The URL can be used to link to this page

00-7a��A�. Presented Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the December 21, 2 1999, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properiy Code Enforcement Appeals far the following 3 addresses: 4 Propertv Aproealed Appellant 6 1�04-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue Melvin Spiegler for Kleinman Rea1ty Co. 7 Decision; Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the S nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doors, 2) the 9 building must othercvise be in compliance. 10 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony Bello 11 Decision: Variance granted with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen 12 sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. When they are not funcfioning correctly, they will 13 haue to be repaired. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Yeas Nays Absent Blakey Coleman � Harris � Benanav f Reiter � sostrom � Lantry ✓ '� Q Ca 21 Adopted by Council: Date O 22 ` 23 Adoption C ified by Council Se,c,retary 24 sy: '� � 1 � " 25 Approved by Mayor: Date �� -�. 26 By: Council File # �'da Green Sheet # 101643 RESOLUTION CITI( OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 1 � ; Requested by Deparnnent of. � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council L•� da'_ � �.� W�,,,� 12-28-99 Gerry Straehman, 266-8560 January 5, 2000 wureaecae ROUirt1G OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET No 10164�3 u�� u��— ❑ a,,,.,.�. ❑ �� ❑ n'ewcc`uaEauicux ❑ nuwy�mmACCro ❑ WwRI��1M�1 ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals for property at 17Q4-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue, and 1073 Thomas Avenue. PLANNING COMMISSION qBCOMMITTEE , CNVL SERV{CE CAMMISSION liss thic oe�soNfi�m e.erwa�cea u�der a contrad rormis aevamneriCl YES NO Has thie peremRrcn ever been a eily emPbYeeT YES NO Does tAi� pe`son/fi'm poseess a sltill not �mallYP�d M' airy curtent ciry employee? YES NQ ' Islhiape�sonfirmatargeledventloY? . YES � G;�e��;c�� s�ur�h G�n4ef iw � � � � i�99 OFTR/WSACiION COST7REVENUE BUDOETm IqRCLE ONE) ACTMTY NUMBER YEE HO INFORMATON (IXPWf� 0 0 -'7 NOTES OF TI-� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, December 21, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Czerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Bemie Arends, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Tom LeClair, LIEP; Don Wagner, LIEP 1704-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue (Note: No one appeared representing the owner nor Fire Prevention; however, Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention, said earlier that Fue Prevention has no objec6ons to the variance.) Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconfornring doors need to be replaced, they wiil be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony and Patricia Bello, owners, appeared. Mr. Bello stated this is about an order dated 7-2- 98. He is appealing two items on that order. The first is Plumbing Item #1, 1'h" steel pipe into floar on laundry tubs; install waste and vent as per code. Mr. Bello's justification for an appeal is as follows: The waste line is an exisring 1%2" galvanized pipe. The pipe is in good condition, no evidence of deteriorarion and does not warrant replacement. To replace this pipe (approxnnately 1 to 2 feet) would require breaking the concrete floor to make new connection to the sewer line. This is not necessary because the pipe is existing, in good condi6on, and should be left in-place. The pipe is just a material, whether galvanized or PVC. Tom Leclair reported neither 1'/z" steel pipe nor galvanized steel pipe have ever been allowed under the floor. That was put in without a permit yeazs back and has never been approved. LIEP is asking it to be replaced. Gerry Strathman asked when this was done. Mr. Bello responded the house was built in 1921. This pipe may be original construction. Mr. LeClair responded this was not done under code in 1921 either because it was not until the 1940's after the war years when houses had laundry trays. The 1'/i' was probably put in without a permit. What is the functional problem with 1%z' galvanized pipe, asked Mr. StraYhman. Mr. LeCiair responded it does not produce the protecfive oxidation as cast iron. The thread areas eventually rot out and there is sewage going into the soil instead of down to the pipe. Also, anythiug under ground has to be at least two inches. Mr. Strathman asked does he need to take up the concrete floor in order to comply. Mr. LeClair responded it depends on how far the 1'/z' pipe goes down. There may be a vertical piece going into it. Bernie Arends stated a person cannot see what is there until the floor is taken up. 00 -? PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 2 The pipe above the floor, stated Mr. Bello, is in good condition. When the house was built, it served the purpose of what it was suppose to do then and it is still doing the same thing now. Mr. LeClair responded the plumbing code in Saint Paul goes back to 1889. Mr. Strathman asked about the second issue. Mr. Bello responded that is Plumbing Item #4, install kitchen sink waste and vent as per code. His justification for an appeal is as follows: The vent and waste line under the kitchen sink are existing and appeazs to be in good condition. The waste line has been replaced but not the vent pipe. For the vent pipe to comply with e�sting code would require its relocation, which would also require the removal of kitchen sink and cabinet and the breaking of old plaster walls to gain access to the e�sting vent in order to make all necessary connections to meet current code. The existing vent is in good condition, the amount of work needed to bring it to code is enormous and should be grandfathered in. Mr. Arends stated part of the waste pipe has been replaced as PVC. It was done incorrectly because it caused the galvanized piping in the basement to pitch backwards. They used what is called a rubber 90 with a couple of clamps, which is not code today. Per code, if work is done on a fixture, it should be brought up to the current code. The vent is not up to code because it runs below the spili line of the fixture and the wall and considered a flat vent. It has to run vertically until it gets above the spill line of the fixture. This is why it is being asked to be changed. Mr. Strathman asked for the implication of it. Mr. Arends responded if the waste line plugs up, water can back into that vent. It would leave behind whatever was in it: dirt, grease, etc. This vent does not carry water, stated Mr. Bello. It is to vent the gas out. Mr. LeClair responded the vent on the kitchen sink is to maintain water pressure so that it does not siphon the trap seal. If the trap seal is siphoned, then there is a chance of getting organisms through the trap seal into the building. There is no longer a sanitary and storm sewer combination, but straight storm and straight sanitary so there is no delusion in the sewer systems. The pipe that goes through the roof vents the sewer systems. The problem is there is higher concentrations of hydrogen sulfide gas in the building than ever before because there is no delusion from the combination sewer, storm, and sanitary. If the trap is lost, there is a possibility if the conditions are right, that bad materials could enter the house. That is why there is always a vent in every fixture trap to maintain the seaL If there is not a vent, there is a chance of losing the trap seal. Mr. Bello stated the plumber that was there and the inspector said the only thing that needs to be done is to make it a 45 degree connection. Mr. LeClair responded 45 degrees or to vertical is what the code says. Until it gets above the spill line above the fixture, added Mr. Arends. He disagrees that bacteria will form in it, stated Mr. Bello. There is a sewer line that goes down into a trap in the basement to the sewer connection. This is to prevent any gas from building up in the unit. Therefore, the vent is there to pipe it out through the roof. QFj PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 3 He does not doubt the City stafF aze correct, stated Mr. Strathman. The question is aze the potential hazards sufficient to require the homeowner to make the changes necessary to bring it into compliance. Mr. Strathman asked is there an estimate for the repairs. Mr. Bello responded no because the plumber does not know what he will find. The vent is there, but in order to make the connection, the plumber may have to relocate it or break down the wa11 in order to find it. Mr. Strathman asked about the other items on the list. Mr. Bello responded the rest of the items have been taken caze of. Patricia Beilo asked is there a way to make sure that the vent is operational. Mr. LeClair responded until it is established where the vent is in the wall, there is no way to check it. Don Wagner responded one way is to fill up the compartment with water, let the water run, and listen for a gurgling sound at the end. Mr. LeClair stated another issue is the water heater, which was installed without a permit. Mr. Bello responded he was told by the inspector that the plumber can get the pernut for it. Mr. Wagner responded the only thing in quesrions are the 2 items Mr. Bello is appealing. Mr. Wagner's understanding is there would be a permit taken out for the water heater. Mr. Strathman granted the variance with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. The other repairs haue been done, and neither of these items in questions are an imminent health hazazd, though there may be a long term health h�rd. City staff is correct in citing this, and Mr. Strathman accepts their determination that this is a violarion of code. The correction on both of them would be a financial burden that is not warranted. When these items aze not functioning conectly, they will haue to be repaired. The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. � a��A�. Presented Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the December 21, 2 1999, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properiy Code Enforcement Appeals far the following 3 addresses: 4 Propertv Aproealed Appellant 6 1�04-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue Melvin Spiegler for Kleinman Rea1ty Co. 7 Decision; Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the S nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doors, 2) the 9 building must othercvise be in compliance. 10 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony Bello 11 Decision: Variance granted with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen 12 sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. When they are not funcfioning correctly, they will 13 haue to be repaired. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Yeas Nays Absent Blakey Coleman � Harris � Benanav f Reiter � sostrom � Lantry ✓ '� Q Ca 21 Adopted by Council: Date O 22 ` 23 Adoption C ified by Council Se,c,retary 24 sy: '� � 1 � " 25 Approved by Mayor: Date �� -�. 26 By: Council File # �'da Green Sheet # 101643 RESOLUTION CITI( OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 1 � ; Requested by Deparnnent of. � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council L•� da'_ � �.� W�,,,� 12-28-99 Gerry Straehman, 266-8560 January 5, 2000 wureaecae ROUirt1G OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET No 10164�3 u�� u��— ❑ a,,,.,.�. ❑ �� ❑ n'ewcc`uaEauicux ❑ nuwy�mmACCro ❑ WwRI��1M�1 ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals for property at 17Q4-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue, and 1073 Thomas Avenue. PLANNING COMMISSION qBCOMMITTEE , CNVL SERV{CE CAMMISSION liss thic oe�soNfi�m e.erwa�cea u�der a contrad rormis aevamneriCl YES NO Has thie peremRrcn ever been a eily emPbYeeT YES NO Does tAi� pe`son/fi'm poseess a sltill not �mallYP�d M' airy curtent ciry employee? YES NQ ' Islhiape�sonfirmatargeledventloY? . YES � G;�e��;c�� s�ur�h G�n4ef iw � � � � i�99 OFTR/WSACiION COST7REVENUE BUDOETm IqRCLE ONE) ACTMTY NUMBER YEE HO INFORMATON (IXPWf� 0 0 -'7 NOTES OF TI-� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, December 21, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Czerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Bemie Arends, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Tom LeClair, LIEP; Don Wagner, LIEP 1704-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue (Note: No one appeared representing the owner nor Fire Prevention; however, Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention, said earlier that Fue Prevention has no objec6ons to the variance.) Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconfornring doors need to be replaced, they wiil be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony and Patricia Bello, owners, appeared. Mr. Bello stated this is about an order dated 7-2- 98. He is appealing two items on that order. The first is Plumbing Item #1, 1'h" steel pipe into floar on laundry tubs; install waste and vent as per code. Mr. Bello's justification for an appeal is as follows: The waste line is an exisring 1%2" galvanized pipe. The pipe is in good condition, no evidence of deteriorarion and does not warrant replacement. To replace this pipe (approxnnately 1 to 2 feet) would require breaking the concrete floor to make new connection to the sewer line. This is not necessary because the pipe is existing, in good condi6on, and should be left in-place. The pipe is just a material, whether galvanized or PVC. Tom Leclair reported neither 1'/z" steel pipe nor galvanized steel pipe have ever been allowed under the floor. That was put in without a permit yeazs back and has never been approved. LIEP is asking it to be replaced. Gerry Strathman asked when this was done. Mr. Bello responded the house was built in 1921. This pipe may be original construction. Mr. LeClair responded this was not done under code in 1921 either because it was not until the 1940's after the war years when houses had laundry trays. The 1'/i' was probably put in without a permit. What is the functional problem with 1%z' galvanized pipe, asked Mr. StraYhman. Mr. LeCiair responded it does not produce the protecfive oxidation as cast iron. The thread areas eventually rot out and there is sewage going into the soil instead of down to the pipe. Also, anythiug under ground has to be at least two inches. Mr. Strathman asked does he need to take up the concrete floor in order to comply. Mr. LeClair responded it depends on how far the 1'/z' pipe goes down. There may be a vertical piece going into it. Bernie Arends stated a person cannot see what is there until the floor is taken up. 00 -? PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 2 The pipe above the floor, stated Mr. Bello, is in good condition. When the house was built, it served the purpose of what it was suppose to do then and it is still doing the same thing now. Mr. LeClair responded the plumbing code in Saint Paul goes back to 1889. Mr. Strathman asked about the second issue. Mr. Bello responded that is Plumbing Item #4, install kitchen sink waste and vent as per code. His justification for an appeal is as follows: The vent and waste line under the kitchen sink are existing and appeazs to be in good condition. The waste line has been replaced but not the vent pipe. For the vent pipe to comply with e�sting code would require its relocation, which would also require the removal of kitchen sink and cabinet and the breaking of old plaster walls to gain access to the e�sting vent in order to make all necessary connections to meet current code. The existing vent is in good condition, the amount of work needed to bring it to code is enormous and should be grandfathered in. Mr. Arends stated part of the waste pipe has been replaced as PVC. It was done incorrectly because it caused the galvanized piping in the basement to pitch backwards. They used what is called a rubber 90 with a couple of clamps, which is not code today. Per code, if work is done on a fixture, it should be brought up to the current code. The vent is not up to code because it runs below the spili line of the fixture and the wall and considered a flat vent. It has to run vertically until it gets above the spill line of the fixture. This is why it is being asked to be changed. Mr. Strathman asked for the implication of it. Mr. Arends responded if the waste line plugs up, water can back into that vent. It would leave behind whatever was in it: dirt, grease, etc. This vent does not carry water, stated Mr. Bello. It is to vent the gas out. Mr. LeClair responded the vent on the kitchen sink is to maintain water pressure so that it does not siphon the trap seal. If the trap seal is siphoned, then there is a chance of getting organisms through the trap seal into the building. There is no longer a sanitary and storm sewer combination, but straight storm and straight sanitary so there is no delusion in the sewer systems. The pipe that goes through the roof vents the sewer systems. The problem is there is higher concentrations of hydrogen sulfide gas in the building than ever before because there is no delusion from the combination sewer, storm, and sanitary. If the trap is lost, there is a possibility if the conditions are right, that bad materials could enter the house. That is why there is always a vent in every fixture trap to maintain the seaL If there is not a vent, there is a chance of losing the trap seal. Mr. Bello stated the plumber that was there and the inspector said the only thing that needs to be done is to make it a 45 degree connection. Mr. LeClair responded 45 degrees or to vertical is what the code says. Until it gets above the spill line above the fixture, added Mr. Arends. He disagrees that bacteria will form in it, stated Mr. Bello. There is a sewer line that goes down into a trap in the basement to the sewer connection. This is to prevent any gas from building up in the unit. Therefore, the vent is there to pipe it out through the roof. QFj PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 3 He does not doubt the City stafF aze correct, stated Mr. Strathman. The question is aze the potential hazards sufficient to require the homeowner to make the changes necessary to bring it into compliance. Mr. Strathman asked is there an estimate for the repairs. Mr. Bello responded no because the plumber does not know what he will find. The vent is there, but in order to make the connection, the plumber may have to relocate it or break down the wa11 in order to find it. Mr. Strathman asked about the other items on the list. Mr. Bello responded the rest of the items have been taken caze of. Patricia Beilo asked is there a way to make sure that the vent is operational. Mr. LeClair responded until it is established where the vent is in the wall, there is no way to check it. Don Wagner responded one way is to fill up the compartment with water, let the water run, and listen for a gurgling sound at the end. Mr. LeClair stated another issue is the water heater, which was installed without a permit. Mr. Bello responded he was told by the inspector that the plumber can get the pernut for it. Mr. Wagner responded the only thing in quesrions are the 2 items Mr. Bello is appealing. Mr. Wagner's understanding is there would be a permit taken out for the water heater. Mr. Strathman granted the variance with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. The other repairs haue been done, and neither of these items in questions are an imminent health hazazd, though there may be a long term health h�rd. City staff is correct in citing this, and Mr. Strathman accepts their determination that this is a violarion of code. The correction on both of them would be a financial burden that is not warranted. When these items aze not functioning conectly, they will haue to be repaired. The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. � a��A�. Presented Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the December 21, 2 1999, decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properiy Code Enforcement Appeals far the following 3 addresses: 4 Propertv Aproealed Appellant 6 1�04-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue Melvin Spiegler for Kleinman Rea1ty Co. 7 Decision; Variance granted on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the S nonconforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doors, 2) the 9 building must othercvise be in compliance. 10 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony Bello 11 Decision: Variance granted with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen 12 sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. When they are not funcfioning correctly, they will 13 haue to be repaired. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Yeas Nays Absent Blakey Coleman � Harris � Benanav f Reiter � sostrom � Lantry ✓ '� Q Ca 21 Adopted by Council: Date O 22 ` 23 Adoption C ified by Council Se,c,retary 24 sy: '� � 1 � " 25 Approved by Mayor: Date �� -�. 26 By: Council File # �'da Green Sheet # 101643 RESOLUTION CITI( OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 1 � ; Requested by Deparnnent of. � Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council L•� da'_ � �.� W�,,,� 12-28-99 Gerry Straehman, 266-8560 January 5, 2000 wureaecae ROUirt1G OROFJt TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES GREEN SHEET No 10164�3 u�� u��— ❑ a,,,.,.�. ❑ �� ❑ n'ewcc`uaEauicux ❑ nuwy�mmACCro ❑ WwRI��1M�1 ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement appeals for property at 17Q4-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue, and 1073 Thomas Avenue. PLANNING COMMISSION qBCOMMITTEE , CNVL SERV{CE CAMMISSION liss thic oe�soNfi�m e.erwa�cea u�der a contrad rormis aevamneriCl YES NO Has thie peremRrcn ever been a eily emPbYeeT YES NO Does tAi� pe`son/fi'm poseess a sltill not �mallYP�d M' airy curtent ciry employee? YES NQ ' Islhiape�sonfirmatargeledventloY? . YES � G;�e��;c�� s�ur�h G�n4ef iw � � � � i�99 OFTR/WSACiION COST7REVENUE BUDOETm IqRCLE ONE) ACTMTY NUMBER YEE HO INFORMATON (IXPWf� 0 0 -'7 NOTES OF TI-� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, December 21, 1999 Room 330 Courthouse Czerry 5trathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Bemie Arends, License, Inspection, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Tom LeClair, LIEP; Don Wagner, LIEP 1704-1720-1740-1750 Norfolk Avenue (Note: No one appeared representing the owner nor Fire Prevention; however, Mike Urmann, Fire Prevention, said earlier that Fue Prevention has no objec6ons to the variance.) Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconfornring doors need to be replaced, they wiil be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 1073 Thomas Avenue Anthony and Patricia Bello, owners, appeared. Mr. Bello stated this is about an order dated 7-2- 98. He is appealing two items on that order. The first is Plumbing Item #1, 1'h" steel pipe into floar on laundry tubs; install waste and vent as per code. Mr. Bello's justification for an appeal is as follows: The waste line is an exisring 1%2" galvanized pipe. The pipe is in good condition, no evidence of deteriorarion and does not warrant replacement. To replace this pipe (approxnnately 1 to 2 feet) would require breaking the concrete floor to make new connection to the sewer line. This is not necessary because the pipe is existing, in good condi6on, and should be left in-place. The pipe is just a material, whether galvanized or PVC. Tom Leclair reported neither 1'/z" steel pipe nor galvanized steel pipe have ever been allowed under the floor. That was put in without a permit yeazs back and has never been approved. LIEP is asking it to be replaced. Gerry Strathman asked when this was done. Mr. Bello responded the house was built in 1921. This pipe may be original construction. Mr. LeClair responded this was not done under code in 1921 either because it was not until the 1940's after the war years when houses had laundry trays. The 1'/i' was probably put in without a permit. What is the functional problem with 1%z' galvanized pipe, asked Mr. StraYhman. Mr. LeCiair responded it does not produce the protecfive oxidation as cast iron. The thread areas eventually rot out and there is sewage going into the soil instead of down to the pipe. Also, anythiug under ground has to be at least two inches. Mr. Strathman asked does he need to take up the concrete floor in order to comply. Mr. LeClair responded it depends on how far the 1'/z' pipe goes down. There may be a vertical piece going into it. Bernie Arends stated a person cannot see what is there until the floor is taken up. 00 -? PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 2 The pipe above the floor, stated Mr. Bello, is in good condition. When the house was built, it served the purpose of what it was suppose to do then and it is still doing the same thing now. Mr. LeClair responded the plumbing code in Saint Paul goes back to 1889. Mr. Strathman asked about the second issue. Mr. Bello responded that is Plumbing Item #4, install kitchen sink waste and vent as per code. His justification for an appeal is as follows: The vent and waste line under the kitchen sink are existing and appeazs to be in good condition. The waste line has been replaced but not the vent pipe. For the vent pipe to comply with e�sting code would require its relocation, which would also require the removal of kitchen sink and cabinet and the breaking of old plaster walls to gain access to the e�sting vent in order to make all necessary connections to meet current code. The existing vent is in good condition, the amount of work needed to bring it to code is enormous and should be grandfathered in. Mr. Arends stated part of the waste pipe has been replaced as PVC. It was done incorrectly because it caused the galvanized piping in the basement to pitch backwards. They used what is called a rubber 90 with a couple of clamps, which is not code today. Per code, if work is done on a fixture, it should be brought up to the current code. The vent is not up to code because it runs below the spili line of the fixture and the wall and considered a flat vent. It has to run vertically until it gets above the spill line of the fixture. This is why it is being asked to be changed. Mr. Strathman asked for the implication of it. Mr. Arends responded if the waste line plugs up, water can back into that vent. It would leave behind whatever was in it: dirt, grease, etc. This vent does not carry water, stated Mr. Bello. It is to vent the gas out. Mr. LeClair responded the vent on the kitchen sink is to maintain water pressure so that it does not siphon the trap seal. If the trap seal is siphoned, then there is a chance of getting organisms through the trap seal into the building. There is no longer a sanitary and storm sewer combination, but straight storm and straight sanitary so there is no delusion in the sewer systems. The pipe that goes through the roof vents the sewer systems. The problem is there is higher concentrations of hydrogen sulfide gas in the building than ever before because there is no delusion from the combination sewer, storm, and sanitary. If the trap is lost, there is a possibility if the conditions are right, that bad materials could enter the house. That is why there is always a vent in every fixture trap to maintain the seaL If there is not a vent, there is a chance of losing the trap seal. Mr. Bello stated the plumber that was there and the inspector said the only thing that needs to be done is to make it a 45 degree connection. Mr. LeClair responded 45 degrees or to vertical is what the code says. Until it gets above the spill line above the fixture, added Mr. Arends. He disagrees that bacteria will form in it, stated Mr. Bello. There is a sewer line that goes down into a trap in the basement to the sewer connection. This is to prevent any gas from building up in the unit. Therefore, the vent is there to pipe it out through the roof. QFj PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF 12-21-99 Page 3 He does not doubt the City stafF aze correct, stated Mr. Strathman. The question is aze the potential hazards sufficient to require the homeowner to make the changes necessary to bring it into compliance. Mr. Strathman asked is there an estimate for the repairs. Mr. Bello responded no because the plumber does not know what he will find. The vent is there, but in order to make the connection, the plumber may have to relocate it or break down the wa11 in order to find it. Mr. Strathman asked about the other items on the list. Mr. Bello responded the rest of the items have been taken caze of. Patricia Beilo asked is there a way to make sure that the vent is operational. Mr. LeClair responded until it is established where the vent is in the wall, there is no way to check it. Don Wagner responded one way is to fill up the compartment with water, let the water run, and listen for a gurgling sound at the end. Mr. LeClair stated another issue is the water heater, which was installed without a permit. Mr. Bello responded he was told by the inspector that the plumber can get the pernut for it. Mr. Wagner responded the only thing in quesrions are the 2 items Mr. Bello is appealing. Mr. Wagner's understanding is there would be a permit taken out for the water heater. Mr. Strathman granted the variance with respect to the 1'/a" steel pipe in the floor on the laundry tubs and the kitchen sink waste and vent as long as they function as intended. The other repairs haue been done, and neither of these items in questions are an imminent health hazazd, though there may be a long term health h�rd. City staff is correct in citing this, and Mr. Strathman accepts their determination that this is a violarion of code. The correction on both of them would be a financial burden that is not warranted. When these items aze not functioning conectly, they will haue to be repaired. The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. �