The URL can be used to link to this page

01-286��IGINAL � Presented by Referred Council File # O l— ag G Green Sheet # 110299 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the March 20, 2001 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 3 PropertLAp eo aled 4 716 Como Avenue Aronellant Robert Wones 5 Decision: Variance granted on nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconforming 6 doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doars, 2) the building must otherwise 7 be in compliance. 8 979 Randolph Avenue Richard Gapinski 9 Decision: Vaziance granted on installing a CO Detector in the basement of the building with the following 10 conditions: 1) the present CO Detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise 11 be in compliance. 12 760 Riverview Mark Wysong 13 Decision: Extension granted on the compliance date, for nonconforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 14 478 Hazel Street #317 15 Decision: Appeal denied. 16 Hillcrest Shoppin Cg enter Isiake Agboola Karlyn Vegoe Boraas 17 Decision: Appeal granted. I Yeas � Nays � Absent II Requested by Deparhnent of: p�� ag` Blakey �/ Bostrom ,/ Hazris Benanav ,/ Reiter ,/ Coleman i � ✓ AdoptedbyCouncil: Date�� ly� �d�/ Adoption Certified by Council Secretary . � � • � � . - . . � . i � � � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: � .� � _ ��.n — � By: Approved by Mayor: Date � y By: L i�� GREEN SHEET Mazch 28, 2001 NUYBQ2FOR ROUTING ORDER �.�,�� TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES o�-�G 110299 No �� ❑ OIYATTORIEI' ❑ C1IYUFRIC ❑ f�iJINfJ�LfERVICESOYt ❑ f11R11GLiER11ll1CCfC ❑ YRYOR(ORI1SSYfA1lf� ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the March 20, 2001, decisions ofthe Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 478 Hazel Street #317, 979 Randolph Avenue, 760 Riverview, 716 Como Avenue, Hillcrest Shopping Center. Of PLANNING COMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION IF APPROVED What, When. Where. WhY) RSONALSERVICE CONTRACTS MUSTANSWER iHE FOLLOWING QUESiIONS: Has this personlfirm ever worked under a cordract for thie departmenl? YES NO Has this persoNfirm ever been a ciry empbyee7 YES NO Dces this persoNfirtn possess a sidll not normallypossessed by any curteM city empioyce'! YES NO IS Ihl6 P2lSOfl/�11118 �3feE1Ed VCfMO(1 rES No AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION SOURCE COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITV NUMBER VES NO INFORMATION (IXPWN) o�-a��9 � NOTES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry St�rathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESEIVT: Phil Owens, Fire Prevenfion; Thomas Riddering, License, Inspections and Environmental Protection, LIEP. 716 Como Avenne Robert Wones, owner, appeazed and stated he is requesting a variance on non-conforming fire rated doors. Owens stated Fire Prevention has no objections to granting a variance, with conditions, on the non-conforming doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the non-conforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the non-conforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 979 Randoluh Avenue • Richard Gapinski, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing the requirement to place a CO detector in the basement of this dwelling. This building houses a small business with an apartment in ihe back. There currently is a CO detector in the apartment. The heating plant is located in the basement and heats the entire building. . Phil Ownes reported there aze two issues the Fire Departrnent is concerned about. One issue is procedural. The Fire Department feels the appeal was not issued in a timely fashion. The orders were issued in August, 1998 and in June, 2000. There have been twelve different visits to this facility. The Fire Department is concerned with the seriousness with which the appellant took the issue, prior to having the detector installed. The second issue is the loca6on of the deteetor. The hazard is where the heating plant is located, therefore a second CO detector should be placed in the basement. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's question regarding who will heaz the alarm if a CO detector is installed in the basement, Mr. Gapinski responded the tenant would be the first to hear the alarm. The heating plant is not directly below the apaztment. It is approxunately 20 feet &om the apartment wall. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, if this was stricUy a commercial building would a gas analysis be necessary, Mr. Owens responded this would not be required in a commercial building. However, if an inspector found indications that the detectors were not functioning properly, an analysis would be required. An analysis is required in a residence. Property Code Enforcement Heazing 3-20-2001 Page 2 � Mr. Strathman stated technically the appeal is aot timely. An appeal should take place within ten days and any dealings with the Fire Department in the future should be dealt with seriously and responsively. Gerry Strathman granted a variance an installing a CO detector in the basement of the building with the following conditions: 1) the present CO detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 760 Riverview Mark VJysong, owner, appeared and stated he is requesting a variance on nonconforming bedroom windows, and installing a lock box on the outside of the building. Mr. Wysong has been the owner of this property for five yeazs and has gone through three certificate of occupancy inspections. Sash windows were installed in the bedrooms in 1985. In the bedrooms, there aze three windows across, and each is appro�umately 18 inches in width. The glass space together equals 5.7 square feet, however, there aze dividers between each window. Currently there is no construction at the properry. To replace the current windows will be costly. Mr Wysong stated installing a lock box on tfie outside of the building, to go down into the baseaient, is unnecessary because the basement door is never locked. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, can the door currenfly be locked, Mr Wysong responded � the door can be locked, but it never is. Mr. Owens stated if the door can be locked, it is considered a lockable door. However, if the door is rendered unlockable, the Fire DepartmenY would not request a lock box. Regazding the bedroom windows, they aze 18 x18. Escape or rescue windows shall have a minimum net clear openable area of 5.7 square feet. The miuimum net clear openable width shall be 20 inches, and the m;.,;,,,� net cleaz open able height shall be 24 inches. The purpose of egress windows is to provide emergency escape for the tenant if the buiiding exits are blocked and to allow rescue by Firefighters. The 5.7 square feet is a calculation based upon the Firefighters gear and getting a • - �orr ut�� o� a ca� ve�%. ° - -- ---- ° - - In response to Mr. Strathman's question, regazding how many entrances are present, Mr. Wysong responded there is one entrance for each bedroom. There are two exists in the dwelling; one in the rear of the building and one in the front. Each bedroom has an additional window on the opposite side of the room that is approafimately 22 inches. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Departments concem with life safety and escape from the sleeping unit is pazamount. Sleeping individuats are the most vulnerable. If sometl�ing were to occur in this apartment that prohibited an escape through the door, the window is all that is left. If the window is too small to get out of, or too small far a Firefighter io get in, the individual is trapped. � o i ��g� � Properiy Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 3 � �� Mr. Strathman stated he is reluctant that the windows should be removed and reconstructed. However, he is concerned about the life safety issues. Mr. Wysong responded he is in agreement and would be willing to work out an anangement that would allow additional time to do the reconstruction Also, the lock will be removed from the basement door without disarming the latching mecUanism. Gerry Strathman granted an e�rtension on the compliance date, for the uon-conforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 478 Hazei Street #317 (Hazelwood Apartments) (Photographs were presented to Gerry Strathman, they were rettuned at the end of the hearing.) Isiaka Agboola, tenant, appeazed and stated he is appealing the condemnation notice for apartment # 31�. The roof in the apartment was leaking, and Mr. Agboola called the Fire Mazshal. Prior to the calling the Fire Marshal the residenY manager, Jolleen Peterson, informed Mr. Agboola that his family would have to move out of their apartment. Management did fnd a different apartment for the Agboolas, however, it was faz away and a smailer unit, for the same amount of rent. A notice was given by management that the Agboolas would have to move out by noon on Apri130, 2001. Mr. Agboola is asking for an extension on the order to vacate. Mr. Agboola said he has been looking for a new apartment, but many of the financially suitable apartments have a waiting list. It has become very difficult locating an apartment. Jolleen Peterson, Resident Manager, appeazed and stated she offered to move the Agboolas to a c3ifferent apartrnent, located at 1470 York Avenue. Ms. Peterson said she tried to re-establish the Agbootas within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson approached tenants who had given notice to move out, and asked if anyone would be wiliing to move out early, however, there was no compliance. The apartment at 1470 York Avenue was all that there was to offer. The apartmenY was compazable in size and rent. However, the Agboolas were unwilling to work with management. The Agboolas contacted the Fire inspector, Barb Cununings. After the inspection, the apaztment was condemned. Ms. Peterson presented the Agboolas with a thirty day notice to move out, because they were unwilling to work with her, and ihe aparhnent is unhabitable. The apartment cannot be repaired until the weather is warmer. Tke Agboolas do have smalt children and mildew witl be present. Atso, the apartment wiil continue to leak. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's quesrion, since this process began and the seazch for a new apartrnent commenced, has the situation changed and is it possible to find the Agboolas another apartment, Ms. Peterson responded there is no availability. Ms. Peterson said she tried to work with other tenants who were moving out, but no one was willing to leave early. There is no place to put the Agboolas. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she knew when the next opening for an apartment would be. Ms. Peterson responded she dces not have anything available. The apardnent tt2at became avaitable was already rettted, and it was suggested not to let the Agbootas rent the apartment because the new tenant needed to move in and a deposit was given. Properry Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 4 Mr. Owens stated the Fire Department wants the ceiling and roof repaired. The roof is going to � have to be repaired before the ceIlings are repaired. The photograghs clearly show that the ceiling is collapsed in this apartmen� The cacpet is impacted, wet, and mildewing. It is possible that the apariment below will also suffer damage. There cleazly aze some issues that need to be resalved soon. Mr. Agboola stated the roof has stopped leaking. The weather is wanning and if the management wanted to fix the roof, they could do it soon. Also, the neighbor neact door has volunteered to move out, there is two months remaining on his lease. The aparnnent is right neart to the unit in wluch the Agboolas cuaenfly reside. Mr. Agboola said they have lived in their apaztment for three years and have paid the rent on time every month. Ms. Agboola stated Ms. Peterson claims iUat compazable time was given. When the papers were received, Ms. Peterson instcucted the Agboolas that they had one hour to make a decision and sign a waiver. Ms. Agboola said it is unfair to altow only one hour to make a decision and sign a piece of paper. One hour is not a comparable time to come nrto faznily that has already paid rent. Also, Ms. Peterson was extremely rude and treated the Agboola family unfairly. Ms. Agboola stated one hour is not a lot of time for Ms. Peterson to search for a place for their family. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, has the option been discussed of letting the next door neighbor move out and letting the Agboolas move in, Ms. Peterson responded the tenant is � obligated to the lease. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she is unwiliing to consider this option. Mr. Peterson responded there are other issues invoived with the Agboolas. Ms. Peterson said she did the besi she could hying to find a comparable place within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson said this is a done issue, because she gave the Agboolas their notice to move out. "Fhe notice was given because the Agboolas zefused to take her offer. Ms. Agboola said she foltowed directions from the owners of the Hazelwood Apartments. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Deparhnent does not want to see this faznily adversely effected. The roof leak was not the fault of this family, nor the_ collapsing ceiling, but �isasly-reYa�.-s �a:-e To be :�ue �"nis is not a i�a6ifable unit The Fire Department would agree to some compromise that would allow the repairs to be completed and stili provide the Agboolas with a habitable place to live. The ceiling may not currenfly be lealdng, but the problem still exist. Leaking could start in the apaztment ne� door. This is a roof problem that will eventuaily run horizontal.� Mr. Owens stated this is a sad situation, and the Fire Department would be as amenable as possible to resolve this issue. Mr. Agboola said he and Iris wife aze both full time workers, and it is very difficult for their family. If they aze without a place to live, they will be homeless with theu ctuldren, and may loose their jobs that they have worked at for the past five years. Mr. Strathman stated he is convinced, from the testimony given, that this unit is not habitable and the order from the inspector is correct. The authority of the Legislative Hearing Officer is to � � � � Froperty Code Enforcement Aearing 3-20-200i Page 5 review what the inspector has done and determine whether the actions are reasonable and within the 1aw. However, it does appeaz there may be some legal issues with the landlord and what legal obiigations the laadlord may have. There are other organizations availabie to assist tenants with disputes with landlords. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. $illcrest Shop�g Center Joseph Anthony, attorney, appeared and stated he is represenring the owner Karlyn Vegoe Boraas. Mr. Anthony stated he is appealing the denial of a buiIding permit for proposed remodeling of the building at 1630 White Bear Avenue. HiIlcrest Shopping Center is a center consisting of 113,484 square feet. Within the shopping centet are numerous businesses and vacancies. The owner of the shopping center wovld fike to put a new tenant in one of the vacancies. There is I,830 square feet that the owners would Iike to lease out to a nail salon, wluch is aiso a permitted use within the azea and consistent with zoning. Within the 1,830 square feet there is appro�cimately $1 square feet that will need improvement. This amounts to less than one haif of 1% of the entire square footage ia the shopping center affected. The cost of fhe repairs will be approximately $30,OQ0. The assessed value is $2.5 million. There was an ordinance passed that caIlBd for a moratorium. The moratorium states it is of a lunited dutation for the purpose of prohibiting developments, which may be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan development objective for the White Beaz Avenue. Mr. Anthony stated Hillcrest Shopping CenYer is not a new development, or a new non-conforming use. It is an existing shopping center that has a vacancy that the owner, not a deveioper, wants to rent. These ordinances should be read as cvriYten. In this case it means redevelopment may be grounds for denial. This is not a new development. The second issue is, if tlus was a new development, there is an exception within the ordinance for building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical permits for repairs of minor alterations to conforming or non-conforming structures. Ali though it is not well written, it appears to be an exemption for minor building, plumbing, mechanical, permits for repair or minor aheration. Tfus is a minor alteration to the structtue. This wovld certainly fall withiu the exemption. Mr. Anthony said it is lus understanding the appeal was denied because someone in LIEP concluded that the intent of the Council must have been denial of permits for any new businesses going into tYus area. This is not what the ordinaace states. Business owners and property owners within tlus azea are entifled to haue fair wuuing af what tius ordinance means. If Yhe ordinance means there will not be any building permits issued in connection with any new businesses in ttus comprehensive azea, it should state t1us. However, it does not. Mr. Anthony said he and tus client interpret the ordinance to say it does not pmhibit new business. The draft comprehensive guide plan, pmvided to the client and others in the area, make its clear that wning will not be effected under this new or proposed comprehensive guide plan. The expressed Ianguage and intent of the ordinance both appear in favor of issuing the permit. Shopping centers, which is a pernutted use here, are going to continue in this area. Hillcrest Shopping Center will be faced with vacancies that cannot be filted and lost revenues that cannot be recovered during this moratorium period. Property Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 6 Thomas Riddering appeared and stated the permits were denie,d because he felt ttus did not fall � under the exceptions. The moratorium does not address huildings, but pmhibits plat approvals and lot splits or building and zoning permits for any pazcel of land or part thereof. Since the City Council created a very broad moratorium, instead of a narrow one, it is assumed that they did not Imow what would be compatible. Mr. Strathman stated it does not appeat that the interior modificaiion of one space in a large complex constituents a development. Although $30,000 is a lot of money, in a building of ttris magnitude, it does constituent a minor alteration. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:23 p.m. sjw � � ��IGINAL � Presented by Referred Council File # O l— ag G Green Sheet # 110299 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the March 20, 2001 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 3 PropertLAp eo aled 4 716 Como Avenue Aronellant Robert Wones 5 Decision: Variance granted on nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconforming 6 doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doars, 2) the building must otherwise 7 be in compliance. 8 979 Randolph Avenue Richard Gapinski 9 Decision: Vaziance granted on installing a CO Detector in the basement of the building with the following 10 conditions: 1) the present CO Detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise 11 be in compliance. 12 760 Riverview Mark Wysong 13 Decision: Extension granted on the compliance date, for nonconforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 14 478 Hazel Street #317 15 Decision: Appeal denied. 16 Hillcrest Shoppin Cg enter Isiake Agboola Karlyn Vegoe Boraas 17 Decision: Appeal granted. I Yeas � Nays � Absent II Requested by Deparhnent of: p�� ag` Blakey �/ Bostrom ,/ Hazris Benanav ,/ Reiter ,/ Coleman i � ✓ AdoptedbyCouncil: Date�� ly� �d�/ Adoption Certified by Council Secretary . � � • � � . - . . � . i � � � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: � .� � _ ��.n — � By: Approved by Mayor: Date � y By: L i�� GREEN SHEET Mazch 28, 2001 NUYBQ2FOR ROUTING ORDER �.�,�� TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES o�-�G 110299 No �� ❑ OIYATTORIEI' ❑ C1IYUFRIC ❑ f�iJINfJ�LfERVICESOYt ❑ f11R11GLiER11ll1CCfC ❑ YRYOR(ORI1SSYfA1lf� ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the March 20, 2001, decisions ofthe Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 478 Hazel Street #317, 979 Randolph Avenue, 760 Riverview, 716 Como Avenue, Hillcrest Shopping Center. Of PLANNING COMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION IF APPROVED What, When. Where. WhY) RSONALSERVICE CONTRACTS MUSTANSWER iHE FOLLOWING QUESiIONS: Has this personlfirm ever worked under a cordract for thie departmenl? YES NO Has this persoNfirm ever been a ciry empbyee7 YES NO Dces this persoNfirtn possess a sidll not normallypossessed by any curteM city empioyce'! YES NO IS Ihl6 P2lSOfl/�11118 �3feE1Ed VCfMO(1 rES No AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION SOURCE COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITV NUMBER VES NO INFORMATION (IXPWN) o�-a��9 � NOTES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry St�rathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESEIVT: Phil Owens, Fire Prevenfion; Thomas Riddering, License, Inspections and Environmental Protection, LIEP. 716 Como Avenne Robert Wones, owner, appeazed and stated he is requesting a variance on non-conforming fire rated doors. Owens stated Fire Prevention has no objections to granting a variance, with conditions, on the non-conforming doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the non-conforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the non-conforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 979 Randoluh Avenue • Richard Gapinski, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing the requirement to place a CO detector in the basement of this dwelling. This building houses a small business with an apartment in ihe back. There currently is a CO detector in the apartment. The heating plant is located in the basement and heats the entire building. . Phil Ownes reported there aze two issues the Fire Departrnent is concerned about. One issue is procedural. The Fire Department feels the appeal was not issued in a timely fashion. The orders were issued in August, 1998 and in June, 2000. There have been twelve different visits to this facility. The Fire Department is concerned with the seriousness with which the appellant took the issue, prior to having the detector installed. The second issue is the loca6on of the deteetor. The hazard is where the heating plant is located, therefore a second CO detector should be placed in the basement. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's question regarding who will heaz the alarm if a CO detector is installed in the basement, Mr. Gapinski responded the tenant would be the first to hear the alarm. The heating plant is not directly below the apaztment. It is approxunately 20 feet &om the apartment wall. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, if this was stricUy a commercial building would a gas analysis be necessary, Mr. Owens responded this would not be required in a commercial building. However, if an inspector found indications that the detectors were not functioning properly, an analysis would be required. An analysis is required in a residence. Property Code Enforcement Heazing 3-20-2001 Page 2 � Mr. Strathman stated technically the appeal is aot timely. An appeal should take place within ten days and any dealings with the Fire Department in the future should be dealt with seriously and responsively. Gerry Strathman granted a variance an installing a CO detector in the basement of the building with the following conditions: 1) the present CO detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 760 Riverview Mark VJysong, owner, appeared and stated he is requesting a variance on nonconforming bedroom windows, and installing a lock box on the outside of the building. Mr. Wysong has been the owner of this property for five yeazs and has gone through three certificate of occupancy inspections. Sash windows were installed in the bedrooms in 1985. In the bedrooms, there aze three windows across, and each is appro�umately 18 inches in width. The glass space together equals 5.7 square feet, however, there aze dividers between each window. Currently there is no construction at the properry. To replace the current windows will be costly. Mr Wysong stated installing a lock box on tfie outside of the building, to go down into the baseaient, is unnecessary because the basement door is never locked. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, can the door currenfly be locked, Mr Wysong responded � the door can be locked, but it never is. Mr. Owens stated if the door can be locked, it is considered a lockable door. However, if the door is rendered unlockable, the Fire DepartmenY would not request a lock box. Regazding the bedroom windows, they aze 18 x18. Escape or rescue windows shall have a minimum net clear openable area of 5.7 square feet. The miuimum net clear openable width shall be 20 inches, and the m;.,;,,,� net cleaz open able height shall be 24 inches. The purpose of egress windows is to provide emergency escape for the tenant if the buiiding exits are blocked and to allow rescue by Firefighters. The 5.7 square feet is a calculation based upon the Firefighters gear and getting a • - �orr ut�� o� a ca� ve�%. ° - -- ---- ° - - In response to Mr. Strathman's question, regazding how many entrances are present, Mr. Wysong responded there is one entrance for each bedroom. There are two exists in the dwelling; one in the rear of the building and one in the front. Each bedroom has an additional window on the opposite side of the room that is approafimately 22 inches. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Departments concem with life safety and escape from the sleeping unit is pazamount. Sleeping individuats are the most vulnerable. If sometl�ing were to occur in this apartment that prohibited an escape through the door, the window is all that is left. If the window is too small to get out of, or too small far a Firefighter io get in, the individual is trapped. � o i ��g� � Properiy Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 3 � �� Mr. Strathman stated he is reluctant that the windows should be removed and reconstructed. However, he is concerned about the life safety issues. Mr. Wysong responded he is in agreement and would be willing to work out an anangement that would allow additional time to do the reconstruction Also, the lock will be removed from the basement door without disarming the latching mecUanism. Gerry Strathman granted an e�rtension on the compliance date, for the uon-conforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 478 Hazei Street #317 (Hazelwood Apartments) (Photographs were presented to Gerry Strathman, they were rettuned at the end of the hearing.) Isiaka Agboola, tenant, appeazed and stated he is appealing the condemnation notice for apartment # 31�. The roof in the apartment was leaking, and Mr. Agboola called the Fire Mazshal. Prior to the calling the Fire Marshal the residenY manager, Jolleen Peterson, informed Mr. Agboola that his family would have to move out of their apartment. Management did fnd a different apartment for the Agboolas, however, it was faz away and a smailer unit, for the same amount of rent. A notice was given by management that the Agboolas would have to move out by noon on Apri130, 2001. Mr. Agboola is asking for an extension on the order to vacate. Mr. Agboola said he has been looking for a new apartment, but many of the financially suitable apartments have a waiting list. It has become very difficult locating an apartment. Jolleen Peterson, Resident Manager, appeazed and stated she offered to move the Agboolas to a c3ifferent apartrnent, located at 1470 York Avenue. Ms. Peterson said she tried to re-establish the Agbootas within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson approached tenants who had given notice to move out, and asked if anyone would be wiliing to move out early, however, there was no compliance. The apartment at 1470 York Avenue was all that there was to offer. The apartmenY was compazable in size and rent. However, the Agboolas were unwilling to work with management. The Agboolas contacted the Fire inspector, Barb Cununings. After the inspection, the apaztment was condemned. Ms. Peterson presented the Agboolas with a thirty day notice to move out, because they were unwilling to work with her, and ihe aparhnent is unhabitable. The apartment cannot be repaired until the weather is warmer. Tke Agboolas do have smalt children and mildew witl be present. Atso, the apartment wiil continue to leak. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's quesrion, since this process began and the seazch for a new apartrnent commenced, has the situation changed and is it possible to find the Agboolas another apartment, Ms. Peterson responded there is no availability. Ms. Peterson said she tried to work with other tenants who were moving out, but no one was willing to leave early. There is no place to put the Agboolas. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she knew when the next opening for an apartment would be. Ms. Peterson responded she dces not have anything available. The apardnent tt2at became avaitable was already rettted, and it was suggested not to let the Agbootas rent the apartment because the new tenant needed to move in and a deposit was given. Properry Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 4 Mr. Owens stated the Fire Department wants the ceiling and roof repaired. The roof is going to � have to be repaired before the ceIlings are repaired. The photograghs clearly show that the ceiling is collapsed in this apartmen� The cacpet is impacted, wet, and mildewing. It is possible that the apariment below will also suffer damage. There cleazly aze some issues that need to be resalved soon. Mr. Agboola stated the roof has stopped leaking. The weather is wanning and if the management wanted to fix the roof, they could do it soon. Also, the neighbor neact door has volunteered to move out, there is two months remaining on his lease. The aparnnent is right neart to the unit in wluch the Agboolas cuaenfly reside. Mr. Agboola said they have lived in their apaztment for three years and have paid the rent on time every month. Ms. Agboola stated Ms. Peterson claims iUat compazable time was given. When the papers were received, Ms. Peterson instcucted the Agboolas that they had one hour to make a decision and sign a waiver. Ms. Agboola said it is unfair to altow only one hour to make a decision and sign a piece of paper. One hour is not a comparable time to come nrto faznily that has already paid rent. Also, Ms. Peterson was extremely rude and treated the Agboola family unfairly. Ms. Agboola stated one hour is not a lot of time for Ms. Peterson to search for a place for their family. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, has the option been discussed of letting the next door neighbor move out and letting the Agboolas move in, Ms. Peterson responded the tenant is � obligated to the lease. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she is unwiliing to consider this option. Mr. Peterson responded there are other issues invoived with the Agboolas. Ms. Peterson said she did the besi she could hying to find a comparable place within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson said this is a done issue, because she gave the Agboolas their notice to move out. "Fhe notice was given because the Agboolas zefused to take her offer. Ms. Agboola said she foltowed directions from the owners of the Hazelwood Apartments. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Deparhnent does not want to see this faznily adversely effected. The roof leak was not the fault of this family, nor the_ collapsing ceiling, but �isasly-reYa�.-s �a:-e To be :�ue �"nis is not a i�a6ifable unit The Fire Department would agree to some compromise that would allow the repairs to be completed and stili provide the Agboolas with a habitable place to live. The ceiling may not currenfly be lealdng, but the problem still exist. Leaking could start in the apaztment ne� door. This is a roof problem that will eventuaily run horizontal.� Mr. Owens stated this is a sad situation, and the Fire Department would be as amenable as possible to resolve this issue. Mr. Agboola said he and Iris wife aze both full time workers, and it is very difficult for their family. If they aze without a place to live, they will be homeless with theu ctuldren, and may loose their jobs that they have worked at for the past five years. Mr. Strathman stated he is convinced, from the testimony given, that this unit is not habitable and the order from the inspector is correct. The authority of the Legislative Hearing Officer is to � � � � Froperty Code Enforcement Aearing 3-20-200i Page 5 review what the inspector has done and determine whether the actions are reasonable and within the 1aw. However, it does appeaz there may be some legal issues with the landlord and what legal obiigations the laadlord may have. There are other organizations availabie to assist tenants with disputes with landlords. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. $illcrest Shop�g Center Joseph Anthony, attorney, appeared and stated he is represenring the owner Karlyn Vegoe Boraas. Mr. Anthony stated he is appealing the denial of a buiIding permit for proposed remodeling of the building at 1630 White Bear Avenue. HiIlcrest Shopping Center is a center consisting of 113,484 square feet. Within the shopping centet are numerous businesses and vacancies. The owner of the shopping center wovld fike to put a new tenant in one of the vacancies. There is I,830 square feet that the owners would Iike to lease out to a nail salon, wluch is aiso a permitted use within the azea and consistent with zoning. Within the 1,830 square feet there is appro�cimately $1 square feet that will need improvement. This amounts to less than one haif of 1% of the entire square footage ia the shopping center affected. The cost of fhe repairs will be approximately $30,OQ0. The assessed value is $2.5 million. There was an ordinance passed that caIlBd for a moratorium. The moratorium states it is of a lunited dutation for the purpose of prohibiting developments, which may be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan development objective for the White Beaz Avenue. Mr. Anthony stated Hillcrest Shopping CenYer is not a new development, or a new non-conforming use. It is an existing shopping center that has a vacancy that the owner, not a deveioper, wants to rent. These ordinances should be read as cvriYten. In this case it means redevelopment may be grounds for denial. This is not a new development. The second issue is, if tlus was a new development, there is an exception within the ordinance for building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical permits for repairs of minor alterations to conforming or non-conforming structures. Ali though it is not well written, it appears to be an exemption for minor building, plumbing, mechanical, permits for repair or minor aheration. Tfus is a minor alteration to the structtue. This wovld certainly fall withiu the exemption. Mr. Anthony said it is lus understanding the appeal was denied because someone in LIEP concluded that the intent of the Council must have been denial of permits for any new businesses going into tYus area. This is not what the ordinaace states. Business owners and property owners within tlus azea are entifled to haue fair wuuing af what tius ordinance means. If Yhe ordinance means there will not be any building permits issued in connection with any new businesses in ttus comprehensive azea, it should state t1us. However, it does not. Mr. Anthony said he and tus client interpret the ordinance to say it does not pmhibit new business. The draft comprehensive guide plan, pmvided to the client and others in the area, make its clear that wning will not be effected under this new or proposed comprehensive guide plan. The expressed Ianguage and intent of the ordinance both appear in favor of issuing the permit. Shopping centers, which is a pernutted use here, are going to continue in this area. Hillcrest Shopping Center will be faced with vacancies that cannot be filted and lost revenues that cannot be recovered during this moratorium period. Property Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 6 Thomas Riddering appeared and stated the permits were denie,d because he felt ttus did not fall � under the exceptions. The moratorium does not address huildings, but pmhibits plat approvals and lot splits or building and zoning permits for any pazcel of land or part thereof. Since the City Council created a very broad moratorium, instead of a narrow one, it is assumed that they did not Imow what would be compatible. Mr. Strathman stated it does not appeat that the interior modificaiion of one space in a large complex constituents a development. Although $30,000 is a lot of money, in a building of ttris magnitude, it does constituent a minor alteration. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:23 p.m. sjw � � ��IGINAL � Presented by Referred Council File # O l— ag G Green Sheet # 110299 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA � Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the March 20, 2001 2 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Properry Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 3 PropertLAp eo aled 4 716 Como Avenue Aronellant Robert Wones 5 Decision: Variance granted on nonconforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the nonconforming 6 doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with confornung fire rated doars, 2) the building must otherwise 7 be in compliance. 8 979 Randolph Avenue Richard Gapinski 9 Decision: Vaziance granted on installing a CO Detector in the basement of the building with the following 10 conditions: 1) the present CO Detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise 11 be in compliance. 12 760 Riverview Mark Wysong 13 Decision: Extension granted on the compliance date, for nonconforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 14 478 Hazel Street #317 15 Decision: Appeal denied. 16 Hillcrest Shoppin Cg enter Isiake Agboola Karlyn Vegoe Boraas 17 Decision: Appeal granted. I Yeas � Nays � Absent II Requested by Deparhnent of: p�� ag` Blakey �/ Bostrom ,/ Hazris Benanav ,/ Reiter ,/ Coleman i � ✓ AdoptedbyCouncil: Date�� ly� �d�/ Adoption Certified by Council Secretary . � � • � � . - . . � . i � � � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: � .� � _ ��.n — � By: Approved by Mayor: Date � y By: L i�� GREEN SHEET Mazch 28, 2001 NUYBQ2FOR ROUTING ORDER �.�,�� TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES o�-�G 110299 No �� ❑ OIYATTORIEI' ❑ C1IYUFRIC ❑ f�iJINfJ�LfERVICESOYt ❑ f11R11GLiER11ll1CCfC ❑ YRYOR(ORI1SSYfA1lf� ❑ (CL1P ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the March 20, 2001, decisions ofthe Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 478 Hazel Street #317, 979 Randolph Avenue, 760 Riverview, 716 Como Avenue, Hillcrest Shopping Center. Of PLANNING COMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION IF APPROVED What, When. Where. WhY) RSONALSERVICE CONTRACTS MUSTANSWER iHE FOLLOWING QUESiIONS: Has this personlfirm ever worked under a cordract for thie departmenl? YES NO Has this persoNfirm ever been a ciry empbyee7 YES NO Dces this persoNfirtn possess a sidll not normallypossessed by any curteM city empioyce'! YES NO IS Ihl6 P2lSOfl/�11118 �3feE1Ed VCfMO(1 rES No AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION SOURCE COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) ACTNITV NUMBER VES NO INFORMATION (IXPWN) o�-a��9 � NOTES OF TF� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry St�rathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESEIVT: Phil Owens, Fire Prevenfion; Thomas Riddering, License, Inspections and Environmental Protection, LIEP. 716 Como Avenne Robert Wones, owner, appeazed and stated he is requesting a variance on non-conforming fire rated doors. Owens stated Fire Prevention has no objections to granting a variance, with conditions, on the non-conforming doors. Gerry Strathman granted a variance on the non-conforming doors with the following conditions: 1) when the non-conforming doors need to be replaced, they will be replaced with conforming fire rated doors, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 979 Randoluh Avenue • Richard Gapinski, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing the requirement to place a CO detector in the basement of this dwelling. This building houses a small business with an apartment in ihe back. There currently is a CO detector in the apartment. The heating plant is located in the basement and heats the entire building. . Phil Ownes reported there aze two issues the Fire Departrnent is concerned about. One issue is procedural. The Fire Department feels the appeal was not issued in a timely fashion. The orders were issued in August, 1998 and in June, 2000. There have been twelve different visits to this facility. The Fire Department is concerned with the seriousness with which the appellant took the issue, prior to having the detector installed. The second issue is the loca6on of the deteetor. The hazard is where the heating plant is located, therefore a second CO detector should be placed in the basement. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's question regarding who will heaz the alarm if a CO detector is installed in the basement, Mr. Gapinski responded the tenant would be the first to hear the alarm. The heating plant is not directly below the apaztment. It is approxunately 20 feet &om the apartment wall. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, if this was stricUy a commercial building would a gas analysis be necessary, Mr. Owens responded this would not be required in a commercial building. However, if an inspector found indications that the detectors were not functioning properly, an analysis would be required. An analysis is required in a residence. Property Code Enforcement Heazing 3-20-2001 Page 2 � Mr. Strathman stated technically the appeal is aot timely. An appeal should take place within ten days and any dealings with the Fire Department in the future should be dealt with seriously and responsively. Gerry Strathman granted a variance an installing a CO detector in the basement of the building with the following conditions: 1) the present CO detector is maintained and in operating condition, 2) the building must otherwise be in compliance. 760 Riverview Mark VJysong, owner, appeared and stated he is requesting a variance on nonconforming bedroom windows, and installing a lock box on the outside of the building. Mr. Wysong has been the owner of this property for five yeazs and has gone through three certificate of occupancy inspections. Sash windows were installed in the bedrooms in 1985. In the bedrooms, there aze three windows across, and each is appro�umately 18 inches in width. The glass space together equals 5.7 square feet, however, there aze dividers between each window. Currently there is no construction at the properry. To replace the current windows will be costly. Mr Wysong stated installing a lock box on tfie outside of the building, to go down into the baseaient, is unnecessary because the basement door is never locked. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, can the door currenfly be locked, Mr Wysong responded � the door can be locked, but it never is. Mr. Owens stated if the door can be locked, it is considered a lockable door. However, if the door is rendered unlockable, the Fire DepartmenY would not request a lock box. Regazding the bedroom windows, they aze 18 x18. Escape or rescue windows shall have a minimum net clear openable area of 5.7 square feet. The miuimum net clear openable width shall be 20 inches, and the m;.,;,,,� net cleaz open able height shall be 24 inches. The purpose of egress windows is to provide emergency escape for the tenant if the buiiding exits are blocked and to allow rescue by Firefighters. The 5.7 square feet is a calculation based upon the Firefighters gear and getting a • - �orr ut�� o� a ca� ve�%. ° - -- ---- ° - - In response to Mr. Strathman's question, regazding how many entrances are present, Mr. Wysong responded there is one entrance for each bedroom. There are two exists in the dwelling; one in the rear of the building and one in the front. Each bedroom has an additional window on the opposite side of the room that is approafimately 22 inches. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Departments concem with life safety and escape from the sleeping unit is pazamount. Sleeping individuats are the most vulnerable. If sometl�ing were to occur in this apartment that prohibited an escape through the door, the window is all that is left. If the window is too small to get out of, or too small far a Firefighter io get in, the individual is trapped. � o i ��g� � Properiy Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 3 � �� Mr. Strathman stated he is reluctant that the windows should be removed and reconstructed. However, he is concerned about the life safety issues. Mr. Wysong responded he is in agreement and would be willing to work out an anangement that would allow additional time to do the reconstruction Also, the lock will be removed from the basement door without disarming the latching mecUanism. Gerry Strathman granted an e�rtension on the compliance date, for the uon-conforming windows, until September 1, 2001. 478 Hazei Street #317 (Hazelwood Apartments) (Photographs were presented to Gerry Strathman, they were rettuned at the end of the hearing.) Isiaka Agboola, tenant, appeazed and stated he is appealing the condemnation notice for apartment # 31�. The roof in the apartment was leaking, and Mr. Agboola called the Fire Mazshal. Prior to the calling the Fire Marshal the residenY manager, Jolleen Peterson, informed Mr. Agboola that his family would have to move out of their apartment. Management did fnd a different apartment for the Agboolas, however, it was faz away and a smailer unit, for the same amount of rent. A notice was given by management that the Agboolas would have to move out by noon on Apri130, 2001. Mr. Agboola is asking for an extension on the order to vacate. Mr. Agboola said he has been looking for a new apartment, but many of the financially suitable apartments have a waiting list. It has become very difficult locating an apartment. Jolleen Peterson, Resident Manager, appeazed and stated she offered to move the Agboolas to a c3ifferent apartrnent, located at 1470 York Avenue. Ms. Peterson said she tried to re-establish the Agbootas within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson approached tenants who had given notice to move out, and asked if anyone would be wiliing to move out early, however, there was no compliance. The apartment at 1470 York Avenue was all that there was to offer. The apartmenY was compazable in size and rent. However, the Agboolas were unwilling to work with management. The Agboolas contacted the Fire inspector, Barb Cununings. After the inspection, the apaztment was condemned. Ms. Peterson presented the Agboolas with a thirty day notice to move out, because they were unwilling to work with her, and ihe aparhnent is unhabitable. The apartment cannot be repaired until the weather is warmer. Tke Agboolas do have smalt children and mildew witl be present. Atso, the apartment wiil continue to leak. In response to Mr. Stratlunan's quesrion, since this process began and the seazch for a new apartrnent commenced, has the situation changed and is it possible to find the Agboolas another apartment, Ms. Peterson responded there is no availability. Ms. Peterson said she tried to work with other tenants who were moving out, but no one was willing to leave early. There is no place to put the Agboolas. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she knew when the next opening for an apartment would be. Ms. Peterson responded she dces not have anything available. The apardnent tt2at became avaitable was already rettted, and it was suggested not to let the Agbootas rent the apartment because the new tenant needed to move in and a deposit was given. Properry Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 4 Mr. Owens stated the Fire Department wants the ceiling and roof repaired. The roof is going to � have to be repaired before the ceIlings are repaired. The photograghs clearly show that the ceiling is collapsed in this apartmen� The cacpet is impacted, wet, and mildewing. It is possible that the apariment below will also suffer damage. There cleazly aze some issues that need to be resalved soon. Mr. Agboola stated the roof has stopped leaking. The weather is wanning and if the management wanted to fix the roof, they could do it soon. Also, the neighbor neact door has volunteered to move out, there is two months remaining on his lease. The aparnnent is right neart to the unit in wluch the Agboolas cuaenfly reside. Mr. Agboola said they have lived in their apaztment for three years and have paid the rent on time every month. Ms. Agboola stated Ms. Peterson claims iUat compazable time was given. When the papers were received, Ms. Peterson instcucted the Agboolas that they had one hour to make a decision and sign a waiver. Ms. Agboola said it is unfair to altow only one hour to make a decision and sign a piece of paper. One hour is not a comparable time to come nrto faznily that has already paid rent. Also, Ms. Peterson was extremely rude and treated the Agboola family unfairly. Ms. Agboola stated one hour is not a lot of time for Ms. Peterson to search for a place for their family. In response to Mr. Strathman's question, has the option been discussed of letting the next door neighbor move out and letting the Agboolas move in, Ms. Peterson responded the tenant is � obligated to the lease. Mr. Strathman asked Ms. Peterson if she is unwiliing to consider this option. Mr. Peterson responded there are other issues invoived with the Agboolas. Ms. Peterson said she did the besi she could hying to find a comparable place within the Hazelwood complex. Ms. Peterson said this is a done issue, because she gave the Agboolas their notice to move out. "Fhe notice was given because the Agboolas zefused to take her offer. Ms. Agboola said she foltowed directions from the owners of the Hazelwood Apartments. Mr. Owens stated the Fire Deparhnent does not want to see this faznily adversely effected. The roof leak was not the fault of this family, nor the_ collapsing ceiling, but �isasly-reYa�.-s �a:-e To be :�ue �"nis is not a i�a6ifable unit The Fire Department would agree to some compromise that would allow the repairs to be completed and stili provide the Agboolas with a habitable place to live. The ceiling may not currenfly be lealdng, but the problem still exist. Leaking could start in the apaztment ne� door. This is a roof problem that will eventuaily run horizontal.� Mr. Owens stated this is a sad situation, and the Fire Department would be as amenable as possible to resolve this issue. Mr. Agboola said he and Iris wife aze both full time workers, and it is very difficult for their family. If they aze without a place to live, they will be homeless with theu ctuldren, and may loose their jobs that they have worked at for the past five years. Mr. Strathman stated he is convinced, from the testimony given, that this unit is not habitable and the order from the inspector is correct. The authority of the Legislative Hearing Officer is to � � � � Froperty Code Enforcement Aearing 3-20-200i Page 5 review what the inspector has done and determine whether the actions are reasonable and within the 1aw. However, it does appeaz there may be some legal issues with the landlord and what legal obiigations the laadlord may have. There are other organizations availabie to assist tenants with disputes with landlords. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. $illcrest Shop�g Center Joseph Anthony, attorney, appeared and stated he is represenring the owner Karlyn Vegoe Boraas. Mr. Anthony stated he is appealing the denial of a buiIding permit for proposed remodeling of the building at 1630 White Bear Avenue. HiIlcrest Shopping Center is a center consisting of 113,484 square feet. Within the shopping centet are numerous businesses and vacancies. The owner of the shopping center wovld fike to put a new tenant in one of the vacancies. There is I,830 square feet that the owners would Iike to lease out to a nail salon, wluch is aiso a permitted use within the azea and consistent with zoning. Within the 1,830 square feet there is appro�cimately $1 square feet that will need improvement. This amounts to less than one haif of 1% of the entire square footage ia the shopping center affected. The cost of fhe repairs will be approximately $30,OQ0. The assessed value is $2.5 million. There was an ordinance passed that caIlBd for a moratorium. The moratorium states it is of a lunited dutation for the purpose of prohibiting developments, which may be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan development objective for the White Beaz Avenue. Mr. Anthony stated Hillcrest Shopping CenYer is not a new development, or a new non-conforming use. It is an existing shopping center that has a vacancy that the owner, not a deveioper, wants to rent. These ordinances should be read as cvriYten. In this case it means redevelopment may be grounds for denial. This is not a new development. The second issue is, if tlus was a new development, there is an exception within the ordinance for building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical permits for repairs of minor alterations to conforming or non-conforming structures. Ali though it is not well written, it appears to be an exemption for minor building, plumbing, mechanical, permits for repair or minor aheration. Tfus is a minor alteration to the structtue. This wovld certainly fall withiu the exemption. Mr. Anthony said it is lus understanding the appeal was denied because someone in LIEP concluded that the intent of the Council must have been denial of permits for any new businesses going into tYus area. This is not what the ordinaace states. Business owners and property owners within tlus azea are entifled to haue fair wuuing af what tius ordinance means. If Yhe ordinance means there will not be any building permits issued in connection with any new businesses in ttus comprehensive azea, it should state t1us. However, it does not. Mr. Anthony said he and tus client interpret the ordinance to say it does not pmhibit new business. The draft comprehensive guide plan, pmvided to the client and others in the area, make its clear that wning will not be effected under this new or proposed comprehensive guide plan. The expressed Ianguage and intent of the ordinance both appear in favor of issuing the permit. Shopping centers, which is a pernutted use here, are going to continue in this area. Hillcrest Shopping Center will be faced with vacancies that cannot be filted and lost revenues that cannot be recovered during this moratorium period. Property Code Enforcement Hearing 3-20-2001 Page 6 Thomas Riddering appeared and stated the permits were denie,d because he felt ttus did not fall � under the exceptions. The moratorium does not address huildings, but pmhibits plat approvals and lot splits or building and zoning permits for any pazcel of land or part thereof. Since the City Council created a very broad moratorium, instead of a narrow one, it is assumed that they did not Imow what would be compatible. Mr. Strathman stated it does not appeat that the interior modificaiion of one space in a large complex constituents a development. Although $30,000 is a lot of money, in a building of ttris magnitude, it does constituent a minor alteration. Gerry Strathman granted the appeal. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:23 p.m. sjw � �