87-1441 WHITE - CI7V CL�RK
PINK - FINANCE GITY OF SAINT PAUL Council �J �/'
CANARV�- OEPARTryIENT File NO. �` /�•/
BLUE - MAVOR
�
� �Co cil Resolution ,�....
Presented By �`�
Referr Committee: . Date
Out of �ommittee By Date
BE IT RESOLVED, Thar the Council of the City of Saint Paul
her�by certifies and approves �he action of the City of St. Paul
Boa�d of Appeals and Review pertaining to the following lisiced
pro erty and as shown by the Excerpted Minu�es of the said Board
of P�ppeals and Review, August 11, 1987 and marked EXHIBIT A, and
atta�ched here-�o and made a part hereof by reference :
DATE OF BOARD
1�INUTES CASE NO: PROPERTY APPELLANT
08/lll/87 55-87-I3 522-524 Smith Ave. S. Aeter & N;arilyn
Schneider
BOAR� ACTION: Granted an extension of time till January 1, 1988
to complete wea�herstrippinq, caulking, a-ttic
insulation, furnace brough'c up to 70� efficiency.
PROP�RTY DESCRIPTION: Lienau' s Re-arrangement of
Blocics 17 and 18 Oliver' s
addition to West St. Paul
Lots 21 and
Lot 22 Blk 17
COUNCIL�VIEN Requested by Department of:
Yeas D�'eW Nays
� �
Rettman In Favor
Scheibe�l
Sonnen —�-- Against BY
Weida
wilson aCj _ � �ggl Form Ap y City tt ey
Adopted by Coun�il: Date
�
Certified Pas b cil Se ary BY
gy,
A►pproved y Mavqr: Date — � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
B BY
t��'�' ` :'�4� r >; 1987
I
. . . . , �.��--i��r
.�� .
(� ' ST. PAUL BOARD OF APPEALS AND REVIEW
705A City Hall
St. Paul , Minnesota 5510�
, Minutes , Meeting of August 11 , 1987
MEMB�RS PRESENT: Ron Glassman, Chairman
Glenn Gausman
William Hite
Harold Knutson
David Schultz
MEMBERS ABSENT: Rosie Bostrom
William L. Tilton
OTHERS PRESENT: Douglas Jensen, St. Paul Neighborhood
Enerny Cons�rtium
Bruce Nelson, Minnesota Dept. of Energy &
Economic Dev. , Energy Div.
Dan Flaherty, Minnesota Dept of Energy &
Economic Dev. , Energy Div.
Tate Halverson, Building Inspection &
Design/City of St. Paul
Alice Bi�jjani , Health Division
Councilman James 5cheibel
Hugh Rogers
Jan Gasterland, City Architect
( '� Frank Staffenson, Health Division
� Peter & Marilyn Schneider
Julie Close, St. Paul Neighborhood
Consortium
STAFF Josephine P. Palermo
The meeting of the Board of Appeals & Review was called to order
by Chairman Ron Glassman, at 1 :30 p,m. , August 11 , 1987. Mr.
Glassman . welcomed the appeltant and explained the procedures,
stating that what the Board does is recommends action to the City
Council .
Minutes of the July 14, 1987 meeting were approved as submitted
in writing.
CASE NO. PROPERTY APPEALED APPELLANT
55-87-H 522-524 Smith Ave. So. Peter 8� Marilyn Schneider
APPEA�RANCE Peter 8� Marilyn Schneider
SUBJ CT Appellant is appealing the Energy Audit, pertaining to
#1 . Weatherstr-ipping prime windows and doors; #2. Caulking,
sealing all gaps, cracks, joints, ( interior 8� exterior) ; #3 Attic
� insulation; #4. Wall and floor insulation.
PROCEEDINGS The appellant is appealing the orders from an Energy
Audit. The building is in good shape, the appellant stated the �
1
-� � . �
. , �����rs�r
�� heat is paid by the owner and not the tenants. New siding, new
roofy new windows , new steps, and cement work. Total cost of
repa� rs was about $ 12,000. 00 dollars. Appellants feel that the
work! order is unreasonable.
Alic� Bijjani , from the Health Department stated that this audit
was because of a complaint, the city cannot reveal who the
complaint came from.
The Lnergy Audit is a State Law that the City is enforcing. This
has been a State Law since 1980. The City has codes covering all
rental property in all phases and if the property is not up to
code, orders will be issued.
Julie Close, from St. Paul Neighborhood Energy Program, stated
that ' there is an amended audit dated May 13 , 1987, which is
basically the same as the original , with the exception of #8.
(Wall and floor insulation) .
Heating bill for the duplex is roughly $ 1 ,600. 00 per year.
.+
Furnace is a gas hot water with radiators , and is 70% efficient.
,�
Roughly 800 sq. ft in each unit.
�Y;; BOARD ACTION Motion made by Dave Schultz to require
weatherstripping, Caulking, attic insulation and furnace ( 7070
efficient) with the exception of wall insulation, to be completed
by Jamuary 1 , 1988. Seconded by Harold Knutson.
(yeas 4) (Nays 1 ) (Abstentsion 0)
--------------------------------------------
The Bmard has invited speakers from Energy Consortium (SPREEE) to
address the Board.
Alice Bijjani , from Health Division stated that the City program
to enforce the energy code started in fall of 1986. State Law
became effective in 1980 to require that rental property meet
certain energy efficiency standards. Around the end of 1985 the
State informed the City that the State could not no longer afford
to enforce the State code, at that time Council looked for ways
to en�orce Energy Code.
Two rnain reasons why:
1 . General conservation.
2. Energy, being the only way to reaily reduce the cost of
( rental housing. more affordable. Other cost are build in
and cannot be reduced.
These 'inspections are conducted because of complaints, which are
2
� ' � � � � � � �7_,��r
� �.
screened and then send to the Energy Consortium, with whom the
City has contracted to do the Energy Audits. Once the Audit is
returned to the Health Department, a letter is sent regarding the
itemS that are required by State Law, that is, anything with a
pay-t�ack period of 10 years or less.
Over the last year roughly 60 buildings were audited and 40 were
ordered to insulate the walls. Average pay-back for the 40
buildings to insulate the walls was estimated to be 5. 4 years per
building.
The concern the Health Department has, is that the people who
come to the Board wi�th appeals regarding energy, no matter what,
were granted variances on wall insulation, not on the basis of
condition in a particular building, or particular har-dship
conditions, the kind of things cited in charge to Board of
Appeals in City Code. In fact, they were granted on the basis of
a disagreement with the law. The Board of Appeals 8 Review does
have a function of reviewing City Code. a very irnportant
function. The proper channel is to provide feedback to the City
Council , as to the problems with the law, rather then grant
varia�ces on the bases that ,you disagree with the law.
Mr. Gausman asked to address the Board. He stated that he does
not disagree with the Law but, the way that the Law is being
�� interpreted, in that. any decent Engineering Study witl show,
(�,�.�P that if the insulation within the wall gets wet, it can be
deterttnental to the insulation and to ones health. Mr. Gausman's
disagreement is, that Code is reguiring insulation and not
requ i r i ng a vapor and i nf i 1 trat i on sea 1 s.�t�w, ���o�ie states,
� that we shall have a better vapor barrie ins�d� the i�all , than
` the outside, and this is what is not being enforced, it is not
eing priced that way, and if it were, you would not be getting a �
10 y�ar pay-back. Mr. Gausman, states this is the point of
objection.
Alice Bijjani , addresses the issue in two ways:
1 . City has increased the amount that the Energy Consortium
is being paid to do the Energy Audit with the promise
that the auditors are to return and make sure that the
insulation does meet code.
2. Persons in the field have been invited to the meeting to
address the issues.
Dave Schuitz asked the questions abo�t the fact if its less than a
10 year pay-back, would the order be enforced?
Alice Bijjani stated that if, less than a 10 year pay-back, then
the order would not be enforced.
Dan Flaherty, from Energy Division, State of Minnesota, who
participated in the training and the design of this audit.
He addressed the issue of wall insulation. The issue of moisture
3
� - � � � ��7,���
{ in wall insulation has been looked into very seriously. It is
very essential when insulating walls properly. Auditors are
train�ed that if wall insulation is recommeded, then interior
caulking is necessary to avoid moisture from entering the walls.
A study of 100 walls that shows walls insulated with a variety of
insulations. The moisture problems that were found was due to
improper flashing or leaks of moisture into the walls. In every
case the insulation was dry and the, insulation per say y�as no
the cause of moi sture.�0�� �-w� x�� - -,�,11ry �� ,��.,�E'.���L.C.,
Another study done in Minneapolis , "Operation Insulation" , where
the Gity of Minnepolis has somewhat the same program that of a
guaranteed Contractor Program. Minneapolis has insulated 2000
homes in the last two years with no complaints. They require
that u�alls be blown to a certain density - air sealing techniques
be made, an infra red inspection is made and if the walls are not
insulated at least 90%, then the insulation contractor has to
return to correct the job.
Dan Flaherty, stated that if the wall insulation is not done
correctly it doesn't work.
Alice Bijjani referred to the statement "doesn't work" . Is that
staternent referring to terms of energy efficient or in terms of
moistWre problem?
f:_��`=' Answer : If air is allowed to circulate through the insulation,
then the R-Value is reduced, atso, if moisture frorn
the house does condense in insulation that also reduces
the R-Value.
Another question Alice Bijjani asked Mr. Flaherty - What are the
kinds ' of things that will create moisture problems if not done
correatly?
Answer: Normatiy moisture in a wall cavity is warm meeting the
cotd. Air leaks that carry moisture, this will
condense somewhere in the insulation and form frost, it
it will take longer to dry, therefore, reducing the R-
Value.
Question: What must be done to avoid moisture problem?
Answer: Primarily, from the interior - need to seal all cracks
( Internal Caulking)
Glenn Gausman feels that the problem of moisture does not show up
in two years, he feels it takes longer. This can cause a serious
problem. Mr. Gausman stated a case where a problem of moisture
has caused serious illness to a family.
4
. . . . ��.-,-,��i
� ' Dave Schultz stated that inspections upon completion is not
suffiicient. It should be done periodically during the time the
contractor is doing the work.
Jan Gasterland - The law was based on reasonabiness, based on
energy crisis. The original proposal was a 20 year payback and
that was reduced to a 10 year payback. This law was drafted to
be et�forced by the inspectors on a complaint basis.
Frank Staffenson - There should be across the board energy
standards in the Housing Codes for everyone.
Councilman Scheibel - Standards that were accepted, were the State
Minimum Standards . If the Board feels these minimum standards
are unreasonable then these should be brought before Council and
the Mayor. The Council could then go to the State to work
together to try and modify the standards . When putting these
City standards together the Council -worked with many different
groups.
A dispute over the question of a ten year payback is
ques�ionable, in that, i.f the caulking and vapor barrier is
included in wall insulation that would bring up the price.
Alice Bijjani , stated that the board is here to consider ,the
cases, out of the ordinary. Housing is such an individual sort of
�'�"" a feel that the board will always have special cases i .e. destroy
historic nature of a building or exterior brick work, flat
roof, etc, the standard can not be applied in the same way. Ms .
Bijjani feels each case should be handled individually, not just
grant a variance across the board on wall insulation. Health
department needs a resolution stating precisely what is to be
enforced so that the inspectors have a line of direction.
Mr. Gausman, stated that if that be the case, then more
background is needed about construction on wall insulation�vz,su�.�C.���
��
Councfilman Scheibel , stated there are two keys here
first, reasonable standards; second, each case be judged
individually. The Board is very valuable, and is doing a
tremer�dous.
Councilman Scheibel , stated while the Councit debated this
ordinance, Council recognized that in most cases the cost wili be
passed on to the tenants.
Doug Jensen, from the St. Paul Energy Consortium stated that when
orders are given to insulate a house it is recommended that the
siding be removed and holes drilled and plugged in sheathing,
then replace the siding.
Meeting adjourned at 3 :30 p.m.
5
.... .
>
_=_____- - "--- AGEI�A ITEMS -------------------------------- �r'7"����
-_�_____________________ -------------------
ID#: [268 ] DATE REC: [09/22/87] AGENDA DATE: [00/00/007 ITEM #: f. 1
SUBJECT: [�OARD OF APPEALS - EXTENSION GRANTED - PETER & MARILYN SCHNEIDER ]
STAFF ASSIf�NED: [ ] SIG:[WILSON ] OUT-[X] TO CLERK �887d0] 09'�,�,3�j�' 7
ORIGINATOR�[CITY ATTORNEY ] CONTACT:[JOSIE PALERMO (4163) ]
ACTION:[ I ]
C I ]
C.F.# [ I� ] ORD.# [ ] FILE COMPLETE="X" [ ]
+� � +� � � : +� +� � r � �
FILE INFO: [RESOLUTION/BOARD MINUTES 8/11/87 ]
[ ]
[ 7
___________�_________________________________________________________________
I
�I
I,
,
,
i
�
�
�
�
;
�
,I