Loading...
05-864Council File # OS' g�T Green Sheet # 3028011 Presented RESOLUTION F SAl}�T PAUL, MINNESOTA � � Referred To Committee Date BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the July 19, 2005, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters, Correction Notices, and Coaection Orders for the following addresses: Propertv Appealed A�pellant 345 St. Peter Slreet Gerald Hersman for Landmark Pazk Towers Ramp Association Decision: The locking of the stair tower doors via card readers as currently exist will be an alternative method of compliance to LSC 7.2.1.5.2 . The locks door will unlock (fail safe) upon activation of the fire alarm system or loss of power to the building. Card readers will be added on Levels 24 and 20 to provide re-entry on the second to the top level (24) and at minimum of every fifth level. The card readers aze to unlock under the same conditions as the existing readers. Signs are to be placed on each stair door in conformance with LSC 7.2.1.5.2 Exception 1 e identifying re-entry level. A reasonable time to comply is to be negotiated by Fire and the owners. 815 Farrintton Street (withdrawn) Donald Ischer, owner 1017 Crreenbrier Street Paul E. Ngene, owner Decision: The exterior concrete stairs be repaired by September 30, 2005, as stipulated on the Conection Norice dated June 23, 2005. 283 Bates Avenue Allen Woods, owner Decision: Extension granted to October 31, 2005, to complete the work on the retaining walls as stipulated on the Deficiency List dated July 1, 2005. OS- 8�� Green Sheet 3028011 Yeas Nays Absent Benanav ,/ Bostrom ,/ Harris �/ Helgen � Lantry ✓ Montgomery 1/ Thune r/ U � Adopted by Council: Date � �/ � ��. �.. Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attorney Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � � Green Sheet Green os- ���p Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � DepartmenUoffice/wuncil: Date Initiated: � -�,m�� 'f4SEP-05 Green Sheet NO: 3028011 Contact Person 8 Phone• Deoartrnent Sent To Person Initial/Date Maroia Mcermond � 0 ounc0 266-8570 pg,�gn 1 ouncil De artm nt Di ector Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number z � C1erk For 3 Routing Order 4 5 Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) Actian Requested: Approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Letters of Deficiency, Correction Orders, and Correction Notices for the following: 345 St. Peter Street, 815 Famngton Street, 1017 Greenbrier Street, 283 Bates Avenue, 1126 Eclgerton Street. Recommentlations: Approve (A) or Rejed (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions: Planning Commission � 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firtn ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this personffirm possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Advantasaes If Approved .., Disadvantapes If Approved: vyu11Cl) �QSB�t'Ch (�QnYQC SEP � 4 2005 Disadvantaqes If Not Approved: � ` , � �.:�e>�� . .. t��.,.z . l � , , Total Amount of CosURevenue Budgeted: - Transaction: Fundin5l Source: Activity Number: Financiaf lnformation: (FJCplain) ��.� �� ����� NOT�S OF "i'F� LEGISLATIVE HEARING LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTION NOTICES, AND CORRECTION ORDERS Tuesday, July 19, 2005 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Mazcia Moermond, Legisiative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:35 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Andy Dawkins, Neighborhood Housing and Properry Improvement (NI�P�; Tom Friel, NIIPI; Phillip Owens, Division of Fire Prevention; Rich Singerhouse, NHPI; Michael . Urmann, Division of Fire Prevention Appeal of Deficiency List at 345 St. Peter Street; appellant: Gerald Hersman for Landmark Park Towers Ramp Association. (Division of Fire Prevention) (Rescheduled from 7-5-OS) The following appeared: Jerry Hersman, Building Manager for Landmark Tower and employee of Green Tree Servicing, which is the owner of the building; Bruce Williams, manager, and employee of United Properties, which does outsourced facility wark. Phillip Owens reported this address is a mixture of B type occupancies, and residential condominium type occupancies. There were three violations on the order of June 10. He understands they are only appealing Item 3, to which Mr. Hersman responded Items 1 and 2 have been taken care of. Mr. Owens confinued: the code provides that when there is a building over four stories, every door in a stair enclosure serving more than four stories should allow re-entry from the stair enclosure of the interior of the building ar there should be an automatic release to unlock the stair enclosure to allow re-entry. The autamatic release shall be activated upon initiation of the building's fire alann system or the building's sprinkler system. The appellant offered exceptions that allow a person to unlock the doors, but they must unlock all of them on alarm activation or fire sprinkler activation or permit re-entry not more than every fifth floor. The appellant has offered a chart that mixes and matches some of those things: some unlock automatically, several floors uniock automatically upon initiafion of the fire alann system, others do not unlock at all. The codes says they a11 unlock or there are some alternatives. The appellant can meet the intent of the code below 16 in that some unlock and some don't. He can still get that every fifth floor re-entry requirement. For Floors 25 through 17, the appellant indicated those are residential condominium floors and for security reasons, they do not want to unlock those. It also requires there is re-entry at the top floor or the floar immediately below it. The 25 floor or the 24�' floor would have to uniock in addition to every fifth floor. In a fire or alarm condition, the Fire Department does not believe the perceived need for security in the condominium floor ovemdes the need to properly evacuate the entire building. Mr. Hersman stated the resident floors aze on 21 through 25. Floors 19 and 20 are double coded residential or commercial. They were originally rented out as residential, but they are being used as commercial office floors. � �' � LEGISLA'TIVE HEARING NOTES OF JiJLY 19, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Williams stated that he is hoping they can meet the intent as a hybrid model. Twenty-five floors is unique for them. They have one resident up there. They can put a card reader on either 21 or 20 to gain re-entry so that the door will unlock to meet the every fifth floor requirement. Mr. Hersman added that Floor 20 would work better. They are concemed about the security aspect of the residents who tend to be over 55 yeazs of age. They have secured access up to those floors. Mr. Owens asked what is on Floor 24 and could they put a card reader there. Mr. Hersman responded it is residential and that couid potentially work. Mr. Owens stated the code requires re-entry on the top level or next to the top level. They would like to put a cazd reader on 24 and on 20 combined with the others. There are some anomalies because the stairwells do not match. It would be better if those matched so that people know which levels 2hey could re-enter. In addition, there would have to be signage on the doors in the stairwells. If they can do the card reader on 20 and 24, the Fire Department will take that as an alternate method of compliance. Ms. Moermond asked does that work for them and do they understand the concerns of the two separate stainvells. Mr. Hersman responded he believes it does work He understands the concerns. He was not awaze of the top floorlsecond floor down requirement. Mr. Williams asked is it an option to sign these stairwells differently to avoid putting readers on the couple of doors that aze locked. Mr. Owens responded that might be possible. They need the 24th and the 20th to match on both stairweils. Mr. Williams asked aze they to keep 24 and 20 open at all times or in the event of the fire. In the activation of the fire alarm and sprinkler system, answered Mr. Williams. The cazd reader panels are pretry full, and there is availability to add those in the upper floors. They will sign 12, 4, and 3 appropriately. Ms Moermond's decision is as follows: The locking of the stair tower doors via card readers as currently exist will be an alternative method of compiiance to LSC 7.21.5.2 . The doors will unlock (fail safe) upon activation of the fire alarm system or loss of power to the building. Card readers wili be added on Levels 24 and 20 to provide re-entry on the second to the top tevel (24) and at minimum of every fifth level. The card readers are to unlock under the same conditions as the existing readers. Signs are to be placed on each stair door in conformance with LSC 7.2.1.5.2 Exception 1 e identifying re-enhy level. A reasonable tnne to comply is to be negotiated by Fire and the owners. Appeai of Deficiency List at 815 Farrin¢ton Street; owner: Donald Ischer. (Division of Fire Prevention) o� �s��- LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOT'ES OF JUT,Y 19, 2005 Page 3 Phil Owens reported that the appellant has withdrawn, as he was granted a 30 day eatension to comply. Appeai of Conecfion Norice at 419 Mount Ida Street; owner: Larry Kiteck. (NITPn (Appellant did not appeaz.) Mazcia Moermond reported that Larry Kiteck could not make it today and he would like an extension to next sutnn�er, otherwise, he would like to be present for a hearing. She is not going to grant him a yeaz extension routinely without lum saying why. Rich Singerhouse reported the porch is in bad condition. He told the appellant that he would work with him on the roof, but Mr. Kiteck said no, as he did not want to do the whole roof. Mr. Singerhouse wall speak to his supervisor Steve Magner to see if he would like to grant an extension. The shingies have started to deteriarate. Mr. Kiteck has no problem with the other items on the notice. Mr. Kiteck indicated he is willing to get the porch roof done by the end of the suminer, said Ms. Moermond. She asked how many layers of shingles. Mr. Singerhouse responded three on the parch and it looks like two on the rest of it, but it is hard to see. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the August 2 Legislative Hearing. Appeal of Deficiency List at 1017 Greenbrier Street; owner: Paui E. Ngene. (NHPI) Paul Ngene, owner, appeazed. Tom Friel reported his office issued orders in September 2004 on a series of violations to owner Linda Brown. Subsequently, they found Mr. Ngene was the owner and he was issued several notices. The first o�cial order he received was 2-1-05. Other items on the order were repaired. Ms. Moermond asked for his plans. Mr. Ngene responded he does not think it needs to be done. He has a lot to do in the house, and he is doing it graduaily. Mr. Friel does not have the right to tell him to get a loan. He has things to do more urgently than the stairs. He lives there by himself. He does not know why this is a problem. (Mr. Friel submitted photographs that he took today.) Ms. Moermond stated it is not good when the concrete steps have to be mowed. The concern with the City code is not about the owner getting in and out of his properiy alone. It is also about getting visitors, mail carriers, firefighters, etc. in and out of the properiy safely. The stairs need to be fixed. Mr. Ngene responded he cannot say when it will be. He is saving for the roof. Ms. Moermond stated the stairs are in bad shape. Mr. Ngene responded they are not in bad shape. �J� ��o�-{' LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF 7ULY 19, 2005 Page 4 Ms. Moermond stated it seems they aze taikiug about an extension to get the work done in a reasonable amount of time. Mr. FriePs next option is to write a criminal citarion. She asked does the roof leak. Mr. Ngene responded no. Ms. Moermond asked if the owner can tell her that he will do it this fa11. Mr. Ngene responded he is saving for the roof, to which Ms. Moermond stated that she repaired her wall with QuickCrete (phonetic). These minimal repairs can be done far under $50. Mr. Ngene stated that he would like NIr. Friel to meet him there and say what he wants done. The way he wants it done is to scrap it entirely. Mr. Friel responded that if the owner removed the stairs, then he would have mare time to rebuild them. Mr. l�gene stated he does not use the stairs. He will do simple maintenance, but he wants Mr. Friel to be there. Ms. Moermond responded it has been her experience that inspectors do accommodate these requests and provide assistance on a number of occasions. She asked would he be willing to go to the properry and not count this issue towazd any excessive consumption bilis. Mr. Friel responded that if the inspectors are working with him, they will not charge him. Ms. Moermond recommends repairing these stairs by September 30, 2005, as sfipulated on the Correction Notice dated June 23, 2005. Appeal of Deficiency List at 283 Bates Avenue; owner: Allen Woods. (Division of Fire Prevention) Allen Woods, owner, appeared. Michael Urmann appeared and supplied photographs, which he numbered. He could not find the graffiti, but the other issues need to be taken care o£ He also supplied photographs, which he numbexed. Photograph 2 shows the condition of a retaining wall. There is a leaning retaining wall in #3. Also, Mr. Urmann took a photograph of the neighbor's retaining wall, which is leaning. Mr. Woods stated he painted over the graffiti about two years ago. The inspector did not like that the paint didn't match. If there is going to be a correction order for graffiti, there should be gr�ti there. The inspector wrote to repair or tuckpoint the concrete wa11. Then, she wrote up the wood wa11, which the inspector said was leaning. (Mr. Woods showed his own pictures.) It will be about $5,000 to fix it; he wants to leave it. It has a little bow to it, which may be an aesthetic issue. According to the code if the wall is retaaning, tkaen it is doing its job. There is some tuckpointing. It is a financial hardship for him. It is structurally sound. Mr. Urmann stated it is not staying where it was designed to stay. He does not believe it will be structurally sound for a long period of time. It needs to be squared up and built in a professional �� ��� LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JULY 19, 2005 Page 5 manner. Mr. Woods responded that he has owned the property for about ten yeazs. The code does not make a reference to it leaning one way or another. Whether it is pleasing to an inspector is not applicable. Ms. Moermond stated if it is her finding that the walis needs to be repaired or replaced, what kind of time line is he looking at. Mr. Woods responded the project itself is a two ar three day project. It is in the HPC area, so he would have to buy the rocks that aze the right color. It can be easily $5,000. It only leans four inches. (Mr. Urmann provided the code.) Ms. Moermond denied the appeal. The requirement is for it to be maintained in a professional manner. Mr. W oods responded he has about four of five units in the neighborhood where there is the code enforcement crackdown. He spent about $20,000 in those units and he is not done yet. They did Certificate of Occupancies on all his units in two weeks. They are giving him 10 to 15 days to make all these repairs and he cannot rent his vacant units un61 all aze in compliance. He already has 20% vacancy rate with the poor rental mazket. This is beyond the point of the repairs being cheaper than filing lawsuits and appealing orders. This is beyond the point of reasonable inspections. He can't keep his apartments empty and spend money on this stuff. Ms. Moermond asked are there three units. Mz. Woods responded he has two rented. Mr. Urmann responded these orders aze not on a Certificate of Occupancy order. They are on a refenal. Ms. Moermond asked has the Fire Department said the owner cannot rent the third unit. Mr. Urmann responded they issue orders in some cases to inspect the unit prior to occupancy, but they have not said he cannot occupy the unit. Mr. Woods responded he was toid my Barb Cumnxings (Fire Prevention) that he should not rent anything until she says. She has been fair to him; however, he feels he is being farced to sell the building. It would be better for him to combine two of the units and turn it back into a duplex and give up his Certificate of Occupancy at this point. The next item is another silly repair for big money and it does not accomplish anything. Ms. Moermond stated the next item is water intrusion. Mr. Urmann stated the tenant allowed access this morning. There is water damage. Photograph 5 shows an interior close-up of the damage. Photograph 6 is a wide-angie view. Item 7 shows tree roots and limbs from a bush growing out from the side of building. This is where the damage is occiuring: it is growing into the wail, in the foundation, and is admitting water into the unit. The wa11 again has been repaired in the past and may need fitrther repair. It may be retaining water. Item 9 shows that the dirt is still wet from water that has pooled there. Ms. Moermond stated of particulaz concern are Items 5 and 7. 05- �s�� LEGISLATTVE HEARING NOT'ES OF JLJLY 19, 2005 Page 6 Mr. Woods stated the tenant previously told him about the wall and said the kids were banging the toys against it. The inspector asked her if water was coming through there, and the tenant said there. He had the building four yeazs and has never had a problem there. The tree root can be dug out and the area patched. Ms. Ci.imaiings wanted him to excavate out the window well, tunnel through the yazd, go to the retaining wall, and put some kind of plumbing in there. He thought that was extreme. He never had any standing water in there. Mr. Urmann responded they are looking for drainage tl�at does not allow any water infiltrarion into the building and any of standing water. If that can be accomplished in another way, they would be open to that option. Ms. Moermond stated the iree root situation is not good. The hole in the wali needs to be patched and repaired. Mr. Woods responded he does not keep his apartment in that condition. The tenant is just causing grief. Ms. Moermond stated she is looking at the end of September or mid October for the work to be done. Mr. Woods responded he does not need an extension on the window wells if he can drain it away and put some grauel in there. Mr. Urmann responded that he is looking at grade, drainage, and that it does not hold any runoff: Ms. Moermond denied the appeal and granted an extension to October 31, 2005, to complete the work on the retaining walls as stipulated on the Deficiency List dated July 1, 2005. The owner indicated no extension is needed on the other items. Mr. Woods responded he will probably drop the Certificate of Occupancy on that property. He is not going to repair things that do not need to be repaired. He thinks the City is out of line on that one. Appeal of Notice to Revoke Rental Registration Certificate at ll26 EdEerton Street; owners: Esther Ondabu and Fred Ondabu. (NHPI) Esther Ondabu appeared. Andy Dawkins reported these are new owners on the properiy, and he believes they are responsible owners. They are appealing his June 27 notice of intent to revoke the Rental Registration Certificate. He sent the notice because they failed to pay the Excessive Consumption fee and failed to arrange an interior inspection, both of which are set by Chapter 51 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. This bill came into being because Paula Seeley (NHPI) issued a Correc6on Notice addressed to the appellant in regazds to a motor vehicle with no plates. She asked that they compiy by Apri125. As late as May 6, there was sfill a vehicle with no plates. Ms. Seeley issued a$SO bill because it was an unnecessary inspection. They now have compiiance, the car is not there, but they still have not paid the $50 and haue not arranged for the interior inspection. Ms. Moermond asked why they aze appealing. Mr. Ondabu responded they just bought the property. It came to their attention that there was a vehicle with no plates and they asked the c�� ���. LEGISLATIVE HEARING NOTES OF JULY 19, 2005 Page 7 renter to put the plates back. There was a violation about containers for the garbage. They are willing to comply. Mr. Ondabu said that he needs pernussion from the renters. He will talk to them and get a tune to talk to the inspector. Ms. Moermond responded the tenants have legal obligation to let the owners in. He does not need to give them two weeks notice. In answer to several questions, the owners responded they have owned the properiy for two months. One of their daughters will live upstairs and they will have a renter downstairs. Ms. Moermond stated she will give them until August 9 to get an interior inspection scheduled. If they do not pay the $50 Excessive Consumption bill, it will get turned into a proposed property tax assessment. Then, he shouid send in the postcard and they will talk about it. If he takes steps to fix up the property, then they can probably take care of this assessment by phone. This issue wi11 be laid over to the August 16 Legislative Hearing if there is no interior inspection by August 9. There aze landlord arganizations that can help with this situation. The hearing was adjourned at 2:46 p.m. rrn