Loading...
07-135Council File # Q 7 Green Sheet # 3036836 RESOLUTION O.F SA1NT PAUL, MIPINESOTA �� Presented by 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the January 2 2, 2007, decisions of the Legislafive Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters, Conection Notices, and 3 Correction Orders for the following addresses: 4 5 Propertv Appealed 6 Appellant 2065 Randolph Avenue Brad Schlaeger, owner Decision: Regazding the Deficiency List dated December 5, 2006, the compliance date is changed to July 2, 2007. 10 11 12 13 14 15 824 Fremont Avenue Parke Schilling, owner Decision: Regarding the Correction Notice dated December 14, 2006: Item 1, Sanitation — the appeal is denied and an extension is granted to February 2, 2007; Item 2, Vehicles — the appeal is denied and an extension is granted to March 2, 2007; Item 3, Vehicles, boats, trailers on unapproved parking surface — the appeal is granted as there is an 16 approved site plan from 1995. Yeas Nays Absent Benanav ;/ Bostrom � Harris � Helgen � Lantry � Montgomery � Thune � 7 � � Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attomey � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council Adopted by Council: Date ��/�j/d� By: Adoption Certified by Co cil Secretary BY --.��//lsl/f,- �'C!�!z�i� B Ayproved y a . � Date: �� � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �7 ��� co ����� Contact Person 8 Phone: Marcia Mcertnond 266-8570 Must Be on Louneil Aaen Doc. Type: RESOLUTfON E-Document Required: N Document Contact: Racquel Naylor Conqct Phone: 266-8573 07-FEB-07 � Assign Number For Routing Order ToWI # of Signature Pages _{Clip Al{ Locations for Sgnature) Green Sheet NO: 3036836 0 onnca 1 ounct7 De artment D"vector 2 ' C1erk 3 4 5 Approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Off'icer on appeals of a Corzetion Nolice at 824 Fremorn Avenue and a Deficiency List at 2065 Randolph Avenue. Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Se[vice Cammission 1. Has lhis personffirm ever worked under a contract for this depadment? Yes No 2.�Has this personlfirm ever beea a city empbyee? Yes No . 3. Does this personffirm possess a skill not normally possessed by a�y curre�t city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, 15sues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Advantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Not Approved: Trensaction: Funding Source: Financial Information: (ESplain) Activity Number. CostlRevenue Butlgeted: February 7, 2007 138 PM Page 1 07 �3s MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTION NOTICES AND CORRECTION ORDERS Tuesday, December 19, 2006 Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Blvd. Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:35 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Kelly Booker, Neighborhood Aousing and Property Improvement (NHPI); Jim Gangl, License, Inspections, Environmental Protection (LIEP); Philip Owens, Division of Fire Prevention Appeal of Brad Schlaeger to a Certificate of Occupancy with Deficiencies for property at 2065 Randolph Avenue. (Fire Prevention) Brad Schlaeger, owner, appeared. (Mr. Owens submitted photographs and a copy of the Fire Code to Ms. Moermond.) Philip Owens appeared and reported that this is a salon that has decorative lighting on the trees that surround the properiy on two sides. There are electrical code violations that the inspector has ordered corrected. He has photographs of the area. Photo 1 shows the underside of the sign and shows the electrical extension cords that are used to supply energy to the trees. Photo 2 shows how those cords terminate to plug into outiets. Photos 3 and 4 show the multi-plug adapters and how the tree lights are plugged into multi-ternunal adaptors. Photos 5 and 6 show the multi-tap terminus of the extension cords. There is a green module duct taped to the tree that is the terminus of the electrical cord where the decorative holiday lights are plugged into a module on the tree. The other photos show where the cards come through the tree branches and go from tree to tree. The final two are showing the front of the building where the electrical cord is wrapped over the existing cable or a strain relief. Another photo shows the cords plugged into the yellow side of the building. Mr. Schlaeger added it was strain relief. Mr. Schlaeger stated that he went to a business association in Minneapolis to look at how they did their holiday lighting. Also, his business was on the front page of the Pioneer Press yesterday (December 18). He spent $3,200 and bought the best of everything. The cords are'/< inch. There are support cables, fuse boxes, GFI units. Jim is the electrical inspector. Jim Gangl, Electrical Inspector, reported that he went to look at it. He thought there was holiday lighting with ground fault protection, so he did not see that there was a shock hazard to an}�one. The code clearly permits extension cord wiring as part of temporary wiring for holiday lighting. When he realized it was permanent wiring, the code does not permit extension cords as a permanent wiring system. It is not sunlight resistant and can deteriorate. If it is permanent, it is clearly a violation. If it is temporary for the holiday, it looks very good. Mr. Schlaeger responded that this is not what they were debating here. He just wanted a comment on the GFI. Mr. Gangl stated that he does not believe it is a shock hazard because it is ground by a detector. 0 7 /.3� LEGISLATIVE HEAIZING MINIJTES OF DECEMBER 19, 2006 Page 2 Mr. Owens asked was there a permit for this work. Mr. Gangl responded that the owner is supposed to be getting one. Mr. Owens stated that this goes right to the point of the issue. If it were holiday lighting, there are a couple of things they might suggest; however, the appellant has made the inspector believe that it is a permanent display; therefore, the power taps, extension cords, lights would not be permitted by the code for more than 90 days in addition with the lTL lisring for the lights. It is popular to do: decorate trees and leave them there far beyond the holiday period. What the Fire Marshall has pernutted in the past is that they can extend beyond the 90 day period as long as they have a hard-wired system. There are a couple of them Downtown along Wabasha. There is one similar by Minnesota Street and Seventh Street around the parking area: the individual underground electrical boxes have been run up to each tree. It is a weather resistant box with covers on it. Then, the lights are plugged into that box. As the lights deteriorate, they are replaced; there is not the hazard of all the cords, duct tape, and non-weather resistant outlets. Ms. Moermond asked will the cords be replaced every year. The code says, responded Mr. Owens, that the extension cord cannot be used for more than 90 days. The multi-plug adaptors, extension cords, and flexible cords are not a substitute for permanent wiring. Extension cords need to be plugged into an approved receptacle. They have taken care of some of the grounding issues with the GFCL Temporary wiring for electricai power and lighting installations are allowed for 90 days. Some of the code pages labeled "Electrical" are the requirements of the Electrical Code, some of which mirror the Fire Code. In the past, the Fire Marshall has approved installation of these decorative lights for no more than 90 days as long as they are plugged into outlets and not extension cords. Mr. Schlaeger stated that he told the inspector that he is looking at this being done for the whole year. He is not negating any of that. He has been doing his own lights for five years in a row. This time, he spent $3,200 and got the best. He has been getting positive [feedback] from the neighborhood. Also, he does not have the money to take them down at this moment. The inspector went through the building. To do the hard wiring, the electrician said it would be $3,000 to $5,000 because there is trench digging, going through the sidewalk, and putting ouflets to the base of the trees. Mr. Schlaeger cannot afford to do it right now. Mr. Owens stated that he understands that the owner spent a great deal of money. It is aesthetically pleasing and they are willing to go for 120 days. That would get him into construction season where he can hire qualified electrical contractors to secure the proper permits and to place the outlets at the base of the tree. If he elects not to, that also gives him warm weather to take down what he has put up. He already has the 90 days. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Gangl is this $3,000 to $5,000 to do this. Mr. Gangl responded he hates to put an estimate because what one contractor will do for $3,QQ0, somebody else will do for $1,540 and another for $6,000. The winter will cost more. Ms. Moermond asked when the lighting system was installed. Mr. Schlaeger responded two to three weeks. He would rather have a complete variance on the issue. He is a small business and operates on a 10% profit margin. 07 LEGISLATIVE AEARING MINiJTE5 OF DECEMBER 19, 2006 Page 3 Ms. Moermond asked has he worked with the district council to see if there is money available to work with this. Mr. Schlaeger responded he called the Highland Business Association, Councilmember Aarris, and his assistant John Marshall. The Highland Business Association said they did not have money for that. Ms. Moermond stated she has no problem with 120 days. This is not Mr. Schlaeger's fault. She knows he has to pay for new strands of lights every year, to which Mr. Schlaeger responded that this might not be the case with LED lights. Ms. Moermond responded they are talking about the cord deterioration. Mr. Gangl added that squirrels can chew the insulation off of it. Ms. Moermond stated she will give 120 days, but will lay over the matter for two weeks. She will call Planning and Economic Development (PED) to find funds in the meantime to get him through this. This is a decent improvement on a public street. She does not want the appeilant to suffer financial hardship, but she has to be worried first about the public safety and then about the aesthetic. This matter was laid over to the January 2, 2007 Legislative Hearing. 07 /3s MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS, ABATEMENT ORDERS, RENTAL REVOCATION CERTIFICATES Tuesday, January 2, 2007 Room 330 City Hall, I S Kellogg Boulevard West Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was cailed to order at 1:40 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Phillip Owens, Division of Fire Prevention Appeal of Brad Schlaeger to a Certificate of Occupancy with Deficiencies for property at 2065 Randolah Avenue. (Fire Prevention) (Laid over from December 19) Ms. Moermond stated that the owner came to the conclusion that he wanted to get this permanently rewired. Ms. Moermond talked to the Highland Business Association and had a conversation with Councilmember Harris about this. He has a little discretionary money for neighborhood improvements, and he would be wi]ling to help out. Mr. Schlaeger would have to demonstrate that his neighbors support having this be permanent lighting. Ms. Moermond is looking for signatures from the neighbors that they would support the installation of this permanent lighting, so that Mr. Hanis has some assurance that this would not be something the neighbors would object to. Mr. Schlaeger asked for the guidelines. Ms. Moermond responded he would need 100% of the adjacent property owners, and 75 to 90% of the other neighbors. She would be comfortable giving him 90 days to do that. She is most concerned about those that are immediately impacted by lights being on. There may have conditions, such as turning it off at a particular time. Mr. Schlaeger responded that would not be a problem. Mr. Owens stated that this property sits on the corner. College of St. Kate's is on one comer, another corner has a building that houses a restaurant among other things, and Luci's is on another corner. Mr. Owens suggests getting signatures from the house next to him, property owners across the street, St. Kate's, and the houses behind him. Also, the owner needs to comply with the electrical violations. Ms. Moermond responded that they will get the money for that. She is comfortable saying 120 days from today. Once that is all squared away, the situation needs to be code compliant. Mr. Owens stated it wiil be 120 days to do the whole thing. That will get tt�em to nonfreezing weather because there will be underground work. Mr. Schlaeger asked what he should do when he has the petition. Ms. Moermond responded that he should contact her, and she will work with Mr. Harris' office on this issue. Mr. Owens stated he will change the compliance date to 120 days from today. The owner should make sure the contractor gets a permit next time. That would have alleviated a lot of this. In summary, Ms. Moermond changed the compliance date to July 2, 2007 on the following condition: owner should give Ms. Moermond a petition showing that the adjacent neighbors are okay with this lighting being permanent. (The recess was taken for a few minutes at 1:40 p.m.)