Loading...
03-249Council File # U � -�o"� �� Presented RESOLUTION Green Sheet # 200570 SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ,ZD Referred To Committee Date BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the February 25, 2003, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals for Letters of Deficiency, Correction Orders, and Conection Notices for the following addresses: Property Appealed Apnellant 39 Avon Street South James Councilman for Avon Aparhnents Decision: Indefinite variance granted from the January 15, 2003, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List on the ventilation system in all bathrooms. 45 Avon Street South James Councilman for Avon Apartments Decision: Indefinite variance granted from the January 15, 2003, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List on the ventilation system in a11 bathrooms. 733 Pierce Butler Route Mai Her Decision: Appeal denied on the February 4, 2003, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List. 469 Whitall Street Kevin Johsnon Decision: The following deficiencies on the February 21, 2003, Revised Correction Notice will be corrected by the City Council adoption of this resolution: holes in the exterior that could lead to infestation as noted in Item 9, garbage in the yard as noted in Item 3, vehicle as noted in Item 4, and house numbers as noted in Item 7. The following deficiencies will be corrected by May 1, 2003: all other holes in the exterior as noted in Item 9, windows and doors as noted in Items 1 and 2, reaz storm door as noted in Item 5, and the wood fence as noted in Item 8. The following deficiencies will be corrected by June 1, 2003: exterior painting as noted in Item 6. Green Sheet 200570 !�3-a�9 Yeas Nays Absent Benanav �/ Blakey �/ Bostrom ,/ Coleman ✓ Harris ✓ Lantry ✓ Reiter ,i d � Adopted by Council: Date �j/� j� �/J�3 Ado� By: Appi By: Requested by Department oE � Form Approved by City Attomey � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � v���q DEPARTMENlfOFFICE/COUNCIL � opTEWmpiBp City Council Offices 3-5-2003 GREEN SHEET No 200570 CON(ACT PFRSON 8 PFiONE NwaVOrt� NMialNah Marcia Moermond, 266-8560 uES�n,�ron� arveaur�.. MUST BE ON CIX1N(YL AGENDA BY (DAT� �sswx MUIIBERFOR QiYATfqtlEY ❑fJ1YLL0K " ROUfiqG �� A�UCIRLaFRU1CFSOrt R111t1f1LLaERV/Atcro ❑ WYOR1oRASauTY+l) ❑ TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLJP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUREj CTION RE�UESTm Approving the February 25, 2003, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters of Deficiency, Correction Orders, and Correction Notices for the following addresses: 39 Avon Street South, 45 Avon Street South, 733 Pierce Butler Route, and 469 Whitall Street. RECOMMENDATION Approve (A) a Reject (R) PERSONALSERVICE CONiitACiS MUSTANSWE2TNE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: . �. Nas wis pexoNrm� e.er wakea unae. a camlac� r« mie aeparcmenn PLANNING COMMISSION YES NO CIB COMMI7TEE 2. Has thie peraorJfirm rrer been a city empbyee7 CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION ves no 3. Does this persoNfirtn possess a sidll not normalrypossessetl by any curteM city employee? YES NO 4. Is Nis pe�soMrtn a targetetl venda? VES NO F�lain all yes areweis on sepa�aM sheet anA attach to green sheet INITIATING PROBLEM ISSUE, OPPORTUNIN (VJho, Whet, When, Where, Why) , _ ...., ., .,.,�r »,�..a..:s...� _....." �ADVAN7AGESIFAPPROVED Council Research Center MAR t} 5 2aQ� ; , DISADVANTAGES IFAPPROVED } � G �� � ,rv., � ..M1 ,,, Y •; � x . ...u3c:. . _ / •,��i,:.:T fs ?a �. DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED � -� - t � TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S COST/REVENUE BUDOEfED (CIRCLE ON� VE$ NO FUNDING SOURCE ACTNITY NUMBER FlNANCNLINFORMATION (IXPWN) 0 � -- �4� z�. NOTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTTON NOTICES, AND SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS Tuesday, Februazy 25, 2003 Room 330 City Hall/Courthouse Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 135 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Pat Fish, Fire Prevention; Officer Dean Koehnen, Police Department (assigied to Code Enforcement); Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Lisa Martin, Code Enforcement 39 Avon Street South Pat Fish reported she discussed this property with the inspectar. The inspector did not think it was feasible to put in the mechanical ventilation. It has not presented a problem in the past; therefore, they do not have an objection to a variance. Marcia Moermond asked aze they looking for a time limited variance or an indefinite one. Ms. Fish responded an indefinite variance. The construction of the building is not conducive to fitting a mechanical vent. Ms. Moermond asked is it the same situation with 45 Avon. Ms. Fish responded yes. James Couneilman, Avon Apartments LLC, appeared. Ms. Moermond granted an indefinite variance from the January 15, 2003, Deficiency List on ventilation system in all bathrooms. 45 Avon Street South (See above.) Marcia Moermond granted an indefinite variance from the January 15, 2003, Deficiency List on ventilation systems in all bathrooms. 733 Pierce Butler Route Pat Fish reported this property was vacant. There was a team inspection. Sprinkler, fire, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing inspectors went through the building. They made a list of requirements for the property and sent it to the owner. There are some substantial changes, such as sprinkling of the basement. The code allowed sepazation of the upstairs area into one hour separated compartments to eliminate the need to sprinkler the upstairs, but that exemption does 0�3= z.��, LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JANiJARY 25, 2003 Page 2 not apply to basement areas, which holds an assembly azea and does not have the 20 square feet of opening every 50 feet. Ms. Moermond asked for ciarification on the upstairs. Ms. Fish responded the upstairs would require sprinklers. It would have to be divided with one hour fire sepazation azeas of less than 5,000 square feet in one room. That would eliminate the need for sprinkling the upstairs. It would also be required to have an alann system. Mai Her, owner, 540 E. County Road D, Little Canada, appeared and stated she has been spending about $20,000 a month for expenses since Bangkok closed on October 3. She is asking to operate her business so that she can get the finances to do the necessary fixing. She asked is it possible to put back the wall that they broke before. Ms. Fish responded the basement area is over 1,500 square feet. Dividing it into sections is not an exception in the code for basement areas that do not have windows or opening areas. Ms. Her asked about just using the pool hall and the bar until they have the money to put in the water sprinkler. Ms. Fish responded none of the downstairs area would meet the requirement without being sprinkled. Ms. Her asked about not using the downstairs and just using the upstairs. Ms. Fish responded that would be a variance she cannot grant, but that would be something the Legislative Hearing Officer would consider. It is a life safety issue. Ms. Moermond asked about any other items they are appealing. Ms. Her responded some of them they can do themselves, but the plumbing and water sprinkler they cannot do because they are low on finances. That is why she would like to get it opened so they can make money to put in a system. Ms. Moermond asked does she have specific code references here. Ms. Her responded the plumbing in the baz area and the men's bathroom. Ms. Moermond asked has an inspectar walked through the property with her to show what is needed. Ms. Her responded she has not had that done yet. Ms. Fish responded the owner was there during the inspection. The owner's representative was with them niost of the time. The waste vent and water piping would need a perxnit. There is a mistype: the plumbing in the men's room should say "cracked and broken urinals." There aze a few things that she would not consider reasonable to give additional time or to open the business. There are fixtures that are not in good shape from a health standpoint. For example, backflow preventers are to keep chemicals from flowing back into the water supply. The inspector could walk through the building with a plumbing contractor. Ms. Her stated when her business closed on October 3, everythiug was left in usable condition. The water sprinkler was not required in 2001. She does not understand why she has to put one in 03�.�� LEGISLATIVE HEAI2ING NOTES OF JANUEIRY 25, 2003 Page 3 now. Ms. Fish responded when a building becomes registered vacant, then the City ordinance requires a team inspection or a code compliance inspection on those vacant buildings. There was discussion previously about dividing the upstairs into fire-rated areas that would eliminate the need for sprinkling. She tallced to the inspector involved in that. Ms. Fish does not know when the basement azea was put into use. This is the first time Ms. Fish inspected the building. Ms. Her asked what is meant by fire-rated areas far the upstairs. Ms. Fish responded when an azea is divided, a one-hour fire wall is installed between the rooms. That means they have to have fue rock on two sides of wooden or metal studs from floor to ceiling, every opening into that room has to be sealed, and one hour fire doors installed with approved self closures. They have to be physically separated and work has to be done with fire-rated materials so that the fire will not travel from one area to another. Ms. Her stated when she bought the building in November, they operated the business and then did the fixing along the way. She asked can.that happen. Ms. Moermond responded the bulk of the appeal talked about wanting a variance from the sprinkler requirements. The timing could not be worse after two major fires nationally in nightclubs. Also, the Fine Line incident in Minneapolis did not lead to deaths because it was a sprinkled area. In the current environment, Ms. Moermond cannot grant a variance of the sprinkler requirement for the type of operation where a lot of people assemble. In terms of the balance of the things on the list, she should meet with the inspector, go through them individually, schedule another appointment to walk through the property, and talk about how some of these things can be taken care o£ There are lots of situations where there are cheaper alternatives that still meet the code. Ms. Moermond denied the appeal on the Deficiency List dated February 4, 2003. 469 Whitall Street Lisa Martin reported there was a complaint on the properiy on February 7 regarding windows, screens, handrail, and siding. She went out to the properry, issued orders and asked they be completed by February 24. She received a voicennail message requesting a detailed list of the windows and screens. She went out there, took photographs, sent out a corrected notice detailing which screens and windows and listed more items to be taken care of. Marcia Moermond asked was the compliance date changed. Ms. Martin responded it was still the 24` After the inspection per the request of the owner, Steven 3ohnson left a voice message on February 19 screaming and sweazing to stay off his property claiming that she was hying to enter his backyard when he was hrying to comply with the detailed list they requested. She has never dealt with the Johnsons before. Ms. Moermond asked is Kevin Johnson the owner of record with Ramsey County Tases. Ms. Martin responded Whitall Associates, care of Steve R. Johnson. 03 Z��1 LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF 7ANiIARY 25, 2003 Page 4 The following appeazed: Steve Johnson, 292 Forbes Avenue, Unit 3; Kevin Johnson (Steve's son), 469 Whitall Street; and Ken Johnson, 292 Forbes Avenue, Unit 3. Kenneth stated on January 28 he was in trial court. On January 31, an inspector put a vacant si� on 469 Whitall. Kevin was living in it. This used to be a nuisance property. Steve called the inspector and asked why the sign was put on. Kenneth stated they should not put a vacant sign on the property without notifying the owner and finding out who lives there. They Ciry withdrew the vacant order when he appealed it. The previous owner Mike had three citarions for trash in the past 10 to 12 yeazs. (Kenneth read a letter dated February 11, 2003, infornung him that the vacant building file has been closed and his check for the filing fee was returned.) Kenneth stated the same day he got his appeal back, he received another letter in the mail with items cited. The City is again harassing the homeowner. There may be a few items that needed care. Kevin's credit is not very good right now. They aze going to do a quick claim deed. It was stated that they made harsh phone calls, but that is because the City was harsh on them. Then, the City came out and cited them. Kevin's girlfriend was in the property when they were walking through the properry. They were jumping over the fence. They should call first if they aze going through the property. This is not a tenant-landlord situation. This is a private home with laws. Per the Fourth amendment, improper search and seisure, the City cannot just walk on someone's yard. They knew Kevin owned it. Kenneth stated that Steve got a little upset and said do not come on the property. Kenneth wanted to lrnow why they recited these items when it was dropped in the first place. Ms. Martin stated she does not work for vacant buildings. She had the complaint and that is why she sent the notice out. She went out there because they left a voice mail that they needed a more detailed description. She was not jumping the fence. A city attorney and police officer were with her. It was a simple set of orders for screens and windows. She is not sure why it got blown out of proportion by him. Kenneth stated Kevin was going to Puerto Rico on Monday. They put the vacant sign up on Friday, the trip was cancelled, and he lost all that money. Kenneth wonders why they came back if there was no call on the properiy. When they bought it, they picked up the trash out there. The previous owner may have had some problems cleaning up the yard, they never enforced it, and now they are enforcing it on Kevin. Steve said that was no code compliance except for garbage removal against Mr. Elman during the 9 yeazs he lived there. This is a form of retaliation. He would like his son left alone. They aze going to stand behind him until the end. Young people do not stand a chance. Inspectors have the power of the police to shove and push. They are harassing his company. Steve has spent 15 years cleaning up troubled neighborhoods in this City. They have neighborhood organizations to 0 z4� LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JANUARY 25, 2003 Page 5 back them up if it goes to another level. He would like to work with the inspectors. He respects what they do. They have done a great job of cleaning up the City. Now, the inspectars aze going to the level of picky things. It is hazd to get to some of those things done. They all work long hours. This harassment has got to stop. Steve said the inspectors come with the police force and throw their weight around. They can make comments to them, but they cannot make comments back. He does not like being shoved azound by City officials. He is financially stable. Neighbars said that the inspector climbed the fence and peeked through the side window. He called the inspectors and asked them why they posted the vacant building to begin with. Their comment back to him is it was a nuisance properry in the past, and the City lost a lot of money. Steve does not feel it is his son's fault. He is fixing the building. Section 8 passed them the first time. He would like to work this out civilly. Ken stated the officer that put up the vacant sign threatens and says it they go in the properry, they wili be arrested. There is no reason for an officer to say that to him. Kevin went in the property to get his clothes. Ken stated he knew the inspectors were watching the property because they have an vendetta against he and his brother. He used to be a Section 8 inspector for eight years. He knows a lot of the fire and safety inspector codes. This is pure harrassment to bother a homeowner. Ms. Moermond stated this is a complaint-based inspection. She asked how this came into the City. By her voicemail, responded Ma Martin. Ms. Moermond asked if Kevin had anything to add. Kevin responded no. Steve stated they have a report on all the complaints, and there are none. ff a neighbor complains about another neighbor, responded Ms. Martin, that is not recorded. If someone calls on the Citizen Service Office, those are recorded and put into the system. If her voicemail is called, it is notrecorded. Ken asked if someone knew her personally to know her voice mail. Ms. Martin responded yes and she has been in the neighborhood before. They do not leave names. Also, Kevin never called her to say he was fixing it up. There aze some issues at the property: throwing garbage in the backyazd, siding, scxeens. O�cer Dean Koehnen asked were they currently the owner of 483 Sherburne. Steve responded that they are. Officer Koehnen stated that he and Ms. Martin also received a complaint on 483 Sherbume. The owner was contacted, the owner did the work, cleaned up the trash, did the windows, and there are no problems over there. Mr. Magner stated laws must be enforced uniformally. In the City of Saint Paul, Chapter 34 is enforced the same way whether it is owner occupied or rented out. 03 Z�� LEGISLATTVE HEARING NOTES OF JANiJARY 25, 2003 Page 6 Ms. Moermond asked did he take issue that any of these are not violations. Steve responded he has not received the revised correction notice, so he does not know. He would like to have time to review those. (The owners were supplied with the revised correction notice. They took a moment to look it over. Then, they went over each item individually.) Item 1- The windows and/or storm windows are in a state of disrepair. Steve stated he does not agree. They have done some work on it. But, they do not know which one. Item 2- The window and/or door screens are missing, defective or in a state of disrepair. Steve stated he does not agree. Item 3- SANITATION - Immediately remove improperly stored or accumulated refuse. - Kevin stated he is slowly tearing off the old siding and putting up new siding. There was a tree scraping against the roof. It was minor debris. Ms. Martin responded there are gazbage bags thrown in the back yard and tree debris by the side of the fence. Item 4- VEHICLES - Vehicle/vehicles parked on an unapproved parking surfaces. Remove and file a site plan with Zoning for parking spaces in the yard. - Ken stated it is covered with ice and snow. It is on City property. Item 5- The rear storm door is in disrepair; repair or replace the rear door. - Ken stated the front is new and the back has a board on it. Item 6- Exterior walls and/or trim have defective, peeled, flaked, scaled or chalking paint or have unpainted wood surfaces. - Steve stated there is some minor siding missing. Item 7- Housing and Building Numbers: Provide reflectorized or illuminated house numbers front and rear where applicable. The numbers must be a minimum of three (3) inches in height and must be clearly visible from the street or alley for safety reasons. - Steve stated they are painted over. Item 8- Repair/replace/remove wood fence that is in poor condition according to the State Building Code. Permit may be required. - Kevin stated he repaired the fence. The fence for nine years had panels that were falling off. The studs were laying on City properiy. He put the fence back up. There is not one piece of wood laying around that fence. Item 9- Exterior walls are defective. Repair all holes, breaks, loose or rotting siding to a professional state of maintenance. (See items 6.) Ms. Moermond stated for appeals, they consider two things: whether the conditions merited the action taken, whether the inspectar acted appropriately in taking that action. There is a long-term °3 z-�{� LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JANLJARY 25, 2003 Page 7 relationship with City inspectors and the owners understand how the City warks. She is also aware of the vacant building situation a few weeks ago, and the City did withdraw that claim. She does not find that the inspector's acted in a hazassing fashion because they responded to a complaint about this properry's condition. In terms of owner occupied properties and rental properties, owner occupied properties have the same set of minimum requirements as rental properties as far as the City and state building codes aze concerned. Section 8 does differ from that. In terms of the actual items listed here, most of them are reasonable and there aze conditions that merited them being listed. (A discussion ensued regazding the compliance dates for each item.) Ms. Moermond's decision is as follows: The following deficiencies on the February 21, 2003, Revised Correction Notice will be corrected by the City Council adoption of this resolution: holes in the exterior that could lead to infestation as noted in Item 9, garbage in the yard as noted in Item 3, vehicle as noted in Item 4, and house numbers as noted in Item 7. The following deficiencies will be conected by May 1, 2003: a11 other holes in the exterior as noted in Item 9, windows and doors as noted in Items 1 and 2, rear storm door as noted in Item 5, and the wood fence as noted in Item 8. The following deficiencies will be corrected by June 1, 2003: exterior painting as noted in Item 6. If the owners disagree with her decision, they can talk to Councilmember Jim Reiter. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 230 p.m. rrn