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(withdrawn)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