Loading...
06-1036Councit Fite # 0%-l03(0 Green Sheet # 3033517 RESOLUTION OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented by /b 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the September 5, 2006, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters, Correction Notices, and Conection Orders for the following address: Propertv Appealed 1091 Payne Avenue Appellant Harriet 7ohnson, et al Donna Young Decision: Crrant the appeal as the property, upon re-inspection, was determined to be in compliance. Thune ✓ Adopted by Councll: Date Benanav Bostrom Hazris Yeas Requested by Department o£ � Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council Adoption Certified by Council Secretary BY� ��d� Approve b a Dat � �p B � � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � 06 /n3e co -co��, Contact Person & Phone: Marcia Mcermond Cr8570 Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Dx.Type: RESOLU770N E-0ocumentRequired: Y DocumentConfact: VickiShefrer Contact Phone: 6-8561 Date Initiatetl: ,,.�,� � Green Sheet NO: 3033517 � Assgn Number For Routiqg Order Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locafions for Signature) DeDar6nent SentToPerson InitiallDate 0 omc� i 1 oun it D rtmentD'v or 2 'tv CI k Gtitv Clerk i 3 4 � 5 Action Requested: Resolurion aprroving the September 5, 2006, decision of the Legislarive Aearing Officer on Appeals of Letters, Correcdon Norices and Correction Orders for property at 1091 Payne Avenue. Recommendations_ Appro�e (AJ or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB Committee CiHI Service Commission Personal Service ConVacts MustMSwerthe Following QuesGo�s: 1. Has this personl5rtn e�er wofked u�er a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has this persoNfirtn e�er been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this persoNfirm possess a ski0 not nortnally possessed by aoy current aty employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and aHach to green sheet Initiating Problem, ls5ues, Opportun'dy (Who, What, Wh¢n, Where, Why): Advanpges MApproved: DisadvanWges IFApproved: Disadvantages If NotAaproved: Transaction: Funtling Source: Financial Information: (Explain) CostlRevenue Budgeted: Activiry Number: October > 9, 2006 2:03 PM Page 1 O� -103� MINLJTES OP TI� LEGISLATIVE HEARING LETTERS OF DEFICLENCY, CORRECTION NOTICES, AND CORRECTION ORDERS Tuesday, September 5, 2006 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Marcia Moermond, Legislarive Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:50 p.m. Staff Present: Michael Unnann, Fire Prevention Appeal of Harriet Johnson and Donna Young for a Certificate of Occupancy with Deficiencies for property at 1091 Pame Avenue. Mr. Urmann stated the appeal of Donna Young, tenant in the upstairs unit, had been resolved. The inspector issued orders because the ceiling between the commercial space and the second floor residential unit had deteriorated to the point there were holes in the ceiling above the false ceiling. Because of the condition of the ceiling, a one-hour fire separation needed to be installed which could be done with either 5(8 inch gypsum or sheet rock. He pointed out that the commercial space was completely vacant. Doug Ramsey, appeared on behalf of the four property owners who owned the building. He did not believe there were holes in the ceiling and he presented letters, pictures and a diagram of the floor plan of the building. They had planned to sell the building and believed they had a buyer, however, they backed out of the purchase agreement. Ms. Moermond asked whether the commercial space was completely vacant. Mr. Urmann responded that it was vacant and was not being used for any sort of storage. The fire separation would not be required if this remained vacant, however, if it were used even for storage `"' purposes, the ceiling would be reqdired to have the fire separarion. Mr. Ramsey asked whether this provision would be grandfathered in. Ms. Moennond responded that it would not. The ceiling had previously been in compliance, however, with the presence of holes in the ceiling above the false ceil'vig, it would need to be brought into compliance with the one-hour �re raring. Mr. Ramsey requested Mr. Urmann inspect the ceiling himself. Ms. Moermond recommended laying this matter over to September 19 so that Mr. Urmann could inspect the ceiling and make a determination. Meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m. On October 3, 2006, Inspectar Urm�nn reported that he had re-inspected the properiy and found the properry to be in compliance. He recommended granting the appeal. vms