Loading...
07-1176Council File # -'/�7� Green Sheet # `3�� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA ADDRESS 906 Thomas Avenue Decision: Appeal denied Adopted by Council: Date �a�j y Adoption Certified by Cout eil Secretary B � Approved by Date Z p By ' � � APELLANT James McNeal Requested by Department o£ � Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayox for Submission to Council sy: a► BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul, based on a review of the legislative hearing record and testimony heazd at public hearing on November 21, 2007 hereby memorializes its decision to certify and approve the November 6, 2007 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer for the following address: � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � o�-lr�� y Dep ;co -Counoa Contact Person 8 Phone: Marcia Mcetmond 2668570 Must Be on Council Agenda by Doc.Type: RESOLUTION E-DOCUment Required: Y Document Contad: Mai Vang ConWct Phone: 266-8563 2�-NO�-07 I Green Sheet NO: 3046671 y �e�a,.,. 0 ouncil ASSign 1 ooncil De arhnentDirector Number 2 i Clerk CitvClerk For Routing 3 Order 4 5 Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip Ali Locations for Signature) Resolution memorializing City Council action taken November 21, 2007 denying the appea] for property at 906 Thomas Averme, per the recommendation of [he Legislative Hearing Officer. idations: Approve (A) or R Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Contmcts Must Answer the 1. Has this person/frm ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2 Has this personffirm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person/frm possess a skill not normally 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): Advantages If Approved: DisadvanWges If Approved: Disadvantages Ifi Not Approved: Trensaction: Funtling Source: Financia� ��formation: (Explain) CosVRevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: November 27, 2007 9:40 AM Page 1 ��� �_. _ ,,,, _, �� iielt�(IIIIOi sE 5 � w ��\' - �-n� October 31, 2007 James McNeal 924 Central Ave. W. St. Paul, MN 55104 CITY OF SAINT PAUL CITY CLERK'S OFFICE RE: appeal for 906 Thomas Ave. Dear Mr. McNeal: Your application for an appeal has been received and processed. V � //� V Please attend the public hearing before the Legislative Hearing Officer on Tuesday, November 6, 2007 at 11:00 a.m. in Room 330 City Hall and Courthouse to consider your appeai concerning the above referenced property. At that time the Legislative Hearing Officer will hear all parties relative to this action. Failure to appear at the hearing may result in denial of your appeal. Sincerely, ������ �✓���� Shari Moore �� City Clerk cc. Rich Singerhouse, Supervisor Mike Kaiis, DSf — Code Enforcement Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer 15 4VEST KELLOGG BOULEVARD, SUITE 310 SAINT PAUf, MINNESOTA55102 Tel: 651-266-8688 Fax:651-266-8574 wcvw.stpaul.gov AA-ADA-EEO Employer 67 //� (p APPLICATION FOR APPEAL Saint Paul City Clerk 1� W. Kellogg Blvd., 310 CiTy Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 5� 102 Telephone:(6�1) 266-8688 I. Address of Property being Appealed: 2. Number of Dwelling Units: 3. Date of I.etter Appealed: q�c� r��� Jo�aa-o � 4. Name of Owner: JC�.NVt2 S R V 1� Y �PLU Address: `1 �� �'P�� �Ci� S'F State: Zip: �.71(� y Phone Numbers: Business Residence c���1 ' l� 7� Cellular S. Appellant / Applicant (if other than owner): Phone Numbers: Business City: Residence , ���� Zip: Cellulaz 6 State specifically what is being appealed and why (Use an attachment if necessary): NOTE: A$25.00 filing fee made payable ro the City of Saint Paul must accompany this application as a necessary condition for filing. You must attach a copy of the original orders and any other correspondence relative to this appeal. Any pezso� unsadsfied hy the final decision of the City Council may obtain judicia] review by umely filing of an action as pro�ided by law in District Court. For Office Use Only Received: Fee Received: Receipt Number: Date of Hearin;: NOV-01-2007 08�52 NHPI INSPECT�RS CTT'Y OF $AIN'I' PAUL DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY Al�tb R�TSPECFIONS DTVISION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT 1600 White Beat Aveaue D .�,(�. 7 � Saint Paul, NL�T 55106 SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDER 6512661919 P.03iO3 October 22 2007 tnsp�cc�ri�o Dace Date Ma;t Maited B (init) 1'og hais tias koj hais lus Hmoob thiab koj tsis to tauh tsab ntawv no, hu rau Cus trhais lus ntawin (651) 266-1418. Nws yog pab dawb zwb. Si usted hahLs el Fspanol y no cntiende esta nota, llama (G51)266-6008 para un �aductor. No costo. James McNeal 406 Thomas Ave St Paul MIv' S5104-2630 As owner or persou(s) responsible for: 906 THOMAS AVE you are hereby ordered to eliminate all nufsance condilions which are im violation of CLapter 45 of Saint Paul Legislative Code_ � Remove impraperly stored or accumulated refuse including: garbage, rubbish, discarded furniture, appliances, veLicle parts, scrap wood and metal, reeycling materials, household items, building materials or rubbie, tires, brusL, etc., from yard areas.(DEBRIS'[�IRU-OTJT YARD, TOYS) � Cuf and remove tal! grass, weeds sud rank plarit growth. —1 - - Remove and properly disPose of all anima! feces from yard areas. IMMEDIATELY secare all buildings whieh are open to unauthorized entry, inctnding: Other: If you do not coaeet the nuisauce or file an appea] before October 31, 2007, t[�e City will eorrcct ffie nuisanee and charge a11 �asts, including boardixlg costs, against the property as a speeial assessment to be eollected in tlie same way as propecty t¢xes. �har�es: If the City corrects the nuisance, tlie charges will include the cost of correction, inspection, travel time, equipment, etc. The rate will be approximately $260.00 per hour plus expc�ses for abatemenk Yau must maintain the premises in a clean condition and provide proper and adeqnate refuse storage at a11 times FAILURE TO COMPLY MAy RESULT IN A CRIMINAL CITA TION Issued by:Mike Kalis Badge Number 362 Phone Number 651-166-I929 If you have any questions about this nrder, the requlrements or the deadline, you shonld contact the Inspector listed above, Monday through Friday. e 1s: irou may appea� il�fs order Und obtain a henr4ng bcfore the City Council by dcadime noud abovo ar sevcn (7) days after �l,c dau mailed, whichev� comes fi�sc �lEplieution frnm [he C'tv Clcrk' OffCe Aonm 4I0 C� Hall. SL Peul. MN 55,�,102. CnTT�ciion Order with vo a e,�J�ypl"c Hon. apPliption wjth "k'_ ARrv� � Cado inspcction nnd cnforcemeni trips cost [he rsxpayers money. If ihe vioiations arc not carrcctcd within the time perioci rrquired in thie notice, the ciry�s costs m conducnng a reinspecdon aftcr thc dve date for compiiance wii3 bc colIected from the owncnattier ffiun bci�g psid 6y the taxp�yaa of the ciry- [f additiona� ncw violaGons arc discovcred wit]»n the nezt following 12 months, the eiry's costs in eo�ucting ndclitional inspections az 8�is same locaeion within such i 2 months wiii be coilecied from the oimcr rather than bcing pajd by the rsxpayers of the ciry. My such fuNre cosrs wi�� be colix�ed vy R4sessment agejngt tl�e ren! property and azy in addirion tu any other Cnes or assessmcnt� which may b� j�hed againsc yc�u and your propeay. sa60158 f0/07 TOTRL P.03 November 6, 2007 Legislative Hearing Minutes Page 5 �� ���7�D 3. Appeai of James McNeal to a Summary Abatement Order for property at 906 Thomas Avenue. Mr. Magner stated he believed the owner was appealing the vacant building status in addition to the summary abatement order. He was unsure, however, since the application didn't indicate what they were appealing. He believed they were appealing the summary abatement order because the boxes were not checked as to what correction needed to be done. The order that he had, indicated the following: remove improperly stored or accuxnulated refuse including gazbage, rubbish, discarded fumiture, appiiances, vehicle parts, scrap wood and metal, recycling materials, household items, building materials or rubble, tires, brush, etc., from the yard, as well at to cut tall grass and weeds. On the issue of why it was a vacant building, they had received a condemnation dated July 31, 2007 with a vacate date of August 3, 2007 for lack of electricity at the property. This property was then referred to vacant buildings by inspector Kelly Booker. The inspector went out the property and found a two-story, wood framed, single-family dwelling to be vacant, unsecured, front and back doors were open. In addition to the electricity being turned off, the water was also turned off. The exterior had multiple code violations, windows, siding, the foundation, trash in yard, and interior also had trash all over. At that time, a summary abatement was issued to secure the building and a work order was sent to Parks to clean the yard and to mow the lawn. As to this summary abatement order which was being appealed, the inspector re-inspected the property on November 1 and found the yard had been cleaned up and the grass was cut. At this time the summary abatement was moot. The appellant did not appear. Ms. Moermond stated that they may have intended to appeal the vacant building status; however, nothing was attached to the appeal to indicate this, so she would not make a recommendation on the vacant building status. She also recommended denying the appeal on the suimnary abatement order.