Loading...
99-650ORIGINAL Presented by Referred To Council File # �� �5 � Green Sheet # 64022 Committee Date 1 BE IT' RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paui hereby certifies and approves the July 6, 1999, 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses 3 Properry Appealed Av eln lant 4 227 Montrose Place Fredrick Thorne 5 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 6 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 7 conforming fire rated doors. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street Martin and Peter Nora Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street Paul Sprosty Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows with the following condition: when the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforming windows. 17 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South Arlene Gralnek 18 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 19 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 20 conforming fire rated doors. 21 1521 McAfee Street Tom Lindbeck for Lindbeck Family Trust 22 Decision: Appeal granted as follows: the garage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need 23 repairing, fire extinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. 24 Lot 7, Lewiston Heiehts. Fourth Addition (South Hiehwood) Ann Schley 25 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 26 27 1607 Hewitt Avenue Michael Schmid 28 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meering. 29 30 416 Charles Avenue Tasha Lolar 31 Decision: Appeal denied. 32 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA �r`(�2�, � �,. - ��-� \y �"�°�`t ! Green Sheet 64022 1 591 Payne Avenue Mary Coleman G+q � G� 2 Decision: Appeal denied. 3 616 Iv� Street East Robert Pilz 4 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the foliowing conditions: 1) the building must 5 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 6 confornvng fire rated doors. 7 421 Hollv Avenue Paul King 8 Decision: Appeal granted to allow the owner to install the purchased windows and to purchase and install similar 9 windows elsewhere in the house. 10 1615 St. Anthony Avenue Dorothy Irvin 11 Decisaon: Appeal granted to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and 12 contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Lo,; �, o��Y- - 1-m R •�S� ��`�a�,� 13 1252 Seventh Street East Ronald Miller 14 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 15 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 16 conforming fire rated doors. 17 SS9 McKniEht Road South Leonazd Anderson 18 Decision: Laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Yeas Nays Absent Biakey �/ Coleman �/ Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lantry ✓ � � � Adopted by Council: Date: L� °� Adopf n Certified by Co cil Secre BY: � � ��.�..,._ . 32 Approve by ayor: 33 Date: � U Z3 ( 34 By: Requested by Department of: I: Form Approved by City Attorney I� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council I� 2 City Council Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 July 14, 1999 July 7, 1999 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET � 9q -Gs o No 64022 Ma�auoar. �..� ❑anr��sc�wer ❑an«�nc ❑ w�+u�uso�vc�suR. ❑ w+.xr,u.a�mn.ccr� ❑ WYOR1oRI�sssfANT) ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGKATURE) Approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals foz the 7-6-99 meeting for the following addxesses: 227 Montrose Place, 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street, 1166 Barclay Street, 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South, 1521 McAfee Street, Lot 7-Lewiston Heights-Fourth Addition (South Highwood), 1607 Hewitt Avenue, 416 Charles Avenue, 591 Payne Avenue, 616 Ivy Street East, 421 Holly Avenue, 1615 St. Anth Avenue, 1252 Seventh Street East, ard 559 McKnight Road South. a PIANN{NG CAMMISSION CIB COMMfffEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SoURCE Has this perso�rtn ever worKetl under a contract (or this department7 Y£S NO Has thia Perso�rm ever heen a ciry emPbYee7 YE3 NO Does this persaNfi�m posxss a sltill no[ nomialrypos,aessed by any wrreM dry emplayeel YES NO la this pefsoNlirm a ta�petetl vendoYt YES NO CO3T/REVENUE BUDGEfED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITY NUMBER YES NO INFORMATON (IXPWN) ��b� NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, July 6, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Brian Krawiecki, License, Inspections, Environmental Protection (LIEP), Thomas�LeClair, LIEP; Paula Se�ley, Code Enforcement; Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 133 p.m. 227 Montrose Place (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Rick Thome appeared to appeal the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The properry was built during the art deco era. These aze the original doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confoiming fire rated doors. 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Martin Nora and Peter Nora appeared and stated they aze appealing the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The building was built in the mid 1960's. They aze hollow core doors. Gerry Strathman asked were there any plans to replace the doors. The Noras responded they were told by John Galies (Fire Prevention) that when the doors need to be replaced, they should be replaced with fire rated doors. This is what they will do. Gerry Stratlunan granted tUe variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Paul Sprosty, owner, appeazed to appeal two issues: the requirement to insta1120 minute fire rated doors, and the requirement for 20 inch windows in the bedrooms. Mr. Sprosty stated his windows aze 14 inch aluminum sliders. T'here aze six of them. Gerry Strathman asked could someone be able to get out of the windows. Mr. Sprosty responded the windows lift out. A person could exit in ten seconds. PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 C" l�(— Co Page 2 Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforaung windows. 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue Sonth (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Arlene Gralnek, owner, appeazed. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following canditions: i) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1521 McAfee Street (No one apeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Tom Lindbeck, representing Lindbeck Family Trust, appeazed and stated he is appealing severals items on his deficiency/correction list. Building walls: The building is approximately 15 yeazs old and has some hairline cracks in the stucco. It cracks every winter from e�cpansion and contraction. He checked with a stucco company and was told all stucco contracts. Fire extinguishers: The inspector saw a fire ea�tinguisher that belonged to a tenant and wanted Mr. Lindbeck to remove it. Mr. Lindbeck does not feel he has a right to take the extinguisher. Repair/replace scteen door: The apartments do not come with screen doors. The screen door was removed. Repair walis under sinks: The inspector looked at one sink instead of all eight. She saw that the cabinet had a cut out in the back whereby the cabinet can slide over the pipes. This inspector wants it repaired; however, it has been like that since it was built. I3one of the tenants want Mr. Lindbeck in their apazhnents doing that. There is no hole between the pipe and the wall. Gerry Stratlunan granted the appeal as follows: the gazage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need repairing, fire ea�tinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. No one is here from the Fire Depariment to explain their actions, and Mr. Lindbeck's azguments seem reasonable. The screen door issue is moot because it has been removed. �°�-��v PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 Lot 7. Lewiston Aeights. Fonrth Addition (South Hiehwood� Page 3 Ann Schley, owner, appeazed and stated she is looking for a variance to install her well 60 feet from the septic system instead of the required 75 feet in order to save some of trees and cause less impact on the slope. This is a h�ee preservation district in South Highwood. Thomas I.eClair reported that he has not received any plans regazding the on site system, the site plan where the homes aze located, nor plans where the drain field is located. He has to have an approved plan before he can approve the entire system. The owner is asldng for a vatiance on the sepazation between the well and the septic system, which is not in e�stence or plotted out. (Mr. LeCiair took a few minutes to review the plans provided by Ms. Schley.) Mr. LeClair stated there is a system oudined in Ms. Schley's plans that show primary and secondary septic systems. Usually when this takes place, the entire system's plan comes to Mr. LeClair by a registered professional from the Minnesota Pollution Conttol Agency (MPCA). Everything is reviewed to make sure the site is receptive to a septic system. If there are glitches in regazds to a sepazation problem, then those aze handled through the appeals process. It is unknown if the soils are receptive. Brian Krawiecki reported he is not sure from the drawing where the neighboring sewer systems are located, which is part of the separation issue here. MPCA personnel will find out where the other drain fields aze to make sure the wells would not be sited too close to those neighboring drain fields. Gerry Strathman laid over this matter to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting to give Ms. Schley an opportunity to talk to Mr. LeClair and Mr. Krawiecki. 1607 Hewitt Avenue (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Frank Melendez appeazed and stated he is putchasing the building from Mike Schmid. They worked on 47 of the items on the deficiency/correction list. He met with the inspectors last week. The inspectors want to condemn the building, but Mr. Melendez would like time to wark on the building. Hopefully, he will take ownership by the end of this month. He has asked Mr. Schmid to give the tenants a 30 day nofice. Mr. Melendez does not want to start work on the properly until he is stue he will be able to purchase the building. Mr. Strathman stated the City has dealt with this property quite a bit; he is uncomfortable with this situation. (Mr. Strathman asked Mr. Melendez to wait a few minutes while the secretary checked to see if a Fire Prevention inspector is available. No one was available.) ��-�� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 � Gerry Strathman laid over to the August 10,1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. By that time, Mr. Melendez may be the owner and the matter can be discussed again. 416 Charles Avenue Dwain Matison, representing his daughter Tasha L,olar, appeared and stated he has found a place to move. He needs until Friday to move into the apartment His children aze not living there. Just he and his wife will be there until Friday. He has Coleman lamps, which run by battery. Paula Seeley reported there was an extension cord connected to the nea�t properry. Mr. Matison responded he has removed that. He has the Coleman lamps instead. Gerry Strathman stated this situation is not great, but it can be withstood until Friday; however, no kerosene or gas lamps are allowed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the City Council will approve his decision on July 14; by that time, Mr. Matison will be out of the properry. 591 Pavne Avenue (No one appeared representing the properry nor representing Fire Prevention.) Gerry Stratlunan denied the appeal. 616 Ivy Street East (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Robert Pilz, owner, appeared. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 421 Aotly Avenue The following appeazed: Paul and Judy King, owners, and William McManus, contractor. (Mr. Fields presented a photograph to Gerry Strathman.) Mr. McManus stated he has 20 years experience. In the last 10 yeazs, he has specialized in rehabilitating older homes. He has manufachued approx'vnately 2,000 windows. He is here in a voluntary capacity as an advisor to the Kings. The Kings were issued a pemut on 4-12-99. Approximately $10,000 worth of new, double hung, wood inserts were ordered that would closely match the outside appeazance as the Kings knew it. Mr. And Mrs. King went to great ��--c�SC� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 5 lengths to match the e�cterior look of the house. They aze on the verge of ordering more, probably in the tune of $25,000 worth of windows. The house is over 100 years old. When the Kings acquired the properry, there was significant leakage in the roof and damage to the house. The windows are not operable or repairable. They jiggie in place, don't seal, and a breeze can blow thiough. Approximately a month ago, a person from LIEP told them to stop further work on the properry until HPC personnei can come. Mr. Rubenstein said a mistake had been made in his office, but everyone would have to live with this oversight. At that time, Mr. Rubenstein accepted the windows would be installed. About ten days later, Mr. McManus received a phone call from Mr. Rubenstein, who said the windows purchased will be installed with the stipulation that the new inserts ordered would match them so the overall appearance would not change or look strange. Several days later, Mr. McManus received a letter which does not represern the verbal agreements made in front of Mr. King and his son nor the telephone conversation between Mr. McManus and Mr. Rubenstein. Mr. Rubenstein is asking average people to be experts in 19 Cenhuy vemacular azchitecriue. (At this point, Mr. McManus presented a book with photographs showing Italianate houses. He directed Mr. Strathman's attention to certain photographs of houses in regazd to windows. Mr. McManus also showed Mr. Strathman photographs taken today of similaz homes in the neighborhood and showed photographs of how 421 Hoily looks right now. Mr Rubenstein was shown photographs also.) In the letter, stated Mr. McManus, Mr. Rubenstein directs the owners to consult with specialists to see if the windows can be repaired or perhaps fitted with jamb liners. Mr. McManus stated this cannot be done. Mr. Rubenstein also directs that the owners keep the eight light storm windows and install them during the winter months to maintain this aspect of the building's historic character. However, photogaphs show the storm windows and the rot; it cannot be done. Mr. McManus can made new windows for the entire house, but it may cost up to $60,000. Mr. Rubenstein directs having wooden screen made for the house in order to restore the building to it's original condition; however, the building pernut just says to replace with wood insert, double hung windows. Mr. Strathman asked did they want the windows ordered to be installed. Mr. McManus responded they want to install the windows already ordered and to install similar windows in the rest of the house. Aazon Rubenstein reported the owners have the right to install new windows. The suggestion that the owners look at the windows to see if they can be repaired, was just a suggestion and not an order. The issue is the configuration of the windows. The pertnit was issued with insufficient detail. The person who issued ffie zeport was told by Mr. King that he had experience in restoring historic buildings, and the appearance of the building would not change. The e�sring original prime windows aze two over two. Looking at two of the photographs of other houses in �� �� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-94 Page 6 the area, one of the houses is not an Italianate style house. These are not necessarily examples that pertain to this case. Mr. Shzthman asked about the pictures from the book of Italianate houses. From looking at the book, there appears to be some Italianate houses that have that type of window. (Mr. McManus showed Mr. Rubenstein pictures in the book.) Mr. Rubenstein responded what comes to mind is which are storm windows or prime windows, and whether they aze original. Although it is possible that some of these may have four over four windows originally, what is most important is to look at the pattern of ttris particulaz house. Historic district guidelines make very clear that what should be replicated aze details of the house, and not details and features taken from other buildings. Mr. Rubenstein was told that the new windows would match the original, but the original appeazance of the windows are two over two. Mr. Rubenstein stated they met on the site on June 1, and he never indicated that the four over four windows were acceptable. He may have said he understands they were ordered. What he said in the letter does not contradict what he said befoze. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to allow the owners to install the pwchased windows and to purchase and install sunilaz windows elsewhere in the house. The Kings made a good faith effort to act in conformance with the rules as the Kings understood them. It seems the windows ordered do not represent a flagrant disregard of the character and nature of the neighborhood. 1615 St. Anthony Avenue (Michael Urmann arrived during this appeal.) Dorothy Irvin, owner, and Susan Mercurio, neighbor, appeared. Ms. Irvin stated the building inspector called her when she was out of town and said she needed to cut her grass. She had someone cut it and informed the inspector. Later, another inspector said she needed to cut all of her grass. (Ms. Irvin presented photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Ms. Mercurio stated Ms. Irvin has a wildflower garden with native prairie grasses. There is an azea of lawn inside the wildflower garden. It is separated by a circle of stones, stated Ms. Irvin. The fue inspector said she would have to cut all the tall grass, even the part that is contained and maintained. Ms. Irvin has consulted the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Horticultural and has received lots of support. Mr. Strathman stated the Council adopted an ordinance with respect to boulevard plantings, but the azea in question is not a boulevard. Ms. Irvin responded this is in her front yard; it is surrounded by a reta inino wall in front, a lilac hedge on one side, a little walk that comes to her ��c-C9� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 7 front door on the other side, and the lawn is separated by a semi circle of stones. No one has ever told her until now that she had to cut the plants below eight inches. Michael Urmann reported the plantings do not meet the boulevazd requirement of not exceeding 24 inches in height. Also, Mr. i3rmann feels some of the plantings may be noacious weeds. (Mr. Urma. presented photographs to Gerry Strathman that were taken last week. Ms. Irvin also was presented these photographs.) Mr. Strathman asked the height of the plants. Mr. Urmann responded tt�ree to four feet in some places. Ms. Irvin stated she is asking to keep her tall grasses and wildflower plantings within her borders. She has trimmed back everything growing outside the borders. Earlier photographs would show plants growing outside their borders. The photographs she took on Saturday show her yard looking good. Ms. Mercurio asked for the definition of noxious weed. Native prairie glasses aze considered ornauiental. (Ms. Sttathman read the definition of a noxious weed as set forth in Chapter 105 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.) Ms. Irvin stated nothing on the weed list is growing on her properry to the best of her knowledge. If they aze and a fue inspector or botanist identifies them she will remove them. Mr. Strathman asked is there a rule about the location of a gazden. Mr. Urmann responded no. The reai issue is whether the garden is tidy or a mess, stated Mr. Strathman. Ms. Irvin's photographs show it being neat and tidy. The photographs shown by Mr. Urmann aze on the messy side. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Note: Mr. Strathman granted Ms. Irvin's request for a refund of her appeal fee due to financial hardslup. 1252 Seventh Street East (No one appeazed representing the property.) Mr. Urmann reported this is a standard fire door situation. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforniing fue rated doors. �� �sc> PROPER'T'I' CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 559 MeKnight Road South � Gerry Stcathman laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting pursuant to the agreement being fulfilled between Leonard Anderson and Code Enforcement. This agreement lays out a schedule whereby Mr. Anderson will make the necessary repairs to lus home. If the agreement is adhered to, all items on this agreement will be fulfilled by October 1, 1999. The meeting was adjourned at 3:07 p.m. rrn ORIGINAL Presented by Referred To Council File # �� �5 � Green Sheet # 64022 Committee Date 1 BE IT' RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paui hereby certifies and approves the July 6, 1999, 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses 3 Properry Appealed Av eln lant 4 227 Montrose Place Fredrick Thorne 5 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 6 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 7 conforming fire rated doors. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street Martin and Peter Nora Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street Paul Sprosty Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows with the following condition: when the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforming windows. 17 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South Arlene Gralnek 18 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 19 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 20 conforming fire rated doors. 21 1521 McAfee Street Tom Lindbeck for Lindbeck Family Trust 22 Decision: Appeal granted as follows: the garage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need 23 repairing, fire extinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. 24 Lot 7, Lewiston Heiehts. Fourth Addition (South Hiehwood) Ann Schley 25 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 26 27 1607 Hewitt Avenue Michael Schmid 28 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meering. 29 30 416 Charles Avenue Tasha Lolar 31 Decision: Appeal denied. 32 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA �r`(�2�, � �,. - ��-� \y �"�°�`t ! Green Sheet 64022 1 591 Payne Avenue Mary Coleman G+q � G� 2 Decision: Appeal denied. 3 616 Iv� Street East Robert Pilz 4 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the foliowing conditions: 1) the building must 5 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 6 confornvng fire rated doors. 7 421 Hollv Avenue Paul King 8 Decision: Appeal granted to allow the owner to install the purchased windows and to purchase and install similar 9 windows elsewhere in the house. 10 1615 St. Anthony Avenue Dorothy Irvin 11 Decisaon: Appeal granted to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and 12 contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Lo,; �, o��Y- - 1-m R •�S� ��`�a�,� 13 1252 Seventh Street East Ronald Miller 14 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 15 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 16 conforming fire rated doors. 17 SS9 McKniEht Road South Leonazd Anderson 18 Decision: Laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Yeas Nays Absent Biakey �/ Coleman �/ Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lantry ✓ � � � Adopted by Council: Date: L� °� Adopf n Certified by Co cil Secre BY: � � ��.�..,._ . 32 Approve by ayor: 33 Date: � U Z3 ( 34 By: Requested by Department of: I: Form Approved by City Attorney I� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council I� 2 City Council Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 July 14, 1999 July 7, 1999 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET � 9q -Gs o No 64022 Ma�auoar. �..� ❑anr��sc�wer ❑an«�nc ❑ w�+u�uso�vc�suR. ❑ w+.xr,u.a�mn.ccr� ❑ WYOR1oRI�sssfANT) ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGKATURE) Approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals foz the 7-6-99 meeting for the following addxesses: 227 Montrose Place, 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street, 1166 Barclay Street, 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South, 1521 McAfee Street, Lot 7-Lewiston Heights-Fourth Addition (South Highwood), 1607 Hewitt Avenue, 416 Charles Avenue, 591 Payne Avenue, 616 Ivy Street East, 421 Holly Avenue, 1615 St. Anth Avenue, 1252 Seventh Street East, ard 559 McKnight Road South. a PIANN{NG CAMMISSION CIB COMMfffEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SoURCE Has this perso�rtn ever worKetl under a contract (or this department7 Y£S NO Has thia Perso�rm ever heen a ciry emPbYee7 YE3 NO Does this persaNfi�m posxss a sltill no[ nomialrypos,aessed by any wrreM dry emplayeel YES NO la this pefsoNlirm a ta�petetl vendoYt YES NO CO3T/REVENUE BUDGEfED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITY NUMBER YES NO INFORMATON (IXPWN) ��b� NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, July 6, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Brian Krawiecki, License, Inspections, Environmental Protection (LIEP), Thomas�LeClair, LIEP; Paula Se�ley, Code Enforcement; Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 133 p.m. 227 Montrose Place (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Rick Thome appeared to appeal the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The properry was built during the art deco era. These aze the original doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confoiming fire rated doors. 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Martin Nora and Peter Nora appeared and stated they aze appealing the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The building was built in the mid 1960's. They aze hollow core doors. Gerry Strathman asked were there any plans to replace the doors. The Noras responded they were told by John Galies (Fire Prevention) that when the doors need to be replaced, they should be replaced with fire rated doors. This is what they will do. Gerry Stratlunan granted tUe variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Paul Sprosty, owner, appeazed to appeal two issues: the requirement to insta1120 minute fire rated doors, and the requirement for 20 inch windows in the bedrooms. Mr. Sprosty stated his windows aze 14 inch aluminum sliders. T'here aze six of them. Gerry Strathman asked could someone be able to get out of the windows. Mr. Sprosty responded the windows lift out. A person could exit in ten seconds. PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 C" l�(— Co Page 2 Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforaung windows. 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue Sonth (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Arlene Gralnek, owner, appeazed. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following canditions: i) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1521 McAfee Street (No one apeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Tom Lindbeck, representing Lindbeck Family Trust, appeazed and stated he is appealing severals items on his deficiency/correction list. Building walls: The building is approximately 15 yeazs old and has some hairline cracks in the stucco. It cracks every winter from e�cpansion and contraction. He checked with a stucco company and was told all stucco contracts. Fire extinguishers: The inspector saw a fire ea�tinguisher that belonged to a tenant and wanted Mr. Lindbeck to remove it. Mr. Lindbeck does not feel he has a right to take the extinguisher. Repair/replace scteen door: The apartments do not come with screen doors. The screen door was removed. Repair walis under sinks: The inspector looked at one sink instead of all eight. She saw that the cabinet had a cut out in the back whereby the cabinet can slide over the pipes. This inspector wants it repaired; however, it has been like that since it was built. I3one of the tenants want Mr. Lindbeck in their apazhnents doing that. There is no hole between the pipe and the wall. Gerry Stratlunan granted the appeal as follows: the gazage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need repairing, fire ea�tinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. No one is here from the Fire Depariment to explain their actions, and Mr. Lindbeck's azguments seem reasonable. The screen door issue is moot because it has been removed. �°�-��v PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 Lot 7. Lewiston Aeights. Fonrth Addition (South Hiehwood� Page 3 Ann Schley, owner, appeazed and stated she is looking for a variance to install her well 60 feet from the septic system instead of the required 75 feet in order to save some of trees and cause less impact on the slope. This is a h�ee preservation district in South Highwood. Thomas I.eClair reported that he has not received any plans regazding the on site system, the site plan where the homes aze located, nor plans where the drain field is located. He has to have an approved plan before he can approve the entire system. The owner is asldng for a vatiance on the sepazation between the well and the septic system, which is not in e�stence or plotted out. (Mr. LeCiair took a few minutes to review the plans provided by Ms. Schley.) Mr. LeClair stated there is a system oudined in Ms. Schley's plans that show primary and secondary septic systems. Usually when this takes place, the entire system's plan comes to Mr. LeClair by a registered professional from the Minnesota Pollution Conttol Agency (MPCA). Everything is reviewed to make sure the site is receptive to a septic system. If there are glitches in regazds to a sepazation problem, then those aze handled through the appeals process. It is unknown if the soils are receptive. Brian Krawiecki reported he is not sure from the drawing where the neighboring sewer systems are located, which is part of the separation issue here. MPCA personnel will find out where the other drain fields aze to make sure the wells would not be sited too close to those neighboring drain fields. Gerry Strathman laid over this matter to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting to give Ms. Schley an opportunity to talk to Mr. LeClair and Mr. Krawiecki. 1607 Hewitt Avenue (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Frank Melendez appeazed and stated he is putchasing the building from Mike Schmid. They worked on 47 of the items on the deficiency/correction list. He met with the inspectors last week. The inspectors want to condemn the building, but Mr. Melendez would like time to wark on the building. Hopefully, he will take ownership by the end of this month. He has asked Mr. Schmid to give the tenants a 30 day nofice. Mr. Melendez does not want to start work on the properly until he is stue he will be able to purchase the building. Mr. Strathman stated the City has dealt with this property quite a bit; he is uncomfortable with this situation. (Mr. Strathman asked Mr. Melendez to wait a few minutes while the secretary checked to see if a Fire Prevention inspector is available. No one was available.) ��-�� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 � Gerry Strathman laid over to the August 10,1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. By that time, Mr. Melendez may be the owner and the matter can be discussed again. 416 Charles Avenue Dwain Matison, representing his daughter Tasha L,olar, appeared and stated he has found a place to move. He needs until Friday to move into the apartment His children aze not living there. Just he and his wife will be there until Friday. He has Coleman lamps, which run by battery. Paula Seeley reported there was an extension cord connected to the nea�t properry. Mr. Matison responded he has removed that. He has the Coleman lamps instead. Gerry Strathman stated this situation is not great, but it can be withstood until Friday; however, no kerosene or gas lamps are allowed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the City Council will approve his decision on July 14; by that time, Mr. Matison will be out of the properry. 591 Pavne Avenue (No one appeared representing the properry nor representing Fire Prevention.) Gerry Stratlunan denied the appeal. 616 Ivy Street East (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Robert Pilz, owner, appeared. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 421 Aotly Avenue The following appeazed: Paul and Judy King, owners, and William McManus, contractor. (Mr. Fields presented a photograph to Gerry Strathman.) Mr. McManus stated he has 20 years experience. In the last 10 yeazs, he has specialized in rehabilitating older homes. He has manufachued approx'vnately 2,000 windows. He is here in a voluntary capacity as an advisor to the Kings. The Kings were issued a pemut on 4-12-99. Approximately $10,000 worth of new, double hung, wood inserts were ordered that would closely match the outside appeazance as the Kings knew it. Mr. And Mrs. King went to great ��--c�SC� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 5 lengths to match the e�cterior look of the house. They aze on the verge of ordering more, probably in the tune of $25,000 worth of windows. The house is over 100 years old. When the Kings acquired the properry, there was significant leakage in the roof and damage to the house. The windows are not operable or repairable. They jiggie in place, don't seal, and a breeze can blow thiough. Approximately a month ago, a person from LIEP told them to stop further work on the properry until HPC personnei can come. Mr. Rubenstein said a mistake had been made in his office, but everyone would have to live with this oversight. At that time, Mr. Rubenstein accepted the windows would be installed. About ten days later, Mr. McManus received a phone call from Mr. Rubenstein, who said the windows purchased will be installed with the stipulation that the new inserts ordered would match them so the overall appearance would not change or look strange. Several days later, Mr. McManus received a letter which does not represern the verbal agreements made in front of Mr. King and his son nor the telephone conversation between Mr. McManus and Mr. Rubenstein. Mr. Rubenstein is asking average people to be experts in 19 Cenhuy vemacular azchitecriue. (At this point, Mr. McManus presented a book with photographs showing Italianate houses. He directed Mr. Strathman's attention to certain photographs of houses in regazd to windows. Mr. McManus also showed Mr. Strathman photographs taken today of similaz homes in the neighborhood and showed photographs of how 421 Hoily looks right now. Mr Rubenstein was shown photographs also.) In the letter, stated Mr. McManus, Mr. Rubenstein directs the owners to consult with specialists to see if the windows can be repaired or perhaps fitted with jamb liners. Mr. McManus stated this cannot be done. Mr. Rubenstein also directs that the owners keep the eight light storm windows and install them during the winter months to maintain this aspect of the building's historic character. However, photogaphs show the storm windows and the rot; it cannot be done. Mr. McManus can made new windows for the entire house, but it may cost up to $60,000. Mr. Rubenstein directs having wooden screen made for the house in order to restore the building to it's original condition; however, the building pernut just says to replace with wood insert, double hung windows. Mr. Strathman asked did they want the windows ordered to be installed. Mr. McManus responded they want to install the windows already ordered and to install similar windows in the rest of the house. Aazon Rubenstein reported the owners have the right to install new windows. The suggestion that the owners look at the windows to see if they can be repaired, was just a suggestion and not an order. The issue is the configuration of the windows. The pertnit was issued with insufficient detail. The person who issued ffie zeport was told by Mr. King that he had experience in restoring historic buildings, and the appearance of the building would not change. The e�sring original prime windows aze two over two. Looking at two of the photographs of other houses in �� �� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-94 Page 6 the area, one of the houses is not an Italianate style house. These are not necessarily examples that pertain to this case. Mr. Shzthman asked about the pictures from the book of Italianate houses. From looking at the book, there appears to be some Italianate houses that have that type of window. (Mr. McManus showed Mr. Rubenstein pictures in the book.) Mr. Rubenstein responded what comes to mind is which are storm windows or prime windows, and whether they aze original. Although it is possible that some of these may have four over four windows originally, what is most important is to look at the pattern of ttris particulaz house. Historic district guidelines make very clear that what should be replicated aze details of the house, and not details and features taken from other buildings. Mr. Rubenstein was told that the new windows would match the original, but the original appeazance of the windows are two over two. Mr. Rubenstein stated they met on the site on June 1, and he never indicated that the four over four windows were acceptable. He may have said he understands they were ordered. What he said in the letter does not contradict what he said befoze. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to allow the owners to install the pwchased windows and to purchase and install sunilaz windows elsewhere in the house. The Kings made a good faith effort to act in conformance with the rules as the Kings understood them. It seems the windows ordered do not represent a flagrant disregard of the character and nature of the neighborhood. 1615 St. Anthony Avenue (Michael Urmann arrived during this appeal.) Dorothy Irvin, owner, and Susan Mercurio, neighbor, appeared. Ms. Irvin stated the building inspector called her when she was out of town and said she needed to cut her grass. She had someone cut it and informed the inspector. Later, another inspector said she needed to cut all of her grass. (Ms. Irvin presented photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Ms. Mercurio stated Ms. Irvin has a wildflower garden with native prairie grasses. There is an azea of lawn inside the wildflower garden. It is separated by a circle of stones, stated Ms. Irvin. The fue inspector said she would have to cut all the tall grass, even the part that is contained and maintained. Ms. Irvin has consulted the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Horticultural and has received lots of support. Mr. Strathman stated the Council adopted an ordinance with respect to boulevard plantings, but the azea in question is not a boulevard. Ms. Irvin responded this is in her front yard; it is surrounded by a reta inino wall in front, a lilac hedge on one side, a little walk that comes to her ��c-C9� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 7 front door on the other side, and the lawn is separated by a semi circle of stones. No one has ever told her until now that she had to cut the plants below eight inches. Michael Urmann reported the plantings do not meet the boulevazd requirement of not exceeding 24 inches in height. Also, Mr. i3rmann feels some of the plantings may be noacious weeds. (Mr. Urma. presented photographs to Gerry Strathman that were taken last week. Ms. Irvin also was presented these photographs.) Mr. Strathman asked the height of the plants. Mr. Urmann responded tt�ree to four feet in some places. Ms. Irvin stated she is asking to keep her tall grasses and wildflower plantings within her borders. She has trimmed back everything growing outside the borders. Earlier photographs would show plants growing outside their borders. The photographs she took on Saturday show her yard looking good. Ms. Mercurio asked for the definition of noxious weed. Native prairie glasses aze considered ornauiental. (Ms. Sttathman read the definition of a noxious weed as set forth in Chapter 105 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.) Ms. Irvin stated nothing on the weed list is growing on her properry to the best of her knowledge. If they aze and a fue inspector or botanist identifies them she will remove them. Mr. Strathman asked is there a rule about the location of a gazden. Mr. Urmann responded no. The reai issue is whether the garden is tidy or a mess, stated Mr. Strathman. Ms. Irvin's photographs show it being neat and tidy. The photographs shown by Mr. Urmann aze on the messy side. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Note: Mr. Strathman granted Ms. Irvin's request for a refund of her appeal fee due to financial hardslup. 1252 Seventh Street East (No one appeazed representing the property.) Mr. Urmann reported this is a standard fire door situation. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforniing fue rated doors. �� �sc> PROPER'T'I' CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 559 MeKnight Road South � Gerry Stcathman laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting pursuant to the agreement being fulfilled between Leonard Anderson and Code Enforcement. This agreement lays out a schedule whereby Mr. Anderson will make the necessary repairs to lus home. If the agreement is adhered to, all items on this agreement will be fulfilled by October 1, 1999. The meeting was adjourned at 3:07 p.m. rrn ORIGINAL Presented by Referred To Council File # �� �5 � Green Sheet # 64022 Committee Date 1 BE IT' RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paui hereby certifies and approves the July 6, 1999, 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses 3 Properry Appealed Av eln lant 4 227 Montrose Place Fredrick Thorne 5 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 6 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 7 conforming fire rated doors. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street Martin and Peter Nora Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street Paul Sprosty Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows with the following condition: when the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforming windows. 17 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South Arlene Gralnek 18 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 19 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 20 conforming fire rated doors. 21 1521 McAfee Street Tom Lindbeck for Lindbeck Family Trust 22 Decision: Appeal granted as follows: the garage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need 23 repairing, fire extinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. 24 Lot 7, Lewiston Heiehts. Fourth Addition (South Hiehwood) Ann Schley 25 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 26 27 1607 Hewitt Avenue Michael Schmid 28 Decision: Laid over to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meering. 29 30 416 Charles Avenue Tasha Lolar 31 Decision: Appeal denied. 32 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA �r`(�2�, � �,. - ��-� \y �"�°�`t ! Green Sheet 64022 1 591 Payne Avenue Mary Coleman G+q � G� 2 Decision: Appeal denied. 3 616 Iv� Street East Robert Pilz 4 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the foliowing conditions: 1) the building must 5 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 6 confornvng fire rated doors. 7 421 Hollv Avenue Paul King 8 Decision: Appeal granted to allow the owner to install the purchased windows and to purchase and install similar 9 windows elsewhere in the house. 10 1615 St. Anthony Avenue Dorothy Irvin 11 Decisaon: Appeal granted to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and 12 contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Lo,; �, o��Y- - 1-m R •�S� ��`�a�,� 13 1252 Seventh Street East Ronald Miller 14 Decision: Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must 15 otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with 16 conforming fire rated doors. 17 SS9 McKniEht Road South Leonazd Anderson 18 Decision: Laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Yeas Nays Absent Biakey �/ Coleman �/ Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom � Lantry ✓ � � � Adopted by Council: Date: L� °� Adopf n Certified by Co cil Secre BY: � � ��.�..,._ . 32 Approve by ayor: 33 Date: � U Z3 ( 34 By: Requested by Department of: I: Form Approved by City Attorney I� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council I� 2 City Council Gerry Strathman, 266-8575 July 14, 1999 July 7, 1999 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET � 9q -Gs o No 64022 Ma�auoar. �..� ❑anr��sc�wer ❑an«�nc ❑ w�+u�uso�vc�suR. ❑ w+.xr,u.a�mn.ccr� ❑ WYOR1oRI�sssfANT) ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGKATURE) Approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals foz the 7-6-99 meeting for the following addxesses: 227 Montrose Place, 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street, 1166 Barclay Street, 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South, 1521 McAfee Street, Lot 7-Lewiston Heights-Fourth Addition (South Highwood), 1607 Hewitt Avenue, 416 Charles Avenue, 591 Payne Avenue, 616 Ivy Street East, 421 Holly Avenue, 1615 St. Anth Avenue, 1252 Seventh Street East, ard 559 McKnight Road South. a PIANN{NG CAMMISSION CIB COMMfffEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SoURCE Has this perso�rtn ever worKetl under a contract (or this department7 Y£S NO Has thia Perso�rm ever heen a ciry emPbYee7 YE3 NO Does this persaNfi�m posxss a sltill no[ nomialrypos,aessed by any wrreM dry emplayeel YES NO la this pefsoNlirm a ta�petetl vendoYt YES NO CO3T/REVENUE BUDGEfED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITY NUMBER YES NO INFORMATON (IXPWN) ��b� NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, July 6, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Brian Krawiecki, License, Inspections, Environmental Protection (LIEP), Thomas�LeClair, LIEP; Paula Se�ley, Code Enforcement; Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 133 p.m. 227 Montrose Place (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Rick Thome appeared to appeal the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The properry was built during the art deco era. These aze the original doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confoiming fire rated doors. 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street (No one appeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Martin Nora and Peter Nora appeared and stated they aze appealing the requirement to insta1120 minute fire doors. The building was built in the mid 1960's. They aze hollow core doors. Gerry Strathman asked were there any plans to replace the doors. The Noras responded they were told by John Galies (Fire Prevention) that when the doors need to be replaced, they should be replaced with fire rated doors. This is what they will do. Gerry Stratlunan granted tUe variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1166 Barclav Street (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Paul Sprosty, owner, appeazed to appeal two issues: the requirement to insta1120 minute fire rated doors, and the requirement for 20 inch windows in the bedrooms. Mr. Sprosty stated his windows aze 14 inch aluminum sliders. T'here aze six of them. Gerry Strathman asked could someone be able to get out of the windows. Mr. Sprosty responded the windows lift out. A person could exit in ten seconds. PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 C" l�(— Co Page 2 Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors and the non conforming windows with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors and the nonconforming windows need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors and conforaung windows. 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue Sonth (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Arlene Gralnek, owner, appeazed. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following canditions: i) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 1521 McAfee Street (No one apeazed representing Fire Prevention.) Tom Lindbeck, representing Lindbeck Family Trust, appeazed and stated he is appealing severals items on his deficiency/correction list. Building walls: The building is approximately 15 yeazs old and has some hairline cracks in the stucco. It cracks every winter from e�cpansion and contraction. He checked with a stucco company and was told all stucco contracts. Fire extinguishers: The inspector saw a fire ea�tinguisher that belonged to a tenant and wanted Mr. Lindbeck to remove it. Mr. Lindbeck does not feel he has a right to take the extinguisher. Repair/replace scteen door: The apartments do not come with screen doors. The screen door was removed. Repair walis under sinks: The inspector looked at one sink instead of all eight. She saw that the cabinet had a cut out in the back whereby the cabinet can slide over the pipes. This inspector wants it repaired; however, it has been like that since it was built. I3one of the tenants want Mr. Lindbeck in their apazhnents doing that. There is no hole between the pipe and the wall. Gerry Stratlunan granted the appeal as follows: the gazage walls do not need repairing, the building walls do not need repairing, fire ea�tinguishers do not need servicing, the walls under sink do not need repairing. No one is here from the Fire Depariment to explain their actions, and Mr. Lindbeck's azguments seem reasonable. The screen door issue is moot because it has been removed. �°�-��v PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 Lot 7. Lewiston Aeights. Fonrth Addition (South Hiehwood� Page 3 Ann Schley, owner, appeazed and stated she is looking for a variance to install her well 60 feet from the septic system instead of the required 75 feet in order to save some of trees and cause less impact on the slope. This is a h�ee preservation district in South Highwood. Thomas I.eClair reported that he has not received any plans regazding the on site system, the site plan where the homes aze located, nor plans where the drain field is located. He has to have an approved plan before he can approve the entire system. The owner is asldng for a vatiance on the sepazation between the well and the septic system, which is not in e�stence or plotted out. (Mr. LeCiair took a few minutes to review the plans provided by Ms. Schley.) Mr. LeClair stated there is a system oudined in Ms. Schley's plans that show primary and secondary septic systems. Usually when this takes place, the entire system's plan comes to Mr. LeClair by a registered professional from the Minnesota Pollution Conttol Agency (MPCA). Everything is reviewed to make sure the site is receptive to a septic system. If there are glitches in regazds to a sepazation problem, then those aze handled through the appeals process. It is unknown if the soils are receptive. Brian Krawiecki reported he is not sure from the drawing where the neighboring sewer systems are located, which is part of the separation issue here. MPCA personnel will find out where the other drain fields aze to make sure the wells would not be sited too close to those neighboring drain fields. Gerry Strathman laid over this matter to the August 10, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting to give Ms. Schley an opportunity to talk to Mr. LeClair and Mr. Krawiecki. 1607 Hewitt Avenue (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Frank Melendez appeazed and stated he is putchasing the building from Mike Schmid. They worked on 47 of the items on the deficiency/correction list. He met with the inspectors last week. The inspectors want to condemn the building, but Mr. Melendez would like time to wark on the building. Hopefully, he will take ownership by the end of this month. He has asked Mr. Schmid to give the tenants a 30 day nofice. Mr. Melendez does not want to start work on the properly until he is stue he will be able to purchase the building. Mr. Strathman stated the City has dealt with this property quite a bit; he is uncomfortable with this situation. (Mr. Strathman asked Mr. Melendez to wait a few minutes while the secretary checked to see if a Fire Prevention inspector is available. No one was available.) ��-�� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 � Gerry Strathman laid over to the August 10,1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting. By that time, Mr. Melendez may be the owner and the matter can be discussed again. 416 Charles Avenue Dwain Matison, representing his daughter Tasha L,olar, appeared and stated he has found a place to move. He needs until Friday to move into the apartment His children aze not living there. Just he and his wife will be there until Friday. He has Coleman lamps, which run by battery. Paula Seeley reported there was an extension cord connected to the nea�t properry. Mr. Matison responded he has removed that. He has the Coleman lamps instead. Gerry Strathman stated this situation is not great, but it can be withstood until Friday; however, no kerosene or gas lamps are allowed. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal citing the City Council will approve his decision on July 14; by that time, Mr. Matison will be out of the properry. 591 Pavne Avenue (No one appeared representing the properry nor representing Fire Prevention.) Gerry Stratlunan denied the appeal. 616 Ivy Street East (No one appeared representing Fire Prevention.) Robert Pilz, owner, appeared. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors. 421 Aotly Avenue The following appeazed: Paul and Judy King, owners, and William McManus, contractor. (Mr. Fields presented a photograph to Gerry Strathman.) Mr. McManus stated he has 20 years experience. In the last 10 yeazs, he has specialized in rehabilitating older homes. He has manufachued approx'vnately 2,000 windows. He is here in a voluntary capacity as an advisor to the Kings. The Kings were issued a pemut on 4-12-99. Approximately $10,000 worth of new, double hung, wood inserts were ordered that would closely match the outside appeazance as the Kings knew it. Mr. And Mrs. King went to great ��--c�SC� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 5 lengths to match the e�cterior look of the house. They aze on the verge of ordering more, probably in the tune of $25,000 worth of windows. The house is over 100 years old. When the Kings acquired the properry, there was significant leakage in the roof and damage to the house. The windows are not operable or repairable. They jiggie in place, don't seal, and a breeze can blow thiough. Approximately a month ago, a person from LIEP told them to stop further work on the properry until HPC personnei can come. Mr. Rubenstein said a mistake had been made in his office, but everyone would have to live with this oversight. At that time, Mr. Rubenstein accepted the windows would be installed. About ten days later, Mr. McManus received a phone call from Mr. Rubenstein, who said the windows purchased will be installed with the stipulation that the new inserts ordered would match them so the overall appearance would not change or look strange. Several days later, Mr. McManus received a letter which does not represern the verbal agreements made in front of Mr. King and his son nor the telephone conversation between Mr. McManus and Mr. Rubenstein. Mr. Rubenstein is asking average people to be experts in 19 Cenhuy vemacular azchitecriue. (At this point, Mr. McManus presented a book with photographs showing Italianate houses. He directed Mr. Strathman's attention to certain photographs of houses in regazd to windows. Mr. McManus also showed Mr. Strathman photographs taken today of similaz homes in the neighborhood and showed photographs of how 421 Hoily looks right now. Mr Rubenstein was shown photographs also.) In the letter, stated Mr. McManus, Mr. Rubenstein directs the owners to consult with specialists to see if the windows can be repaired or perhaps fitted with jamb liners. Mr. McManus stated this cannot be done. Mr. Rubenstein also directs that the owners keep the eight light storm windows and install them during the winter months to maintain this aspect of the building's historic character. However, photogaphs show the storm windows and the rot; it cannot be done. Mr. McManus can made new windows for the entire house, but it may cost up to $60,000. Mr. Rubenstein directs having wooden screen made for the house in order to restore the building to it's original condition; however, the building pernut just says to replace with wood insert, double hung windows. Mr. Strathman asked did they want the windows ordered to be installed. Mr. McManus responded they want to install the windows already ordered and to install similar windows in the rest of the house. Aazon Rubenstein reported the owners have the right to install new windows. The suggestion that the owners look at the windows to see if they can be repaired, was just a suggestion and not an order. The issue is the configuration of the windows. The pertnit was issued with insufficient detail. The person who issued ffie zeport was told by Mr. King that he had experience in restoring historic buildings, and the appearance of the building would not change. The e�sring original prime windows aze two over two. Looking at two of the photographs of other houses in �� �� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-94 Page 6 the area, one of the houses is not an Italianate style house. These are not necessarily examples that pertain to this case. Mr. Shzthman asked about the pictures from the book of Italianate houses. From looking at the book, there appears to be some Italianate houses that have that type of window. (Mr. McManus showed Mr. Rubenstein pictures in the book.) Mr. Rubenstein responded what comes to mind is which are storm windows or prime windows, and whether they aze original. Although it is possible that some of these may have four over four windows originally, what is most important is to look at the pattern of ttris particulaz house. Historic district guidelines make very clear that what should be replicated aze details of the house, and not details and features taken from other buildings. Mr. Rubenstein was told that the new windows would match the original, but the original appeazance of the windows are two over two. Mr. Rubenstein stated they met on the site on June 1, and he never indicated that the four over four windows were acceptable. He may have said he understands they were ordered. What he said in the letter does not contradict what he said befoze. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to allow the owners to install the pwchased windows and to purchase and install sunilaz windows elsewhere in the house. The Kings made a good faith effort to act in conformance with the rules as the Kings understood them. It seems the windows ordered do not represent a flagrant disregard of the character and nature of the neighborhood. 1615 St. Anthony Avenue (Michael Urmann arrived during this appeal.) Dorothy Irvin, owner, and Susan Mercurio, neighbor, appeared. Ms. Irvin stated the building inspector called her when she was out of town and said she needed to cut her grass. She had someone cut it and informed the inspector. Later, another inspector said she needed to cut all of her grass. (Ms. Irvin presented photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Ms. Mercurio stated Ms. Irvin has a wildflower garden with native prairie grasses. There is an azea of lawn inside the wildflower garden. It is separated by a circle of stones, stated Ms. Irvin. The fue inspector said she would have to cut all the tall grass, even the part that is contained and maintained. Ms. Irvin has consulted the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Horticultural and has received lots of support. Mr. Strathman stated the Council adopted an ordinance with respect to boulevard plantings, but the azea in question is not a boulevard. Ms. Irvin responded this is in her front yard; it is surrounded by a reta inino wall in front, a lilac hedge on one side, a little walk that comes to her ��c-C9� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT NOT'ES OF 7-6-99 Page 7 front door on the other side, and the lawn is separated by a semi circle of stones. No one has ever told her until now that she had to cut the plants below eight inches. Michael Urmann reported the plantings do not meet the boulevazd requirement of not exceeding 24 inches in height. Also, Mr. i3rmann feels some of the plantings may be noacious weeds. (Mr. Urma. presented photographs to Gerry Strathman that were taken last week. Ms. Irvin also was presented these photographs.) Mr. Strathman asked the height of the plants. Mr. Urmann responded tt�ree to four feet in some places. Ms. Irvin stated she is asking to keep her tall grasses and wildflower plantings within her borders. She has trimmed back everything growing outside the borders. Earlier photographs would show plants growing outside their borders. The photographs she took on Saturday show her yard looking good. Ms. Mercurio asked for the definition of noxious weed. Native prairie glasses aze considered ornauiental. (Ms. Sttathman read the definition of a noxious weed as set forth in Chapter 105 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.) Ms. Irvin stated nothing on the weed list is growing on her properry to the best of her knowledge. If they aze and a fue inspector or botanist identifies them she will remove them. Mr. Strathman asked is there a rule about the location of a gazden. Mr. Urmann responded no. The reai issue is whether the garden is tidy or a mess, stated Mr. Strathman. Ms. Irvin's photographs show it being neat and tidy. The photographs shown by Mr. Urmann aze on the messy side. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal to keep the tall grasses with the following condition: the grasses will be maintained and contained to keep them from becoming overgrown and a blight. Note: Mr. Strathman granted Ms. Irvin's request for a refund of her appeal fee due to financial hardslup. 1252 Seventh Street East (No one appeazed representing the property.) Mr. Urmann reported this is a standard fire door situation. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconfornung doors with the following conditions: 1) the building must otherwise be in compliance, 2) when the nonconfornung doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforniing fue rated doors. �� �sc> PROPER'T'I' CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTES OF 7-6-99 559 MeKnight Road South � Gerry Stcathman laid over to the October 5, 1999, Property Code Enforcement meeting pursuant to the agreement being fulfilled between Leonard Anderson and Code Enforcement. This agreement lays out a schedule whereby Mr. Anderson will make the necessary repairs to lus home. If the agreement is adhered to, all items on this agreement will be fulfilled by October 1, 1999. The meeting was adjourned at 3:07 p.m. rrn