Loading...
02-799Council File # O� - ��°� Presented Refesed To Committee Date BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the August 27, 2002, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 4 Properry Appealed Green Sheet # 113830 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ,�{ Ap elp lant 5 1078 Front Avenue Gretchen Erie 6 Decision: Laid over to the October 8, 2002, Property Code Enforcement Meefing. 7 977 Fu11er Avenue (Laid over from 7-2-02) Cherie Eula Johnson 8 Decision: Laid over to the September 10, 2002, Properiy Code Enforcement Meeting. 9 184 Baker Street East Lori Hurley 10 Decision: Laid over to the September 10, 2002, Property Code Enforcement Meeting. 11 456 Osceola Avenue South Tony Casland 12 Decision: Appeal denied on the July 25, 2002, Vacant Building Registration Notice. 13 201 Genesee Street Steven Cromey 14 Decision: Appeal denied on the August 6, 2002, Correction Notice. Green Sheet 113$30 0�...��� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 -�� � . - ��__ � - . � �__ 'Iiiirl��__ : - . . �__ ��__ : � �__ ��__ _��� 8 9 � �� � 10 Adopted by Council: Date:�,� n- _ Y :3.l� (1 � lI � T 12 Adoptio Certifi d by Council 5ecretary 13 By: 7 _ �,,...�. _ 14 Approved b' yor: Date 15 By: Requested by Department of �: Form Approved by City Attorney : Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � 2 �w"�ll DEPARTMENUOFFlCEICOUNqt oA7E�N1TIn'rm � ' ' ' c�t coun��� au Za, Zooz GREEN SHEET No 113830 �ACT PERSON $ �iONE N�m� � Gerxy St=athman, 266-856� oE.,R,�rowgroR cncouxra MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGENOA BY (DATE] AEEK.M 1AIMBEItFOR b�Y�TTaN1EY �aIYClFItlt RO17fb16 �� RlII1CIAI.fF0.YCFlaR ❑ wUliMLiE0.�rteGCTG ❑MVGR�ORI�EASlYi� ❑ TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLIP ALL L4CATIOPJS FOR S►GSdATURE) CTION REQUES7ED Approving the August 27; 2002, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for the following addresses: 1078 Front Avenue, 977 Fuller Avenue, 184 Baker Street East, 456 Osceola Avenue South, and 201 Genesee Street. RECAMMENDATION prove(A}wReject{ ) VERSONALSERKCECONTRACTSMUSTANSWERSHEFOLLOWIN6QUE5(IONS: 1. Has this persorvfim� everv.vrNed uMer a crontrad for this tlepartment7 PLANNING CAMMISSION VES No CIBCOMMITTEE 2. HaathispeisoN(iimeverbeenacityemqoyeeT CIViISERViCECAMMISSION YE5 NO , 3. Dcesthis PersoNfinn P� a skiN nd �w�ma��YO��sed M a�p' curteM aA' em�oyce't VES NO 4. Is Mie persanlfirm a tsrpeted ventld? YES NO Explain all yes ansxeis on separate sheet aM atlach to reen sheet IMTIA7WG PROBLEM ISSLIE, OPPORTUNiTY �VJhq What, When. Wl�e, WhY) ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED � Councit Research Center AU6 2 g � DISADVAMAGESIFAPPROVED . "� .,.,�„_,�t `^ ; � ' -_... ! : �. ,. DISADVAMAGES IF NOT APPROVED TO7AL AMOUNT OF TRIWSAC770N S COSTrttEVENUE BUDfiEIED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO FUNOING SOURCE ACTNITY NUMBER FINNNCIPL INFORMATON (FJ�WIQ �2-��� NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING Tuesday, August 27, 2002 Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer Room 330 Courthouse The meeting was called to order at 1:32 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Joel Bssling, Code Enforcement; Kristine Kujala, Ramsey County-TaY Forfeited Lands; Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Dennis Senty, Code Enforcement; Ed Smith, Code Enforcement 1078 Front Avenue Gerry Strathman laid over to the October 8, 2002, Properly Code Enforcement Meeting at the request of Michael Urmann (Fire Prevention). 977 Fuller Avenue (Laid over from 7-2-02) Gerry Strathman stated this matter goes back to March. He asked the current situation. The following appeared: Richard Hawke, attorney, Cherie Eula Johnson, owner. Mr. Hawke stated Ms. Johnson was able to reinstate the contract with Ramsey County. There is an application with Patricia Kelley (Planning and Economic Development [PED]-Housing Loan Program), who said there is money in the programs slotted for Ms. Johnson. Ms. Johnson dropped off the application materiais just before coming here today. Ms. Johnson has also been in contact with the community housing program as an additional possibility for funding. Mr. Strathman stated this matter started in February. He was told there were loans in process and they were expected shortly. Later, one loan didn't happen, but Mr. Hawke was sure another would happen. Now, it is six months later, and they are talking about a loan from PED. This is beginning to sound Iike an endless situation. Mr. Hawke responded there is a loan application for a mortgage. A new broker said that Ms. Johnson has been pre-approved. With the low interest money, there are plenty of loan applicarions that fit into the underwriter's model. He is hauing a tough time getting the attention of the underwriters. Mr. Hawke put in a phone ca11 with him yesterday and has not heazd back yet. Ms. 7ohnson had to find her own funds to reinstate the contract. It is a difficult process. Joel Essling reported the orig3nal orders were issued in June 2001. The condemnation was issued in February 2002. Nothing has been done. He would recommend the house be vacated and turned over to Vacant Buildings. He told Mr. Hawke and Ms. Jotmson, that he would give them a vacate of about ten days, Ms. Patricia Kelley would give them the money, and then he could e�ctend the date. Mr. Hawke stated this is a difficult situation. Given the financial situation, vacating the property would create a hardship for Ms. Johnson. �Z�1Q� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 2002 Page 2 Kristine Kujala reported the contract is current, but it is not paid off. She is not taking any action at this point. Gerry Strathman laid over to the September 10, 2002, Property Code Enforcement Meeting. If the owner does not have a rehabilitarion loan commitment in hand at that tune, he will move to deny the appeal, which will reinstate the Notice of Condemnation. He is not inclined to look past September 10. If there is a real commihnent for the money to make the necessary repairs, then they will talk about allowing time for that to happen. Mr. Essling added that he will talk to Ms. Kelly to see if he can expedite this issue. 184 Baker Street East Geiry Strathman stated that Jack Reazdon {Code Enfarcement) called his secretary to say that the owner and the neighbor haue reached an agreement on the retaining wall. That usually means the matter in dispute is being resolved and the City does not need to be involved anymore; therefore, Mr. Reardon as not here today. Steve Magner stated he left a message for Mr. Reardon to appear, and is waiting for a response. Lori Hurley, owner, appeazed and stated it is not true that the issue is resolved. She owns the upside of the property and he owns the lower side. This is regazding a retaining wall. She acquired the properiy in April. There was a retanung wall there about five years ago according to the previous owner, who said she reported that wall to the City because of termites. The owner removed the wall, and it was not replaced. Ms. Hurley and he have been in touch about the wall because he has a Certificate of Occupancy Certificate at stake. They aze trying to figure out who is paying what. She does not know her responsibility in the matter. Mr. Strathman responded those are legal matters that he is not qualified to deal with. The only item in front of him is the July 17, 2002, Correction Notice. Ms. Hurley stated she talked to Maynard Vinge (Code Enforcement) who told her the City won't require a retaining wall and she may haue misinterpreted the notice. Mr. Schiller responded if she has sufFicient property, it is possible to take the wall out, do proper grading, and have proper ground cover. He suggested she call the Building Permit and meet an inspector onsite. Gerry Strathman laid over to the September 10, 2002, Property Code Enfarcement Meeting to have the inspector present to answer Ms. Hurley's quesrions. 456 Osceola Avenue South The following appeazed: Tony Casland and Greg Tessmer, his brother. Mr. Casland stated their mother died in Febri.�ary, and he is in chazge of the propzriy as the trustee. Gerry Strathman stated this appeal is in response to a letter from the City telling him that he needs to register the property as a vacant building. Mr. Casland responded there are four homes to be sold. One is being closed on Friday. His mother lived at 456 Osceola before she went into c�Z�� � PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 2002 Page 3 a nursing home. While she was in the nursing home, his two brothers-Dominick and Greg--lived there. Dominick moved into an apartment. They have four floors to clean out. They have been working on the house for six montbs. While Crreg was away from the home, he was in another house. During that titue period, the City put a vacancy placard there. There were two brothers working on the house. The brother could not move back in because of the vacancy sign. Mr. Casland is the oldest of 14 kids. At least three of the brothers do not have homes. He uses these homes as homesteading while he is fixing the homes and selling them. The properties were occupied wlule being prepazed. Mr. Strathman stated one brother moved out while it was under restorafion and the other brother wants to move in. Mr. Casiand responded it is the same one. Steve Magner reported Dennis Senty opened a file on June 27 on a referrai from Steve Schiller. There have been approacimately 74 inspections on this properiy in the last three years. This includes everydiing from e�cterior building maintenance, vehicles, and yazd cleaning. Mr. Magner is familiar with this property. He was here as faz back as 1993, and Mr. Schiller remembers going to this property 20 years ago when he started with Code Bnforcement. This property has a long history of invoivement with Code Enforcement and use of City services to clean it and maintain it because the owners were unable to do that. Once, the dwelling was reported to be unoccupied, Code Enforcement posted a piacard. They had no immediate responses from the individuals. Mr. Magner encountered Dominick, one of the brothers, who indicated the dwelling was unoccupied because his brother Greg was living at another property down the street. Mr. Magner asked him why he didn't think it should be a vacant building. Greg said that he needs to sell it. If he had to get a code compliance, he wouid have to spend about $3,000 to rehab it. Mr. Magner explained if the dwelling is unoccupied, meets the defuution of the legislative code, had an open file when it became unoccupied, then he had no other recourse than to open a Category 2 vacant building. It wouid require a vacant building registration, fees, and a code compliance certificate before the properiy is occupied. Dominick said he would move his brother in. Mr. Magner responded then he would haue to use a condemnation to force the vacate based on the information they have because they cannot allow occupancy of the dwelling. Based on your observation, asked Mr. Strathman, the building was vacant when you issued the orders. Mr. Magner responded that is correct. It was verified by Dominick. Dennis Senty reported that he met Greg Tessmer at the properry, and he was asked did he ar anyone live at 456 Osecola. Three times Mr. Tessmer answered no. Mr. Casland responded Dominick is not a representative of them. They aze hying to get the properties secured, locked, and up to code. They have always tried to take care of their violations. Mr. Casiand stated that Greg is willing to move back in, but they won't let him because of the vacancy. Since his mother had the stroke in December, said Mr. Casland, he had 10 citations at the most. They may be compounding the issue because notices were being sent to his mother and himsel£ Mr. Tessmer added that they are aiways working on it. If something needs to be done, they do it. oz��� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEE`ITNG OF AUGUST 27, 2002 Page 4 Mr. Strathman stated the issue here is did the Gity inspectors make an error in detennining this is a vacant building. At the time they issued this, it was a vacant building. They had information from someone that had lived there that it was vacant. Mr. Strathman does not believe the inspectors made an error. Identifying the building as vacant and requiring it to be registered is an appropriate use of their authority and observation. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal on the July 25, 2002, V acant Building Registration Notice. 201 Genesee Street Steven Cromey, owner, appeated and stated he is concerned about the wall and where it is located. He is not sure where the property line lies. He has not had time to get a professional to stake it out. Gerry Strathman asked are they in agreement that the retaining wall needs repairs. Mr. Cromey responded he agrees that it needs to be repaired on the east side of the house. He is not sure of the ownership. It looks like they built the wall to keep the water away from the property on the east. There is a new wall in piace in the front of his property. If they had spent the time to replace the one in the front, they would haue done it on the east as well. Mr. Strathman asked how he is going to determine whose wall it is. Mr. Cromey responded he has not talked to the properry owner, who is the one who cailed and reported the wall. It is so close to the propetty line, it may turn into a legal dispute. Ed Smith reported that there is a retaining wail on the south end of the property and a cement wall on the east side of the property. The properties at 203-205 do not have a cement retaining wall on the south end of their property. They have some wood timbers in front. They have nothing on the east side of their properry. The retaining wall is leaning badly towazd the property at 203-205 Genesee Street. The tenants in the upper unit have small children. There is a cement stand on the west side of their property. His main concern is the wall could collapse on someone. Mr. Strathxnan stated it does not seem that the major dispute is whether Yhe wali needs to be repaired or not, the dispute is about who is responsible for it. Mr. Cromey responded correct. Also, there aze trees there. He has estimates in the upper $20,000 range. (Mr. Cromey and Mr. Smitk showed Mr. Strathman photographs.) Mr. Strathman stated there are three questions: i) does the wall need to be repaired, 2) whose responsibility is it, 3) what is the reasonable amount of time for it to be repaired. There is no question that the wall needs to be repaired. Tlie inspector concluded the wa11 needs to be repaired and thinks Mr. Cromey is the owner. If there is a question about whethez Mr. Cromey is the owner, perhaps it can be resolved, and he can issue orders to both properties. If iYs a matter of time, they can allow more time for that to get done. oZ��� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 2002 Page 5 Mr. Smith stated he gave an estension to October 6. Mr. Stratlunan responded that is not long enough to get a contractor out. Mr. Strathman asked does he think it is cleariy on Mr. Cromey's properry. Mr. Smith responded the other properties did not have a cement retainiug wall in that location. Mr. Cromey responded he grew up across the street from tlus properiy. The wood retainiug wall is about ten yeazs old. It used to be a lull that rolled out into the sidewalk. If there was assurance that Mr. Cromey was accepting responsibility for tlus, stated Mr. Suathman, they can talk about more tnne, but he does not want to give more time to find out nothing is done. Mr. Cromey responded there aze two trees there, and if the ovmer does not want to remove those trees, there is not much he can do. Mr. Strathman stated the inspector has the authority to give an ea-tension beyond October if the owner is working on the problem. Mr. Sirathman suggests Mr. Cromey work with the inspector and keep him informed. Mr. Cromey stated he cannot do this financially. Unfortunately, responded Mr. Strathman, finances are not a basis for ignoring a code violation. Mr. Cromey asked why can't the neighbor get issued also. Mr. Stratl�man responded he cannot tell the inspector to issue an order to the neighbor when it is the inspector's judgement to issue the notice to Mr. Cromey's property. Mr. Cromey stated he is an architectural designer and comes from the building trades. This house would not have been built without the retaining wall to hold back the water. Mr. Strathman responded a survey will cost him something, but it would be in his interest to prove it.. Gerty Strathman denied the appeal on the August 6, 2002, Correction Nofice. The inspector did not make a mistake in issuing this; he exercised reasonable judgement. The meeting was adjourned at 2:26 p.m. rrn