Loading...
00-1924��G11�A� Presented � Council File # O� 1 1. Green Sheet # 100403 RESOLUTION OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Referred To Committee Date BE TT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the February 22, 2000, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following address: • �. • ��-. -. Ap�ellant 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 Decision: The Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate will be li8ed on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by Februaiy 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #1 l. Frank Young will make the arrangements for he, a social worker, and Carl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Comparoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Comparoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. Yeas Nays Absent B1akeY � Coleman � Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom ✓ Lantry i / O Adopted by Council: Date �, \ �-� Adoption By: Approved ! 3'� Requested by Department oE � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � 00 -�qa- City Council 0£fices Gerry Strathman, 266-8560 February 23, GREEN SHEET wr�r owFCroie No � � � �"-�: 0 3 March 1, 2000 xureeeFOrt ROIITYIG OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ❑ alr�na�eEr ❑ arvp.wt _ ❑ w+rHCw�aoeu�sow. ❑ wuxpumnn�ccro � Mlpt(OItYOTNii) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for 1533 St. Paul Avenue, Unit 11. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMfTTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION Hea uuc pe�saNfi�m erer vrorkea under aconaact r«tnia aepa�anemx YES NO Has ihia V��m ever 6een a cdY empbyee'! vE5 NO �oes ihis Y��m poseecs a sldll not namailyC�ssed bY anY curteM oitY emWm/ee7 VES IVG Isthis P�rm atargeted venEOYt YR NO dein all ves arawew on aeoara[e sheet and attach to nreen aheek G�'�b:�� �',�� F"t,��uA�24�0.�:t 6�te��d� . ) ' � ��' � ...'. COET/itEVENUE BUDfiETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO SOURCE NCTVfSY Nt9M66R �v �. NOTES OF T'I� SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, Febniary 22, 2000 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Heating Officer STAFF PRESENT: Cazl Compazoni, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 131 p.m. 1533 St. Paul Avenue. Unit 11 Gerry Strathxnan e�cplained that this meeting is being held to heaz an appeal from Frank Young to a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate froin the Fire Department on 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 as being unfit for human habitation. Frank Young, tenant and appellant, appeazed and read from a letter that he prepared. His main points aze as follows: 1} The aparfinent is not unfit for human habitation. The proper fifle would be Notice to Vacate, Non Compliance with Fire Regulations. 2) This is short notice and a rush to judgement. Mr. Young returned late one night and saw the inspection notice. The next morning, came the inspection. The following day was the condemnation notice. Things are always a mess on short notice. A resource person cannot come to help tidy, advocate, and witness in such a short time span. If someone could give an reinspection the next morning, items could be removed quickly. 3) Posifive factors have been ignored, such as a non hazardous lifestyle, no smoking, no drugs, no weapons, na fires or emetgencies in his life. He is serious about fire safety. 4) There is a lack of specificity. Things should be spelled out in writing so that Mr. Young knows exactly what will satisfy an inspection, such as what combustibles include, and what a clear path requires. 5) There was no prior warning ar previous complaint on blockage. Mr. Young stated the condemnation notice serves as undeserved punishment and unwarranted feaz. He stated he suffers from an illness. Carl Comparoni reported that on approxnnately January 12 to 14, he sent a letter to Dauern Park Apartments that he will be coming out to inspect the entire complex on February 9 and 10. There are 16 units. On Februaiy 9, he went to the complex and met Mike Voss. This is a 16 unit building. At Unit 11, Mr. Comparoni could only open the door about halfway. The kitchen window and living room windows were stacked four feet out and four feet deep with boxes, calendars, magazines, and papers. The kitchen is a wrap around type and has two means of egress. A person could enter the ldtchen from the main hallway. Once in the kitchen, the only means of egress was to go back down the hallway. A person could not circle around because of the amount of collectibles. The bedroom has the same concerns: combustibles were blocking the window. It is your view that it would not be possible for Mr. Young to egress through the windows, asked Mr. Strathman. NIr. Compazoni responded yes and the door also creates a problem. Boxes behind the door were preventing it from being open. He tried to explain to Mr. Young that there eU -\°lZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNG NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 2 needed to be three feet of clearauce, but Mr. Young felt he could get to the windows. Mr. Comparoni told Mr. Young that he would be back sometime in March to reinspect the apartment. Mr. Comparoni stated he grew more concerned about the many items in the apamnent. He thought in the best interest of safety, he would condemn the building. He went back on Februasy 10 to inspect the rest of the complex. At that time, he told Mr. Young he was going to condemn the unit and the condemnation date was Febraaty 29. He told Mr. Young he would work with him, and if progress was being made, the condemnation would be lifted and Mr. Comparoni would return on Mazch 28 to reinspect the entire complex and Apartment 11. If the apartment was in the same condition on Mazch 28, it would be condexnned again. Noticing a violation, telling the property owner it has to be conected, and laying out a schedule when it should be done is a customary process, stated Mr. Strathman. Issuing a condemnation order on the second visit is not customary. He asked what prompted him to issue a condemnation order instead of working towazds compliance with Mr. Young. Mr. Comparoni responded the amount of collectibles presented an immediate hazazd. He felt that he was giving Mr. Young too much time to comply. Mr. Strathxnan asked did Mike Voss haue anything to add. Mr. Voss responded he did not. Mr. Strathman asked is Mr. Compazoni's account factually accurate as faz as what he did and what he said. Mr. Young replied he did not agree that there was only one way to get out of the kitchen both sides. He admits there was a litter problem, and he was getting to the point where he could do something about it. If the inspector had said he would come back tomorrow and would expect some things to be cleazed right away, that could be done. The items by the door were rivo crates that could have easily been moved away. There aze some things that are blocking three foot access from the front to the rear, but Mr Young can maintain access. It does not involve moving that much. A heavy cabinet is an issue, but he would gladly get rid of it. It's just a question of getting people to move it out of there. The urgency of the matter is not evident. NIr. Young alluded to suffering from an illness, stated Mr. Strathman. He asked are there resources to get the apartment to a safe condition. Mr. Young responded the problem is the fear inflicted on him that has made it difficult to do the work he has been asked to do; however, it is not beyond him to do this. How long would it take to return the apariment to a safe condition, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Young responded the problem is a lack of specificity as to what needs to be done. Mr. Strathman asked if Mr. Comparoni or another inspector came to the unit and described what needs to be done, would that address the need for more information. Mr. Young replied what they would requu�e would make a big difference as to what he could do. Mr. Strathman asked does he think Mr. Young can bring his apartment into compliance in a reasonable period of time. Mr. Compazoni replied if Mr. Young uses the resources available to him. OU-\�tZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 3 Was Mr. Young receptive to hearing what needs to be done or was he unable to understand, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni replied comprehension may have been a problem. Mr. Strathman asked would it be possible to arrange for an advocate to be present during another inspection to work with him after the inspector left. Mr. Young responded he hopes so, but it is always a question of schedules. Mr. Comparoni added that two social workers informed him they were denied access to the apartment. Mr. Young replied he did not thiuk he was denying them access, and they did not tell him they thought anyfliiug of the kind. He does have concems about things being thrown around. Would it be possible to return to the apartment with a social worker present to explain concerns, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni responded he is more than willing to do that. Mr. Strathman asked would he be willing to make arrangements with Mr. Comparoni and one of the social workers to discuss what needs to be done. Mr. Young responded he would like the items in writing, and Mr. Comparoni responded he could do that. Mr. Strathman stated someone needs to take responsibility for setting another inspection date and contacting a social worker. He asked did Mr. Comparoni have a telephone number for the social workers. Mr. Comparoni responded no. In that case, stated Mr. Strathman, Mr. Young will have to take the responsibility of contacting a social worker plus contacting Mr. Compazoni to arrange for an inspection by the end of this month. Mr. Strathman urged Mr. Compazoni to make a special effort to fit this inspection into his schedule. Mr. Young stated he would like someone else to do the inspection. Mr. Strathman replied he will not make that decision and will assuxne Mr. Compazoni will be the inspector. (NIr. Comparoni gave Mr. Young his business card.) ff Mr. Young is confused about the arrangements, Mr. Voss can help him, stated Mr. Strathman. Gerry Strathman stated the Notice of Condexnnation and Order to Vacate will be lifted on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by February 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11. Frank Young will make the arrangements for himself, a social worker, and Cazl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Compazoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Compazoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. The mee6ng was adjourned at 2:13 p.m. rrn 4��G11�A� Presented � Council File # O� 1 1. Green Sheet # 100403 RESOLUTION OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Referred To Committee Date BE TT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the February 22, 2000, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following address: • �. • ��-. -. Ap�ellant 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 Decision: The Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate will be li8ed on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by Februaiy 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #1 l. Frank Young will make the arrangements for he, a social worker, and Carl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Comparoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Comparoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. Yeas Nays Absent B1akeY � Coleman � Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom ✓ Lantry i / O Adopted by Council: Date �, \ �-� Adoption By: Approved ! 3'� Requested by Department oE � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � 00 -�qa- City Council 0£fices Gerry Strathman, 266-8560 February 23, GREEN SHEET wr�r owFCroie No � � � �"-�: 0 3 March 1, 2000 xureeeFOrt ROIITYIG OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ❑ alr�na�eEr ❑ arvp.wt _ ❑ w+rHCw�aoeu�sow. ❑ wuxpumnn�ccro � Mlpt(OItYOTNii) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for 1533 St. Paul Avenue, Unit 11. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMfTTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION Hea uuc pe�saNfi�m erer vrorkea under aconaact r«tnia aepa�anemx YES NO Has ihia V��m ever 6een a cdY empbyee'! vE5 NO �oes ihis Y��m poseecs a sldll not namailyC�ssed bY anY curteM oitY emWm/ee7 VES IVG Isthis P�rm atargeted venEOYt YR NO dein all ves arawew on aeoara[e sheet and attach to nreen aheek G�'�b:�� �',�� F"t,��uA�24�0.�:t 6�te��d� . ) ' � ��' � ...'. COET/itEVENUE BUDfiETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO SOURCE NCTVfSY Nt9M66R �v �. NOTES OF T'I� SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, Febniary 22, 2000 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Heating Officer STAFF PRESENT: Cazl Compazoni, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 131 p.m. 1533 St. Paul Avenue. Unit 11 Gerry Strathxnan e�cplained that this meeting is being held to heaz an appeal from Frank Young to a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate froin the Fire Department on 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 as being unfit for human habitation. Frank Young, tenant and appellant, appeazed and read from a letter that he prepared. His main points aze as follows: 1} The aparfinent is not unfit for human habitation. The proper fifle would be Notice to Vacate, Non Compliance with Fire Regulations. 2) This is short notice and a rush to judgement. Mr. Young returned late one night and saw the inspection notice. The next morning, came the inspection. The following day was the condemnation notice. Things are always a mess on short notice. A resource person cannot come to help tidy, advocate, and witness in such a short time span. If someone could give an reinspection the next morning, items could be removed quickly. 3) Posifive factors have been ignored, such as a non hazardous lifestyle, no smoking, no drugs, no weapons, na fires or emetgencies in his life. He is serious about fire safety. 4) There is a lack of specificity. Things should be spelled out in writing so that Mr. Young knows exactly what will satisfy an inspection, such as what combustibles include, and what a clear path requires. 5) There was no prior warning ar previous complaint on blockage. Mr. Young stated the condemnation notice serves as undeserved punishment and unwarranted feaz. He stated he suffers from an illness. Carl Comparoni reported that on approxnnately January 12 to 14, he sent a letter to Dauern Park Apartments that he will be coming out to inspect the entire complex on February 9 and 10. There are 16 units. On Februaiy 9, he went to the complex and met Mike Voss. This is a 16 unit building. At Unit 11, Mr. Comparoni could only open the door about halfway. The kitchen window and living room windows were stacked four feet out and four feet deep with boxes, calendars, magazines, and papers. The kitchen is a wrap around type and has two means of egress. A person could enter the ldtchen from the main hallway. Once in the kitchen, the only means of egress was to go back down the hallway. A person could not circle around because of the amount of collectibles. The bedroom has the same concerns: combustibles were blocking the window. It is your view that it would not be possible for Mr. Young to egress through the windows, asked Mr. Strathman. NIr. Compazoni responded yes and the door also creates a problem. Boxes behind the door were preventing it from being open. He tried to explain to Mr. Young that there eU -\°lZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNG NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 2 needed to be three feet of clearauce, but Mr. Young felt he could get to the windows. Mr. Comparoni told Mr. Young that he would be back sometime in March to reinspect the apartment. Mr. Comparoni stated he grew more concerned about the many items in the apamnent. He thought in the best interest of safety, he would condemn the building. He went back on Februasy 10 to inspect the rest of the complex. At that time, he told Mr. Young he was going to condemn the unit and the condemnation date was Febraaty 29. He told Mr. Young he would work with him, and if progress was being made, the condemnation would be lifted and Mr. Comparoni would return on Mazch 28 to reinspect the entire complex and Apartment 11. If the apartment was in the same condition on Mazch 28, it would be condexnned again. Noticing a violation, telling the property owner it has to be conected, and laying out a schedule when it should be done is a customary process, stated Mr. Strathman. Issuing a condemnation order on the second visit is not customary. He asked what prompted him to issue a condemnation order instead of working towazds compliance with Mr. Young. Mr. Comparoni responded the amount of collectibles presented an immediate hazazd. He felt that he was giving Mr. Young too much time to comply. Mr. Strathxnan asked did Mike Voss haue anything to add. Mr. Voss responded he did not. Mr. Strathman asked is Mr. Compazoni's account factually accurate as faz as what he did and what he said. Mr. Young replied he did not agree that there was only one way to get out of the kitchen both sides. He admits there was a litter problem, and he was getting to the point where he could do something about it. If the inspector had said he would come back tomorrow and would expect some things to be cleazed right away, that could be done. The items by the door were rivo crates that could have easily been moved away. There aze some things that are blocking three foot access from the front to the rear, but Mr Young can maintain access. It does not involve moving that much. A heavy cabinet is an issue, but he would gladly get rid of it. It's just a question of getting people to move it out of there. The urgency of the matter is not evident. NIr. Young alluded to suffering from an illness, stated Mr. Strathman. He asked are there resources to get the apartment to a safe condition. Mr. Young responded the problem is the fear inflicted on him that has made it difficult to do the work he has been asked to do; however, it is not beyond him to do this. How long would it take to return the apariment to a safe condition, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Young responded the problem is a lack of specificity as to what needs to be done. Mr. Strathman asked if Mr. Comparoni or another inspector came to the unit and described what needs to be done, would that address the need for more information. Mr. Young replied what they would requu�e would make a big difference as to what he could do. Mr. Strathman asked does he think Mr. Young can bring his apartment into compliance in a reasonable period of time. Mr. Compazoni replied if Mr. Young uses the resources available to him. OU-\�tZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 3 Was Mr. Young receptive to hearing what needs to be done or was he unable to understand, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni replied comprehension may have been a problem. Mr. Strathman asked would it be possible to arrange for an advocate to be present during another inspection to work with him after the inspector left. Mr. Young responded he hopes so, but it is always a question of schedules. Mr. Comparoni added that two social workers informed him they were denied access to the apartment. Mr. Young replied he did not thiuk he was denying them access, and they did not tell him they thought anyfliiug of the kind. He does have concems about things being thrown around. Would it be possible to return to the apartment with a social worker present to explain concerns, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni responded he is more than willing to do that. Mr. Strathman asked would he be willing to make arrangements with Mr. Comparoni and one of the social workers to discuss what needs to be done. Mr. Young responded he would like the items in writing, and Mr. Comparoni responded he could do that. Mr. Strathman stated someone needs to take responsibility for setting another inspection date and contacting a social worker. He asked did Mr. Comparoni have a telephone number for the social workers. Mr. Comparoni responded no. In that case, stated Mr. Strathman, Mr. Young will have to take the responsibility of contacting a social worker plus contacting Mr. Compazoni to arrange for an inspection by the end of this month. Mr. Strathman urged Mr. Compazoni to make a special effort to fit this inspection into his schedule. Mr. Young stated he would like someone else to do the inspection. Mr. Strathman replied he will not make that decision and will assuxne Mr. Compazoni will be the inspector. (NIr. Comparoni gave Mr. Young his business card.) ff Mr. Young is confused about the arrangements, Mr. Voss can help him, stated Mr. Strathman. Gerry Strathman stated the Notice of Condexnnation and Order to Vacate will be lifted on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by February 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11. Frank Young will make the arrangements for himself, a social worker, and Cazl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Compazoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Compazoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. The mee6ng was adjourned at 2:13 p.m. rrn 4��G11�A� Presented � Council File # O� 1 1. Green Sheet # 100403 RESOLUTION OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Referred To Committee Date BE TT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the February 22, 2000, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following address: • �. • ��-. -. Ap�ellant 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 Decision: The Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate will be li8ed on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by Februaiy 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #1 l. Frank Young will make the arrangements for he, a social worker, and Carl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Comparoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Comparoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. Yeas Nays Absent B1akeY � Coleman � Harris � Benanav � Reiter � Bostrom ✓ Lantry i / O Adopted by Council: Date �, \ �-� Adoption By: Approved ! 3'� Requested by Department oE � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � 00 -�qa- City Council 0£fices Gerry Strathman, 266-8560 February 23, GREEN SHEET wr�r owFCroie No � � � �"-�: 0 3 March 1, 2000 xureeeFOrt ROIITYIG OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ❑ alr�na�eEr ❑ arvp.wt _ ❑ w+rHCw�aoeu�sow. ❑ wuxpumnn�ccro � Mlpt(OItYOTNii) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for 1533 St. Paul Avenue, Unit 11. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMfTTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION Hea uuc pe�saNfi�m erer vrorkea under aconaact r«tnia aepa�anemx YES NO Has ihia V��m ever 6een a cdY empbyee'! vE5 NO �oes ihis Y��m poseecs a sldll not namailyC�ssed bY anY curteM oitY emWm/ee7 VES IVG Isthis P�rm atargeted venEOYt YR NO dein all ves arawew on aeoara[e sheet and attach to nreen aheek G�'�b:�� �',�� F"t,��uA�24�0.�:t 6�te��d� . ) ' � ��' � ...'. COET/itEVENUE BUDfiETED (CIRCLE ON� YES NO SOURCE NCTVfSY Nt9M66R �v �. NOTES OF T'I� SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, Febniary 22, 2000 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Heating Officer STAFF PRESENT: Cazl Compazoni, Fire Prevention The meeting was called to order at 131 p.m. 1533 St. Paul Avenue. Unit 11 Gerry Strathxnan e�cplained that this meeting is being held to heaz an appeal from Frank Young to a Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate froin the Fire Department on 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11 as being unfit for human habitation. Frank Young, tenant and appellant, appeazed and read from a letter that he prepared. His main points aze as follows: 1} The aparfinent is not unfit for human habitation. The proper fifle would be Notice to Vacate, Non Compliance with Fire Regulations. 2) This is short notice and a rush to judgement. Mr. Young returned late one night and saw the inspection notice. The next morning, came the inspection. The following day was the condemnation notice. Things are always a mess on short notice. A resource person cannot come to help tidy, advocate, and witness in such a short time span. If someone could give an reinspection the next morning, items could be removed quickly. 3) Posifive factors have been ignored, such as a non hazardous lifestyle, no smoking, no drugs, no weapons, na fires or emetgencies in his life. He is serious about fire safety. 4) There is a lack of specificity. Things should be spelled out in writing so that Mr. Young knows exactly what will satisfy an inspection, such as what combustibles include, and what a clear path requires. 5) There was no prior warning ar previous complaint on blockage. Mr. Young stated the condemnation notice serves as undeserved punishment and unwarranted feaz. He stated he suffers from an illness. Carl Comparoni reported that on approxnnately January 12 to 14, he sent a letter to Dauern Park Apartments that he will be coming out to inspect the entire complex on February 9 and 10. There are 16 units. On Februaiy 9, he went to the complex and met Mike Voss. This is a 16 unit building. At Unit 11, Mr. Comparoni could only open the door about halfway. The kitchen window and living room windows were stacked four feet out and four feet deep with boxes, calendars, magazines, and papers. The kitchen is a wrap around type and has two means of egress. A person could enter the ldtchen from the main hallway. Once in the kitchen, the only means of egress was to go back down the hallway. A person could not circle around because of the amount of collectibles. The bedroom has the same concerns: combustibles were blocking the window. It is your view that it would not be possible for Mr. Young to egress through the windows, asked Mr. Strathman. NIr. Compazoni responded yes and the door also creates a problem. Boxes behind the door were preventing it from being open. He tried to explain to Mr. Young that there eU -\°lZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETTNG NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 2 needed to be three feet of clearauce, but Mr. Young felt he could get to the windows. Mr. Comparoni told Mr. Young that he would be back sometime in March to reinspect the apartment. Mr. Comparoni stated he grew more concerned about the many items in the apamnent. He thought in the best interest of safety, he would condemn the building. He went back on Februasy 10 to inspect the rest of the complex. At that time, he told Mr. Young he was going to condemn the unit and the condemnation date was Febraaty 29. He told Mr. Young he would work with him, and if progress was being made, the condemnation would be lifted and Mr. Comparoni would return on Mazch 28 to reinspect the entire complex and Apartment 11. If the apartment was in the same condition on Mazch 28, it would be condexnned again. Noticing a violation, telling the property owner it has to be conected, and laying out a schedule when it should be done is a customary process, stated Mr. Strathman. Issuing a condemnation order on the second visit is not customary. He asked what prompted him to issue a condemnation order instead of working towazds compliance with Mr. Young. Mr. Comparoni responded the amount of collectibles presented an immediate hazazd. He felt that he was giving Mr. Young too much time to comply. Mr. Strathxnan asked did Mike Voss haue anything to add. Mr. Voss responded he did not. Mr. Strathman asked is Mr. Compazoni's account factually accurate as faz as what he did and what he said. Mr. Young replied he did not agree that there was only one way to get out of the kitchen both sides. He admits there was a litter problem, and he was getting to the point where he could do something about it. If the inspector had said he would come back tomorrow and would expect some things to be cleazed right away, that could be done. The items by the door were rivo crates that could have easily been moved away. There aze some things that are blocking three foot access from the front to the rear, but Mr Young can maintain access. It does not involve moving that much. A heavy cabinet is an issue, but he would gladly get rid of it. It's just a question of getting people to move it out of there. The urgency of the matter is not evident. NIr. Young alluded to suffering from an illness, stated Mr. Strathman. He asked are there resources to get the apartment to a safe condition. Mr. Young responded the problem is the fear inflicted on him that has made it difficult to do the work he has been asked to do; however, it is not beyond him to do this. How long would it take to return the apariment to a safe condition, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Young responded the problem is a lack of specificity as to what needs to be done. Mr. Strathman asked if Mr. Comparoni or another inspector came to the unit and described what needs to be done, would that address the need for more information. Mr. Young replied what they would requu�e would make a big difference as to what he could do. Mr. Strathman asked does he think Mr. Young can bring his apartment into compliance in a reasonable period of time. Mr. Compazoni replied if Mr. Young uses the resources available to him. OU-\�tZ SPECIAL PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING NOTES, 2-22-2000 Page 3 Was Mr. Young receptive to hearing what needs to be done or was he unable to understand, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni replied comprehension may have been a problem. Mr. Strathman asked would it be possible to arrange for an advocate to be present during another inspection to work with him after the inspector left. Mr. Young responded he hopes so, but it is always a question of schedules. Mr. Comparoni added that two social workers informed him they were denied access to the apartment. Mr. Young replied he did not thiuk he was denying them access, and they did not tell him they thought anyfliiug of the kind. He does have concems about things being thrown around. Would it be possible to return to the apartment with a social worker present to explain concerns, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Compazoni responded he is more than willing to do that. Mr. Strathman asked would he be willing to make arrangements with Mr. Comparoni and one of the social workers to discuss what needs to be done. Mr. Young responded he would like the items in writing, and Mr. Comparoni responded he could do that. Mr. Strathman stated someone needs to take responsibility for setting another inspection date and contacting a social worker. He asked did Mr. Comparoni have a telephone number for the social workers. Mr. Comparoni responded no. In that case, stated Mr. Strathman, Mr. Young will have to take the responsibility of contacting a social worker plus contacting Mr. Compazoni to arrange for an inspection by the end of this month. Mr. Strathman urged Mr. Compazoni to make a special effort to fit this inspection into his schedule. Mr. Young stated he would like someone else to do the inspection. Mr. Strathman replied he will not make that decision and will assuxne Mr. Compazoni will be the inspector. (NIr. Comparoni gave Mr. Young his business card.) ff Mr. Young is confused about the arrangements, Mr. Voss can help him, stated Mr. Strathman. Gerry Strathman stated the Notice of Condexnnation and Order to Vacate will be lifted on the following conditions: 1) An inspection will be done by February 29, 2000 at 1533 St. Paul Avenue #11. Frank Young will make the arrangements for himself, a social worker, and Cazl Comparoni to meet at the apartment for this inspection; 2) Mr. Compazoni will inform Mr. Young and the social worker what specifically needs to be done; 3) At the inspection, Mr. Compazoni will give a written list to Mr. Young of what needs to be done; 4) Mr. Compazoni will set a new compliance date and this date will be at his discretion. If the apartment is brought into compliance, this matter will be closed. If the apartment is not brought into compliance by the specified date, another condemnation order may be issued. The mee6ng was adjourned at 2:13 p.m. rrn