Loading...
06-1147Council File # �� �,4 Green Sheet #3035453 NT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented by � � 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the October 2 17, 2006, decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters, Correction Notices, and 3 Correction Orders for the following address: 4 5 Prooertv Appealed 6 Ap elp lant 72 Kent Street, Unit 2 Ruth Eliason Decision: Denying the appeal and granting an extension to November 17, 2006, to comply with the Deficiency List. The electrical box will remain unlocked if there is a common circuit. Requested by Department of: Adoption Certified by C�o ci] Secretary BY� f�/�ii,�<�// Approved by a ate l— L- � By: :'� Form Approved by City Attorney B Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: Adopted by Council: Date \Z. � 2� ��4j � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �lo� 1� CO -�omcil ConqG Person & Phone: Marcia Mcermond 266-8560 Must Be on Couneil Aaen Doc. Type: RESOLUTION E-Document Required: N Document Contact: Racquel Naylor ConWct Phone: 266-8560 18-DEC-06 ( Green Sheet NO: 3035453 � veoaranent xnt�orerson 0 ounN Assign 1 ouecil De artmentDircctor Number Z . Qerk For Routing 3 Order 4 5 Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on appeal of a Deficiency List at 92 Kent Street, Unit 2. Planning Commission 1. Has ihis person/firtn ever worked under a conVact for this departmenC? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person/firtn possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answero on separete sheet and attach to green sheet I�itiating Problem, lssues, OppoRUnity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): AdvantageslfApproved: Disadvanta9es If Approved: Disadvantages If Not Approved: Trensaction: Funding SourCe: Financial Informat�on: (Explain) CosURevenue Budgeted: Activity Number. December 18, 2006 10:51 AM Page 1 O� �ly'1 MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTION NOTICES, AND CORRECTION ORDERS Tuesday, October 17, 2006 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Blvd. West Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:30 p,m. STAFF PRESENT: Phillip Owens, Fire Prevention Appeal of Ruth Eliason on a Deficiency List for a Certificate of Occupancy for property at '72 Kent Street, Unit 2. The following appeared: Ruth Eliason, 72 Kent Street #2, appellant; and Mary Nuebel, 72 Kent 5treet #1. Phillip Owens, Supervisor, appeazed and reported one of the electrical panels has been broken. The plastic housing around it now exposes some of the energized electrical components inside it, and Fire Prevention has ordered it to be replaced. In addition, it was found that one of the electrical panels has been placed under lock and this panel houses some joint components known as the house wiring. Locking it prevents others from having access to it; therefore, it cannot be locked. Mr. Owens says there are two issues: 1) panels should not be locked so that someone should be able to take care of electrical problems if they need to, 2) the broken electrical main switch in one of the panels be replaced. Ms. Moermond questioned whether or not the plastic door on the panel was broken. Mr. Owens responded that inside their panel, there are a number of switches that control certain electrical circuits. The main, usually at the top, controls all of the energized circuits and that device has the plastic housing that protects against being energized when broken. Basically, the panel is pulled out and replaced with a new one. The electrical inspector wrote the orders and the one that is locked is a sepazate panel. Ruth Eliason stated she is looking for an explanation. She got a letter in the mail that she has to have this fixed in six days. The house has been inspected several times, appraised, and it has been put up for sale. No one ever said that had to be done. They were told it was an anonymous report (compiaint), and they assumed it was the neighbor because when she moved in two years ago, she had an electrician come over to look at the house and said there was something that was dangerous, but electricians that Ms. Eliason knew said that was not true. Sq they were waiting for an explanation as to why this is so dangerous. They have lived here for over six years. The September 27 letter does not say you have to vacate, said Ms. Moermond. Ms. Eliason responded she read it as her leaving the house if she didn't fix it. Ms. Moermond stated it does not matter whether the complaint came from; what matters is whether it is grounded. Ms. Eliason responded that she understands that. October 17, 2006 Property Code Hearing Minutes �(o Page 2 Ms. Moermond questioned Mr. Owens why the housing on the main switch was a dangerous situation. Ms. Owens responded that the electrical panel is generally a metal box that is covered and there are plastic switches inside that control the individual circuits. At the top is a main that comes in from a master power outside the house that controls the whole box. For exampie, if you want to do something in the bedroom, turn off the bedroom circuit. If you have the problem and you need to turn off the entire power, then you pull out the main. The main is enclosed in a plastic housing, except for the electrical component on the back. This plastic housing is broken or damaged to such an extent that it had exposed the energized metallic electrical component inside and someone could be electrocuted by it. There aze a number of possible scenarios to a11ow the panel to become energized or for someone to come into contact with energized equipment. It is designed to be protected by the plastic, the plastic is broken, and it is an energized hazard. Ms. Eliason asked what the main switch is for. Mr. Owens responded it turns the electricity off altogether. Ms. Eliason asked what situation would require that (for the electricity to be turned of�. Mr. Owens responded a problem with the electrical, a fire in the house where the firefighters would like to disconnect it, someone working on it, and others needing to be protected from the energized electrical material. That is the reason it is in the plastic housing. Ms. Moermond questioned if the plastic housing is required in the Minnesota Electrical Code. Mr. Owens answered absolutely. It is damaged, and it needs to be replaced. Ms. Eliason stated that the insurance man inspected the fuse box because of the age of the house and said it was okay. Mr. Owens responded there are private inspectors that look at things for a variety of reasons. The insurance man is looking at it to see if he wants to take the liability of insuring the dwelling. The truth-in-housing inspector is trying to see if the owner minimally meets the requirements that the City has for selling the property. The financial investigator decides if he wants to take the liability of refinancing the home. The City's electrical inspector is a law enforcement officer. She is there only to protect hazazds and require that they be prepared for the owner's protection. Ms. Eliason responded she understands. Ms. Moermond asked how many units aze in this structure. Ms. Eliason responded there were two units. Ms. Moermond asked if the door on the service panels was the same one or a different one. Ms. Eliason responded she has no idea. Mr. Owens responded it is his understanding that it is a separate one, but he has not been at the premises. Ms. Eliason replied she had only seen one breaker box downstairs, but she is not in the basement a lot. Mr. Owens stated the door had been locked and, in this particular panel, some of the common wiring connects to that box. Anyone who needed to access it for joint tenancy reasons could not get in the box. October 17, 2006 Property Code Hearing Minutes oc�-,�ti� Page Mary Nuebel, 72 Kent Street #1, stated that she is glad the house got inspected. The house has two circuit breakers. This was a 1910 house that was condo-ized in the 1980's. She purchased her unit in February 2004 and could not get it insured unless an update was done on the electricai in her 60 amp unit. So, an electrical contractor was employed to upgrade her electric pane1. During this several week process, many circuits were found that were in that fuse box that belonged to Unit #1. The electrician was paid to have the circuits put in the fuse box that belonged to Unit # 1. Ms. Neubel discovered over this time that the front entryway was in her fuse box; therefore, she asked Ms. Eliason to not have their lights on all of the time. She travels a lot for business. Each time she goes, it is reported by her neighbors that the lights are on all the time. The last time she went on a trip, she shut that circuit off and locked her box because someone has been messing with her circuits. She has noticed electrical items flashing. There is a restraining order on Ms. Eliason's partner. It has been a difficult living situation. This could be a fire hazard and she is scazed. She would like their electrician to take that circuit out of their box. She came home from a trip and the electrical box was broken into. She called the police, they came, and they talked about electrical boxes. She then asked for an inspector to come and that is how this ensued. There is a lot wrong with this place. Her electrician showed both of them and said that they have to keep the door shut because it could burn down the whole thing. That door is held open all the time by her partner. She is scared and that is why she is here. She would like to see it fixed. Ms. Moermond stated that she cannot engage all the issues in play here. The electrical box has to be fixed and the box must remain unlocked. Ms. Neubel stated she would like to lock the box so that her things are not flicked off and on. That is the only reason there is a lock on the back. Mr. Owens stated that locking a proprietary box that only has Ms. Nuebel's things in it is not a problem. Most boxes are affixed with a lock. Some have a little latch. Larger residential and commercial boxes are designed to be locked. Although he is dumbfounded by all the issues involved here, he can only address the ones that are code violations. The master switch has to be replaced. The panel cannot be locked as long as the joint or house lights are on one circuit. They cannot turn off the hallway lights during hours of darkness because the law requires that the hallway lights cannot be turned of£ From a law standpoint is to separate the circuits and have a third box for joint tenancy. Also, they can put a timer on the hallway lights where they only come on during the hours of dazkness. Ms. Moermond asked about a motion detector on the interior light. Mr. Owens answered that he would have to look to see if that complies. The Electrical Code only talks about an x-number of foot candles inside and outside the exit; a porch light, and an interior landing light during the hours of dazkness. A motion detector would work for that, but it would also turn on during day hours. Having it in a house box with a timer would be the best thing, but the code can't require that. Ms. Moermond stated the motion detector with a timer is something to consider. There needs to be interior and exterior lighting so exiting and entering the house is safe. Ms. Eliason stated she is willing to get an electrician to come fix the electrical box and move the circuitry for privacy. She appreciates the fact that the electrician did ali that. The house was October 17, 2006 Property Code Hearing Minutes C�lo Page 4 puzzled apart so to have something common is understandable. When she moved in, that is the way it was, and Ms. Neubel made lots of changes that have been beneficial for all of them. The lights are not kept on 24 hours; it is turned on at night for safety purposes. Ms. Eliason is willing to pay for that. It would be good to have it common for the house. There is no way to do that in the facility that they aze in. They don't get along and there is a restraining order so that there is no contact between the two of them, which works. They would like to keep it in play. This situation needs to be explained to her before anyone is hired and she is asking for a reasonable length of time to get it fixed and how she would verify that with the court. Ms. Moermond stated she is comfortable giving a month to get it done. Ms. Nuebel can go in today to get it scheduled or call Fire Prevention to get it scheduled, said Ms. Moermond. With respect to the electrical box, it needs to be unlocked as long as there is a common circuit. If there is not a common circuit, they can go with locking it and that is fine. It sounds like basic energy conservation things like using a time or motion detector for the common areas to minimize cost to whoever. Mr. Owens stated 30 days is okay. Their inspector will take care of that. Inspector Schlichte will contact the property owners after thirty days to arrange for the inspection. Nothing will be gained if the house lights are taken out of the one electrical box and put in the other electrical box because they are being taken out of one unit and into Unit 2. They have not gained anything. If they are going to do it, it needs to be a third box. Ms. Nuebel stated the difficulty is that it is connected to other things in tk�e other tenanYs unit, not anything in hers. Mr. Owens asked if it was connected to Ms. Eliason's household circuits. Ms. Eliason responded that when the circuit breaker was off, her bedroom clock and her hallway light was off. She said she would make sure the front light is controlled by her household to feel safer. Ms. Nuebel stated that she has paid for it for two years and Ms. Eliason can pay for it for the next two years. After that point, they can decide how they will pay for it. The expense is minimal, said Mr. Owens, if there is one light. If there are other circuits in her night, it would be most financial expedient to put it in Ms. Nuebel's box. She may continue to lock it as long as there are no house circuits in it. As long as she has control of the house circuit, it cannot be turned off or put on a timer or some other device that makes it come on during the hours of darkness. The law requires that the entry way be illuminated both inside and on the porch. (Note: 1196 Seventh Street East was the next item on the agenda; however, it is included in another set of minutes.) The heazing was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. �3'�t.`[L�i