded the watex shutoff item is not necessary and that variance could be granted. There is a new law for smoke detectars. If more than $1,000 of work is done on a property, a smoke detector is required on each level. Gercy Strathman asked would there be any value in further discussion with Ronald Staeheli on site to see if a mutual understanding can be met. Donald Wagner responded he would be glad to go over items besides the foundation. Mr. Staeheli responded he would be willing to make repairs to anything that is a specific vlolation in the maintenance code. He does not want to tear out a foundation and driii to bedrock just because the code says general maintenance. If it is done the way Mr. Wagnet suggests, then the building will be condemned. If a new foundation is built, then Mr. Staebeli has to meet new codes because that is specifically in the law. A structural engineer is not going to sign off on it. Gezry Strathman stated if something cannot be worked out, the appeai will be denied, then Ronald Staeheli can pursue this with the Ciry Council. Mr. Staeheli responded he would like to frame this in such a way so that Don Wagner understands the only code he has is the maintenance code. Mr. Strathman stated if Mr. Staeheli only wants to pursue the principle of the matter, the appeal will be denied. Don Wagner stated Mr. Staeheli has stated a number of untruths, therefare Mr. Wagner cannot work with him any longer. He suggested John Conway work with Mr. Staeheli. Gerry Strathman asked John Conway would he be willing to work with Ronald Staeheli. Mr. Conway responded he would. Gerry Strathman laid this over to the November 17, 1498 Property Code Enforcement meeting. y� g55 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 6 80 West Lawson Avenue No one appeared representing the property. Paula Seeley from Code Enforcement appeazed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. 1424 1428 1430 14321434 1436 Case Avenue• and 1741 1751 1761 Sitns Avenue Robert McClay for Garden Acquisi6on Limited Partnership appeared. Gerry Strathman stated the best starting point would be the orders that have been annotated by Pat Fish. Robert McClay stated he did not haue the annotated copy. Mr. Strathman explained Ms. Fish noted if each item was appealed previousiy or if the item was new. It is Mr. Strathman's view that anything on the arders that the City Council decided on are not appealable a second time to the City, however there are other avenues of appeal after that. The other items are appealable and can be discussed here. Robert McClay stated the properties on Sims were converted from two bedroom to four bedroom units in approximatelp 1990. By design the units provide housing for large funilies with many children. The Case properties were constructed in 1983 and also aze designed for larger families. They are three bedroom units and there are 24 units in the particulaz complex. The properties were foreclosed and operated by Fannie Mae for a number of years. Mr. McClay's client purchased the properties in 1945, a little less than three yeazs ago. The scope of managing the properties was far more involved than they anticipated. In 1998, they expended over $50,000 in efforts to get the properties in a suitable condition. Additionally, they have evicted or failed to renew leases on perceived probiem tenants. Of the 24 units on Case, five of them continue Co be vacant for this reason. Additionally, three of the properties that are presently under lease ue subject to unlawful detainer acrions which will have heazings this Thursday. Of the 18 units on Sims, four of them aze vacant for the same basis. Over the past three months, the owners have committed additional resources, money, and people to the maintenance of the two complexes and have made great progress. Mr. McClay requests that Mr. Strathman deternune the following issues: whether the deficiencies noted are sustained, what deficiencies remain,and does the present conditions warrant revocation of the certi�cate of occupancy. First, it should be deternuned whether an item is on a prior list and on this list. Second, deternune whether the deficiency noted is within the scope of the building maintenance code, Chapter 33, ar the property maintenance code, Chapter 34. Mr. McClay stated he is here with Jim Crockarell who is associated with the management group and is knowiedgeable as to each of the units. He will advise to the particular deficiencies noted, and whether the item has been corrected. After Mr. Strathman heazs the evidence, Mr. McClay believes q g- �ss PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEE1`ING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 7 it wili show the present condition of the units does not wazrant revoking the certificate of occupancy, the appeal should be granted, and the proposed acrion by the City denied. Pat Fish stated the City and the Fire Department have spent an exorbitant amount of time on these properties. Ms. Fish presented a booklet of photographs to Gerry Strathman of the properties taken over time. Some photographs were taken today. Ms. Fish does not feel the appellants should be granted this appeal simply on technicalities and resents having to argue these technicalities again. Tt should not be the responsibility of the Fire Department to have to tell a management company to cleanup the gazbage and replace the tile in the entry. Over a period of a year, ongoing orders have been issued on this properry. None of the items listed here are unreasonable. Most aze common sense maintenance items. The arguments presented here are uru-easonabie and petty. Gerry Strathman asked was a copy of the annotated version supplied to Robert McCiay. Pat Fish responded it was not. Mr. Strathman stated there will be a recess in order to provide Mr. McClay a copy of the annotated document and to review them plus the photographs. (Recess 3:04 to 3:18 p.m.) Robert McClay suggested each item be gone through to deternune if it has been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated he does not have the authority to take tesdmony on matters the Council already has ruled on. Robert McClay responded some of the items were remedied and then reaccurred. Therefare, it wouid be subject to a new appeai. Mr. Suathman stated he operates under Chapter 8 and it does not put him in the position of second guessing City officials. Rather, his authority is whether the City officials have given proper notification to the owner, whether an opportunity to correct has been provided, and whether the actions aze reasonable. This is a legislative review of an administrauve process. For example, Mr. Strathman cannot decide whether or not the floars are dirry because he is not a hyer of fact. Robert McClay stated if Mr. Strathman's role is to determine whether the action is reasonable, he cannot deternune that without considering the condition of the properry today. Pat Fish stated she made an appoantment, the management and the owner knew what time she would be there, and they had copies of the deficiency list. At least far the inspection, the condirion shouid have been corrected. Gerry Strathman stated it is appropriate for him to make a decision as to whether he finds Pat Fish's findings credible. He will hear from her as to what she saw on August 2& and he will hear from Robert McClay as to what he saw on the 28`�. What the condition is today or some other day, Mr. Strathman has no way of knowing. Mr. McClay stated he disagreed. Mr. Strathman responded the record will show his arguments. 1424 Case Avenue James Crockazell went through the items as follows: y� 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNCz NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 8 Item 1- The hallways and stairwells were cleaned the morning of the inspection. There is now a contract with an outside firm to clean. Residents will ciean also. Item 2- The carpeting does not need to be replaced. It has been shampooed, dyed, and it would pass Section 8 certification. Item 3- The broken tile in the entry has been replaced. Pat Fish stated Item 2 was put on at the request of maintenance because she made a comment about the carpefing being in bad condition. The cleaning of the hallways and stairwells was not sufficient. Ms. Fish has no objection to appealing the tile. She was not told by maintenance people they had been cleaned. James Crockazell stated cleaning is now done six days a week. Gerry Strathman stated cleaning is a reoccurring event. It is not possible to know if the lack of cleanliness from July 14 is the same lack of cleanliness on August 25. All three items are subject to appeal. Robert McCiay stated the condition of the carpeting in the unit is the responsibility of the tenant. Pat Fish responded this refers ta the carpeting in the hallway and was clearly explained to the maintenance people. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1424 Case Avenue. 1428 Case Avenue Pat Fish reported this unit is not vacant, but occupied as a workroom. It wili haue to be approved and inspected befare being occupied again. As long as it is not occupied as a residence, she will not pursue the matter. The certificate is not revoked on this building. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue as long as Unit #1 remains vacant. 1430 Case Avenue James Crockarell stated the tenant in Units #1 and 4 are being evicted. It is best to fix those items when they leave. Mr. Crockarell went through the items as follows: Item 1- The hallways and stairwells aze clean. The broken tile has been replaced. Item 2- The missing screens in Unit #4 have been replaced. Item 7- There is now a screen on the bedroom window in Unit #4. Item 8- The torn screens have been repaired. Fat Fish stated she talked to the tenants in Unit #4 who said the oven is srill not working. The certificate was revoked because of the number of violarions and the condition of the buildang. James Crockarell stated these are not the same 8 items as on the previous inspection. The children tear the screens on a regular basis. Ten screens have been tom since August 26. Gerry Strathman stated he believes the violations were there on Aua st 26. It is justification to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Robert McClay stated on August 14 there were 2& items and �• : PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 1VOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 9 on the last inspection there were eight items. There are things that occur at these properties each day. Mr. Strathman stated the revocation is based on a growing sense of repeated failures to get the remedies maintained. These items by themselves may not normally consritute basis for revocarion of certificate of occupancy. However, given the totality of the record, it constitutes sufficient basis for action. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 143Q Case Avenue. 1432 Case Avenue Item 1- James Crockarell stated tenants take down the certificate of occupancy notice repeatedly. All six items on the list are done now. Pat Fish stated one of the windows is gazden level. The plastic covering was fragile. Regazding the aarbage in Item 6, when Pat Fish was at the complex, there were two dumpsters. There was gazbage and trash in front of the dumpsters so the tenants could not get close. On the west end of the compiex is the previous dump site; it had mattresses and bags broken away and there were many flies around. James Crockazell stated trash is picked up three times a week, and they are billed for three pick ups a week. Gerry Strathman suggested the owners check to make sure the trash is being picked up. Gerry Strathman stated there seems to be sufficient basis for revocation. It is a failure of the property owner to resoive some matters such as broken bedroom windows. It is reasonable to fix a windows in 12 days. Robert McClay stated it was not easy to find tradespeople to do work thls summer. James Crockarell responded the windows are custom made because the windows opening are unique. Mr. Strathman stated he is not persuaded by the inability to repair the windows. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1432 Case Avenue. 1434 Case Avenue 7ames Crockareli went over the items as foliows: Item 1- A new certificate of occupancy has been placed. Item 2- The hallways were clean on the day of the inspecUon. Item 3- The kitchen cabinet doors have been fixed. Item 4- The cabinet doors are fixed. Item 6- Water damage is not on the previous list. Item 7- Cleaning the carpeting in Unit #4 is not the owner's job. Item 8- Replacing the carpeting is unreasonable. Item 11 - The screens have been installed again in Unit #4. Item 12 - Mr. McClay stated the doar is not in such a state that it needs to be replaced. Mr. Strathman asked why it needed to be replaced. Pat Fish responded the door has lost the security y a' �'S 5 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOT'ES OF 9-15-98 Page 10 aspect. The maintenance people agreed wiffi her. Mr. Strathman stated if it is based on someone else's judgement, it should read `Yepair or replace" the door. Regazding Item 5, Robert McClay stated Unit 2 is not rented, and the items will be repaired before it is rented again. Regazding Item 3, Pat Fish stated the repairs have not been done in a professional manner. Gerry Strathman asked why does the carpeting have to be replaced instead of cleaned or repaired. Pat Fish responded it is given as an altemative. The entire apartment was so severely stained that it was not cleanabie. Item 3 did not have the correct hinges. Gerry Suathman denied the appeal on 1434 Case Avenue, but the DeficiencyfCorrection list is amended as follows: the carpering in Unit #4 is not the owner's responsibiliry; the entry door to Unit #4 can be repaired or replaced. 1436 Case Avenue James Crockarell and Robeft McClay went over the items as follows: Item 1- Mr. Crockazell stated the certificate of occupancy was taken down. Item 3- Mr. McClay stated holes in the carpeting is the owner's responsibility. Item 5- Mr. Crockarell stated the patio door is not broken, but the screen needs to be fixed. Pat Fish agreed. Given the short list of deficiencies, Gerry Strathman asked why the certificate of occupancy was revoked. Ms. Fish responded if the certificate was revoked in June and with the lengthy appeals process extending the time, each rime the owners were sent a letter, they were also sent a revocation lettec because it is still revoked. Robert McClay stated the City and his client entered into a consent agreement. This is conhary to the agreement that was approved by the court. There was a hearing on this following the City Council hearing. The owner was upheld at that heating. A judicial officer detemuned that the owners did not violate that consent aa eement. Given that, Barb Cummings actions were an illegal aberration of her authority. She did things she did not have the authority to do. Gerry Strathman stated this letter is reiterating a decision made in June and asked do these things observed on August 25 and 26 consfitute a basis for revocation. Pat Fish responded the certificate of occupancy was revoked because of non compliance with the property maintenance code and the agreement previously made. Just because the building is inspected on August 25 and the letter says the certificate is revoked, it may have been revoked six months ago. Mr. Strathman asked was it Ms. Fish's detemunation on August 25 that what she observed sufficient reason to revoke the certificate of occupancy. Ms. Fish responded yes. Regarding Item 3, Pat Fish stated if the owner wants to hold the tenants responsible, that is between the owner and the tenant. James Cockarell stated Section 8 inspected the unit and did not find the tear befare the tenant moved in. y8-855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETIIVG NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page ll Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1436 Case Avenue citing Pat Fish's conciusion is not unreasonable, however he has some concerns about whether these violations are sufFcient for revoking a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Strathman wiil not subsUtute his judgement for the judgement of Ms. Fish who was on site and saw these violations. 1741 Sims Avenue James Cockazell stated Items 9 through 12 are new. Items 2 and 9- Inspector Barb Cumtnings is requiring them to replace air condirioners throughout the building. It is not the owner's responsibility under the lease or under Section 8 rules to provide an air conditioner. Items 3 and 4- Mr. Cockazell stated the carpeting has been shampooed, therefore it does not need to be replaced. To satisfy Bazb Cummings, carpeting was taken out of four units, and the floors were sanded. Gerry Strathman stated Item 3 mentions water damage. Mr. Cockarell stated it was dirty. Mr. Strathman suggested different language on this item and is concemed about ardering replacement of carpeting. Pat Fish stated worn carpeting is not an issue unless it is a tripping hazazd. In many units in the City, some managers go to tile ar hardwood floors. Mr. Strathman asked would Ms. Fish be willing to amend anything on the list. Ms. Fish responded she would rather not. Mr. McClay stated the property passed Section 8 inspecrion. Ms. Fish stated Section 8's standards are a lot lower than the City's standards and have nothing to do with the certificate of occupancy inspecrion. Mr. Strathman stated it is the owner's responsibility to make sure the people who live there maintain the property in a safe manner. Item 5- James Cockarell stated the owners have spent over $1,000 replacing new cabinet drawers. Item 7- Mr. Cockarell stated a carpenter took caze of the cupboard doors. James Crockarell stated the owner should not be required to repiace cazpeting and sand floors while the tenants are in the unit. Regarding the air conditioners, Robert McClay stated tbe code requires they be operating if they are prov3ded, but they do not have to be allowed. Pat Fish agreed with this. Mr. Cockarell stated he would like to meet with appropriate Ciry representauves to either put sheetrock, plywood, ar whatever is appropriate to replace the air conditioners. Mr. McClay stated he has a proposal to bring before Ms. Fish for approval. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1741 Suns Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners are present, they have to be in working condition. 1751 Sims Avenue Unit 2- James Cockareil stated the carpeting has been shampooed and does not need to be replaced. Unit 3- Mr. Cockazell stated Unit 102 is not occupied, therefare the air conditioner does not need to be replaced. 9g- 855 PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES OF 9-15-98 Page 12 Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1751 Sims Avenue, however air conditioners do not need to be repaired if they aze removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Mr. Strathman stated he is not in a position to lmow if the cazpeting needs replacement. 1761 Sims Avenue James Crockarell went over the iYems as follows: Item 1- The chimney has been repaired adequately. Barb Cummings may have added this as a mistake. Item 2- The metal duct has been properly sealed. Item 3- St. Paul Plumbing put in a new hot water heater, however Barb Cummings said she could not find evidence of the pernut being granted. Item 9- The fire extinguisher has been repaired. Item 12 - Tenants have been toid bicycies cannot be kept in the hallway. Item 13 - The strike plate for the fire doar has been replaced. Items 4, 6, 7, 11 - He cannot sand the floors of 18 units while the tenants are there. The tenants have to be housed in hotels, furniture has to be moved into the hallway or vacant units. The owners are prepared to make the floors conform to City requirements when the tenants leave the unit. Robert McClay asked about the compliance dates on some items. Pat Fish responded some of the items were cited on previous orders. Gerry Strathman asked is it usual practice to order carpets replaced. Pat Fish responded it depends on how bad it is; this carpeting was beyond cleaning. Mr. Strathman stated the code says that floors should be kept in a safe and clean fashion. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on 1761 Sims, however air condirioners do not need to be replaced if they are removed. If air conditioners aze present, they have to be in working condition. Also, the DeficiencyiCorrecfion list should be amended to read: "Maintain flooring in a safe and clean condition" Note: Regazding the appeals by Robert McClay, some appeals were denied on the basis of being previously acted upon by the City Council. Other appeals were denied because the actions of the Fire Department aze credible and reasonable. Only the appeal on 1428 Case Avenue was granted. With a few amendments, the appeals for 1424, 1430, 1432, 1434, 1436 Case Avenue, 1741, 1751, and 1761 Sims Avenue are denied. 79 Vireinia Street Gerry Strathman rescheduled tlus to the October 6 Property Code Enforcement mee6ng. The meeting was adjoumed at 5:18 p.m. rrn 9 $-555 MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF 9-IS-98 Guy Wiliits reported orders were mailed on three times for the dilapidated garage with a compliance da[e of May 30, 1448. The garage was removed by the Ciiy on July 9, 1998. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. � Provertv Code Enforcement Anpeal for 1564 Uvaer Afton Road No one appeared representing the property. Page 4 Thomas LeClair reported he talked to the owner this morning. The owner says he found a sketch that shows a trench system on his septic system. This is completely different than what is on the annuai inspection report. The owner wants six weeks to verify the information that he has. The report could be sustained or amended depending on what is found. Mz. Dufresne plans to use an infrazed detector system on the ground to substantiate tt�e trench system. Mr. I,eClair is agreeable to a six week layover. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the November 3, 1998 I.egislative Heazing. 1904 .Tefferson Avenue Gerry Stralhman recommendeci laying over to the October 6, 1998 Legislative Hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn