04-121Council �ile # ���
Green Sheet # �O \\���j
RESOLUTION
PAUL, MiNNESOTA
Presented
Referred To
��
Committee Date
BE IT IiESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the 3anuary 13,
2004, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals for Letters of Deficiency, Correction Norices, and
Conection Orders for the foliowing addresses:
Properf�ppealed
Aunellant
528 Ashland Avenue Patricia Callahan for Phoenix Condominium Assoc.
Decision: Extension granted to October 8, 2004, to repair or remove the pillars on the Deficiency List dated
December 8, 2003; laid over to the October 12, 2004, Legislative Heazing for followup.
880 Juno Avenue (Laid over from 7-8-03) Karen A. Flynn
Decision: Appeal denied on Correction Notice dated June 12, 2003; Code Enforcement staff will issue a
Suumiary Abatement Order to remove or repair the garage by May 15, 2004.
501 Shenazd Road (Laid over from 11-25-03) Mary C. Smith for NSP-H3gh Bridge Generating Plant
Decision: Appeal denied on the Deficiency List dated October 30, 2003.
� Yeas Na s Absent
Benanav ✓
Bostrom ✓
Harris ,i
Helgen ✓
Lantry ✓
Montgomery ✓
Thune ✓
� �
Adopted by Council: Date ___���,./ /�i dOl/�
%
AdoF
By:
App[
By:
Requested by Deparnnent oE
�
Form Approved by City Attomey
�
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
�
� Green Sheet Green Sheet
6�,- �
Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet
Depar6ne�Uofficetwuncil: Date lnitiated:
co -�� 04-FEB-04 Green Sheet NO: 3011355
CoMaet Person 8 Phone: ���eM SeM To Person InitiaUDate
MacciaMoem�ood � 0 ncil
Z �� Assign 1 0 0'1 De artmentDirec or
Must Se on Councii Agenda by (Date): Number 2 � �
For
RouUng 3
Order 4
5
Totai # of Signature Pages �(Clip Ail Locations for Signature)
Action Requested: � � � � �
Approving the January 13, 2004, decisions ofthe I,egislative Hearing Officer on Appeals for I.etters of Deficiency, Correction Norices,
and Coaecfion Orders for the following addresses: 528 Ashland Avenue, 880 Juno Avenue, and 501 Shepud Road.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Followmg Questions:
Planning Commission 1. Has this persontfum ever worked under a contrad for this department?
CIB Committee Yes No
Civii Service Commission 2. Has this person�rm ever been a city empbyee?
Yes No
3. Does this personffirm possess a ski{I iwt normally possessed by any
curcent city empbyee?
Yes No
F�cpiain all yes answecs on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, Whe�, Where, Why):
Advantages If Approved: � , �
Disadvantages If Approved: ,
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
ToWI Amount of CosURevenue Budgeted:
Tra�saction:
Fundinp Source: Activity Number:
Financial lnfortnation:
(Explain)
��
��� 1c�
NOTES OF T'I� LEGISLATIVE HEARING
LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTION NOTTCES, AND CORRECTTON ORDERS
Tuesday, 7anuary 13, 2004
Room 330 City Hail, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West
Mazcia Moermond, L.egislative Hearing Officer
The hearing was called to order at 139 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Douglas 7ohnson, Fire Prevention
528 Ashland Avenue
The following appeazed: Walter Merz, President of Phoenix Condominium Association; and
Patricia Callaghan, Treasurer of Phoenix Condominium Association.
Ms. Moermond asked is he appealing the pillazs. Mr. Merz responded they haue a letter from
Mark Macpherson, Macpherson-Towne Company, who has done tuckpointing on the building
and examined the pillazs.
(Mr. Merz submitted the letter from Mark Macpherson.)
Ms. Moermond asked is Mr. Macpherson writing about the structural soundness of it. Mr. Merz
responded that Mr. Macpherson does not feel he is qualified to taik about engineering, but he has
stated his opinion about what could be done in terms of repair to make the pillars waterproof and
stable.
Douglas Johnson reported it is the front brick pillars that need repair. He left it generic on the
report to leaue the options open: repair them or take them down. They look unstable and aze
statting to sepazate from the walls. It is hard to predict how much ice or snow will get in there to
cause them to come down. They could cause damage to a person or property.
(Mr. Johnson submitted photographs.)
Mr. Merz stated he feels that the structure will not collapse, and Mr. McPherson feels caulking
wouid be sufficient. Mr. Johnson responded water is so thin it can get behind anything.
Someone could pull on them and the pillars could come down. Nothing is 100% water tight;
caulking will not prevent water from getting behind there.
Has he seen the letYer, asked Ms. Moermond. Mr. Johnson responded he has not.
{Mr. Johnson looked at a copy of the letter.)
Mr. Merz stated he would like permission to have Macpherson-Towne do sufficient caulking to
keep the water out. Until such time they are able to finish the tuckpointing on the building, they
would like to caulk as a temporary solution for a few years.
o�-�Z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOT'ES OF JANUARX 13, 2004 Page 2
Ms. Moermond asked are they tuckpointing azound the building in stages. Mr. Merz responded
all the building has been done in the last s� yeazs except the front stages. That will be done
when they raise the funds in three to four years.
Ms. Moermond stated she is hearing that caullciug is sufficient for water mtrusion, but she is not
hearing anything about the pillars falling. Mr. Merz responded an engineer would need to look at
it. At that time, they would do the repair. Ms. Callaghan added that they did not understand that
was part of the opuuon. They would like the opporhanity to get an engineer.
This is not a roof that will cave in on someone, stated Ms. Moermond. It is a cosmetic problem
with possible shuctural implications. The code says to maintain the properry in a workmanlike
manner. A three or four year extension is excessive. This is a code violation whether it is
cosmetic or structural; it is not in a sound posi6on because of the cracks.
Mr. 7ohnson stated he gave them until May 4, 2004, to bring the property into compliance. By
that time, if they obtained a written contract from a masonry establishment, they could get it done
in the contractor's time frame.
Ms. Moermond asked can they go forwazd with the caulking now. She wonders if that would
affect the masonry wark later. Mr. Merz stated that they do not know if the pillars need to be
torn down or rebuilt. They would depend on the engineer as to what could be done.
Ms. Moermond responded it looks like the original members of the building. Ms. Callaghan
responded they are not. They were somehow added later. These buildings often had porches in
the front originally. She asked could they have the alternative of tuckpointing or tearing it down.
Ms. Moermond resporided that they do not know what is behind the pillazs, but she is happy wifh
a repair or remove of these pieces.
Mr. Johnson stated if they want to take them down and not replace them, that is fine. If they
want to rebuild them so they are structutally sound, that is fine. Whatever they decide to do is
fine as long as the pillars look right.
Ms. Moermond stated this is a historic distriet, so there aze concerns there. They may want to
give the HPC (Historic Preservation Commission) a phone call.
Ms. Moermond stated she does not think caulking would be sufficient. They do not know
whether it is shucturally sound or not. If they need to go through the appeals process again, that
can be done.
Ms. Moermond granted the appeal to an extension to October 8, 2004, to repair or remove the
pillazs. Also, this issue will be laid over to October 12, 2004, Legislarive Hearing for followup.
o�-�z�
LBGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JANUARY 13, 2004 Page 3
880 Juno Avenue (Laid over from 7-8-03)
(The appellant did not appeaz.)
Ms. Moermond stated Karen A. Flynn has been ordered to remove or repair the garage. She no
longer wants to repair it, but she wants until spring to remove it.
Ms. Moermond denied the appeal, and is recommending Code Enforcement staff issue a
Summary Abatement Order to remove or repair by May 15, 2004.
501 Shepard Road (Laid over from 11-25-03)
(The appellant did not appear.)
Ms. Moermond stated the appeal is denied as the appellants have complied with the deficiency
list. The filing fee will not be refunded.
The hearing was adjourned at 2:03 pm.
rrn