Loading...
07-835Council File # ��S'J " Green Sheet # �( „�'� RESOLUTION CITY OF SA1NT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented �� 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the August 2 21, 200'7 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Letters for the following address: 4 Property Ap ep aled 5 6 1461 Dale Street North 7 Apnellant Andrew Hybben 8 Aecision: Grant a six (6) month waiver on the Registered Vacant Building Fee and deny the appeal on the 9 Code Compliance Inspecrion Report for items 3, 4, 7 and 101isted under Plumbing. 10 Requested by Department of: AdoptedbyCouncil: Date ���fJ Adoprion Certified by Counci Secretary By . , B Aypxovedb,y�yo�� �� l�j t lA.t � Form Approved by CiTy Attorney By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council � � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � (71''g� co ��� CoMad Person & Phone: Marcia Mcermond 6-8570 Must Be on Council Agen Doc. Type: RESOLUTION E-Document Required: Y DocumentContact: Vicki Conpd Phone: &8561 OS-SEP-07 � Assign Number For Routing Order Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for SignaWre) Green Sheet NO: 3043613 0 aacil 1 iComcil Deo�entDirec[or 2 �ity Clerk l CYtv Clerk 3 4 5 Resolution approving the decision of the Legislarive Hearing Officer on Appeal of Letters for 1461 Date Street North. ioanons: Hpprove �q� or rt Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission 1. Has this person�ttn ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has Nis persoNfirm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this personlfirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separaSe sheet and aitach to green sheet Initiating Prob{em, Issues, Opportunity (Who, Wfiat, When, Where, Why): Advantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Not Approved: Transaction: Funding Source: Financial fnformation: (EUplain) Activity Number: Cosf/Revenue Budgeted: Sepfember 5, 2007 9:05 AM Page 1 August 21, 2007 Legislative Aearing Minutes ��� p�j � Page 10 3. Appeal of Andrew Hybben to a Vacant Building Registration Notice and Vacant Building Registration Fee for properiy at 1461 Dale Street North. Andrew Hybben, property owner, stated that the tenants were evicted and the sheriff had to remove them on July 2, 2007. They unmediately hired someone to paint the interior as the inside of the house was a complete mess. On July 11, he went to the property and discovered a vacant building placazd had been placed on the house. On 7uly 14, the side door had been kicked in which he had to replace and he asserted was because of the vacant building sign on the outside of the house. He was appealing the vacant building status because they were cleaning and fixing up the house in attempt to rent it out again. He had orders that had been issued by "Lisa" which he presented to Nis. Moermond. Ms. Moermond asked how many people were living at the property. Mr. Hybben responded that there were three people on the lease, however, he was unsure as to how many people actually lived there. Mr. Magner stated that the information he had was Fire Prevention inspected the property in May, 2007 and issued a Certificate of Occupancy with deficiencies. The property was re-inspected on July 18 and the C of O was revoked. At that time, a vacant building file was opened as a category II building and a vacant building registration notice was sent to the owner. As a result, a code compliance inspection was necessary to make sure all of the repairs were made and the building be brought up to code. The inspection was done on July 27 which identified a number of violations which needed to be addressed and a re-inspecrion would be required for the code compliance inspection to be signed offbefore the C of O could be re-issued. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Hybben how long he had owned the property. Mr. Hybben responded that he had owned the property approximately 15 years. The property had been kept up untii the most recent tenants had done a significant amount of damage but he had cleaned it up and believed it was now in good condition. He did not believe the building should have been listed as a vacant building. Mr. Hybben presented a copy of the code compliance report which indicated the items that he had completed. Ms. Moermond stated that in reviewing the list, it appeared that they had accomplished a lot of the items on the list. Mr. Hybben stated that there were several items on the list that were cited as needing repair such as the height of the basement steps, the sink was too close to the toilet, etc. were items that they didn't believe they could repair as this was the way the house was built back in the 1930's and did not conform to today's code standards. Ms. Moermond asked whether there were items on the list that they were concerned about due to the expense of the repair. Mr. Hybben stated that the items that he had the most concern with were replacing the widows in the basement, the toilet, raise the water meter, provide a 24 inch clearance in the front of water closet (item #4 under Building; items 3, 4, 7 and 10 under Plumbing). He stated that the electrical had been taken care of and that he had looked at the water pipes and could not find anything that needed repair or replacement. He also did not understand the order on the waste being incorrect in the kitchen sink. Everytlung else on the list was either taken care of or they were going to take care of the repairs. Ms. Moermond stated that the building was obviously vacant and the issues were the fees and when the building could be re-occupied. Mr. Magner stated that it was his understanding that the vacant building registration form had not been filled out and the vacant building fees had not been paid. August 21, 2007 Legislative Hearing Minutes � 7' O 3 J i l Ms. Moermond stated that she would require Mr. Hybben to fill out the vacant buiiding registration form. She also recommended waiving the vacant building fee for six months. Regarding the items on the list that Mr. Hybben was concerned about bringing into compliance, she stated that in some instances she was able to grant a waiver, however, she would need to talk to the inspector who did the code compliance inspection and possibly talk to the City Attorney's Office on whether she would be able to grant waivers on certain items. She asked Mr. Hybben when he believed he would have the building repaired for re-occupancy. Mr. Hybben stated that they wanted to get the work completed as quickly as possible to rent out again. Ms. Moermond stated that she would also discuss with the inspector whether there were any life/safery violations that they were concerned about. She continued the hearing to August 28, 2007. Ma Moermond stated that she received a message from 7im Seeger, DSI-Licensing, on September 4, 2007. Mr. Seeger indicated that that all items listed, specifically under plumbing, were critical and needed to be brought into compliance. To date, the owner has not pulled any permits which will need to be done before the building can be re-inspected, signed off and can be re-occupied.