The URL can be used to link to this page

08-526Council File # d� ��{p AMENDED 5/21/0$ Green Sheet # 3053537 � SOLUTION OF SAI T PAUL, MINNESOTA a� Presented by �� 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Pa�l based on a review of the legislative 2 hearin record and testimon heard at ublic hearin on Ma � g y p g y 2008 hereby memorializes its decision to 3 certify and approve the Apri124, 2008 decision of the Legislafive Hearing O�cer far the following 4 address: 5 6 ADDRESS APELLANT 7 8 495 Stryker Avenue 9 10 Decision: Appeal denied. Adopted by Council: Date G J� Z� � 0� Adopt ertiS by,�C� ur, il Secretary BY /47 Approv y�a, or: Dab° � 7� By: Floyd Unruh Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � � /a � . co �o�� Contact Person 8 Phone: Marcia Mcermond 68570 Must Be on Council Aaen Doc. Type: RESOLUTION E-Document Required: Y DocumentContact: MaiVang 09-MAY-08 y Assign Number For Routing Order Contact Phone: 68563 I I Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) Green Sheet NO: 3053537 0 ouucil 1 ooncil D¢ artmentDirector 2 Clerk Gy Clerk 3 4 5 ResoluGOn memocializing City Counci] action taken May 7, 2008 denying the appeal for property at 495 Shyker Avenue, per the recommendation of the Legislative Hearing Officer. . ioaoons. Hpprove ��a� or ne�ea �n�: rersonai sernce contrec[s must nnswer tne ronowmg [2uesnons: Planning Commission 7. Has tbis person/firm ever worked under a contrect for this department? CIB Committee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a ciry employee? Yes No 3. Does this personlflrm possess a skill not normaily possessed by any current ciry employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet Inkiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Advantages If Approved: DisadvanWges If Approved: DisadvanWges If NotApproved: Transaction: Funding Source: Financial Information: (Explain) Activity Number: CosURevenue Budgeted: May 9, 2008 10:12 AM Page 1 CITI p MS s i aA` °� • s 6 „�� , �a n1111 April 18, 2008 CITY OF SAII�TT PAUL CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Floyd Unruh 7050 Blaine Avenue Inver Grove Heights. MN 55076 RE: 495 Stryker l,t,nr�.l� Dear Mr. W,,att`ace: Your application for an appeal has been received and processed. VV J ✓ �T Please attend the public hearing before the Legislative Hearing O�cer on Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 330 City Hall and Courthouse to consider your appeal concerning the above referenced property. At that time the Legislative Hearing Officerwill hear all parties relative to this action. Failure to appear at the hearing may result in denial of your appeal. 5incerely, t=� ��_ � Shari Moore City Clerk cc: Mike Urmann, DSI (Fire) Phil Owens, DSI (Fire) Leanna Shaff, DSI (Fire) Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer Jerry Hendrickson, Deputy City Attorney 15 WEST KELLOGG BOULEVARD, SUITE 310 SAINT PAi1L, MINNESOTA55102 Tel: 651-26lt8688 Far.651-2668574 wwwstpaul.gov AA-ADA-EEO Employer APPLICATION FOR APPEAL Saint Paul City Clerk �i� 15 W. Kellogg Blvd., 310 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 �+� Telephone: (651) 266-8688 1. Address of Property being Appealed: 2. Number of Dwellin� Units y9.s �" t� ��f��- 1 b8 r �� 3. Date of Letter Appzaled: �/%�/�� 4. NameofOwner: �'l�d iJ � � �'/ri/�� y�z� "�/ Address: 70�f� t L City: tTr�d� l�f�State: /�6 �� Zip: 559�/ ( /v � / — Phone Numbers: Business /,aS�l— Residence Lf 5'/ G� 7�Cellulaz 3.��/__= Signature: ��<�� ;`�a f�� . Appellant / Applicant (if other than owner): Address: City: State: Zip: Phone Numbers: Business Residence Cellulaz Signature: 6 State specifically what is being appealed and why (Use an attachment if necessary): /��<'�� l/ ��f �� e�� ; �� ., v �i� � �� .�ii s c c ar 1� � t �� G��r� ��c�C t� ; n �� NOTE: A$25.00 filing fee made payable to the City of Saint Paul must accompany this application as a necessary condiuon for filing. You must at[ach a copy of the original orders and any other correspondence relative to this appeal. Any person unsatisfied by the final decision of the City Council may obtain judicial review by timely filing of an acvon as provided by law in District Court. 1"Vl V111tiG VJG Received: I Fee Received: I Receipt Number: Date of Hearing: DEPARTMENT OFSAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Fire Inspection Division Robert Kessler. Director CITY OF SA.�1T' PAUL Chrisropher B. Cofeman, Mnyor Apri19, 2008 /00 Enst 1/"' Street Telephone' 65/-228-6230 SamiPaul.MN55/0/ �� — �i�fj ��;JJ h 7 S,�y� ��',�D� ,�� % 13�b�f /�'��s/�r FLOYD R T_JNRUH 7Q50 BLAINE AVE INVER GROVE HEIGATS MN 55076-2310 RB: 495 STRYKER AVE Ref. # 109330 Dear Property Representative: Your building was inspected Apri19, 200 �n response to a referral. The building was found to be unsafe, unfit for human habifation, a public nuisance, a hazard to the public weifaze or otherwise dangerous to human life. A Condemnation Placard has been posted on the building. The following deficiency list must be completed immediately or the building vacated. � � .._ .. A reinspection wi11 be made an or afte �A ril� 10; 2408: � � r; p� � CONDEMNATION OF THE BUILDING REVOKES THE FIRE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. Failure to complete the corrections may result in a criminal citation. The Saint Paul Legisiative Code requires that no building be occupied without a Fire Certificate of Occupancy. DEFICIENCY LIST 76��. FRONT °ORCH - SPLC 34.D9 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and r.iaintain ±he wir.dow glass. -Where broken and missing. � 2. MAIN FLOOR - SPLC 3410 (7), 34.33 (6} - Repair or replace and maintain the woodwork in an 'k approved manner. �� 3. MAIN FLOOR - MN Stat. 299F.362 - Immediately provide and maintain a smoke detector located outside each sleeping area. t�(�D 4. REAR ENTRY - SPLC 34.09 (2) 3432 (2) - Provide an approved handrail. The top of the handrail must be betv✓een 34 and 38 inches above the treads and run the entire length of the stair. 5. SPLC 34.09 (1) b,c, 34.32 (1) b,c - Provide and maintain all exterior walls free from holes and ��deterioration. All wood exterior unprotected surfaces must be painted or protected from the elements and mazntained in a professional manner free from chipped or peeling paint. -Replace the rotted portions of the wood. Scrape and paint where needed. b � b. SPLC 39_02(c) - Complete and sign Che provided smoke detector affidavit and return it to thas office. �`3�Jr9+7 Q.�n�7. MSFC 605.5 - Discontinue use of extension cords used in lieu ofpermanent wirin�. ��,�� 8. SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and maintain the door in good condition. /� q�� /„ U� `f" 7�,�9. ��10. 3� � �''�` .��, dQ� SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.;2 (;) - Repair and maintain the door latch. SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and maintain the door frame. SPLC 34.09 (3), 3432 (3) - Repair and maintain the window glass. ��, 12. SPLC 3410 (4), 34.33 (3) - Provide a bathroom floor impervious to water. 7 13. MSFC 315.2 - provide and maintain orderly storage of materials. t 14. SPLC 34.23, MSFC 1101 - This occupancy is condemned as unfit for human habitation. This occupancy must not be used until re-inspected and approved by this office. }�yy� 15. SPLC 34.12 (2), 3435 (1) - Repair and maintain all required and supplied equipment in an operative and safe condition. -Thermostat was removed from the wall. 5 16. 6 t� 17. wr , � �..18. MSFC 605.1- All light fixtures shall be maintained with protective globes if originally equipped. SPlC 3410 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair and maintain the walls in an approved manner. SPLC 3410 (7), 3433 (6) - Repair and maintain the ceiling in an approved manner. 19. MSFC 603.7 - Immediately cease using the stove or oven for heating. TENANT HAS BEEN WARNED ON TWO OCCASIONS, NOT TO USE OVEN FOR HEAT. lF THIS CONTTNUES, A CRIMINAL CITATION WILL BE ISSUED. ] 0. SPLC 34.11 (6), 3434 (3) - Provide service of heating facility by a licensed contractor which must .C� �clude a carbon monoxide test. Submit a completed copy of the Saint Paul Fire Marshal's Existing Fuel Burning Equipment Safety Test Report to this office. ( 21. MN Rules 1300.0180 - Immediately discontinue use of unsafe heating appliance until repaired or replaced by a licensed conira�tor. This work may require a pe*_mit(s). r'all BSI at (651) 265-9�J90. Imr.iedia.ely repair the boilex. � 22. b � r�23. rY'wl�24. �� UMC 1346.703 - Provide 30 inches cleazance around all mechanical equipment. SPLC 34.Q9 (3} i- Repair and maintain an approved one-inch throw single cylinder deadbolt lock. SPLC 39.02(c) - Complete and sign the provided smoke detector affidavit and return it to this office. DIVLSION OF O EMENT � �/� 1600 White Bear Avenue Saint Panl, MN 55106 SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDER Yog hais tias koj hais lus FImoob t]uab koj tsis to taub zsab ntawv no, hu rau tus L-thais lus ntawm (651) 266-8989. Nws yog pab dawb zwb. Si usted 1�abla el Espanol y no endende esta nota, llama (651)266-8989 paza un traductor. No costo. TO:�`�� R, �(�y'FN� L a UNd�.Yti� TO: ?O S(? �iLfTi/J� �}t4� .T'ar Vi� C^�Al� i�E/6� MeS >St�7lo- 2310 As owner or person(s) responsible for: y�! �'`�J��(L� �E'S you are hereby ordered to eliminate all nuisance condilions which are in violation of Chapter 45 of Saint Paul Legislative Code. � Remove improperly stored or accuwulated refuse including: garbage, rubbish, discarded furniture, appliances, vehicle parfs, scrap wood and metal, recycliug materials, household items, building materials or rubble, tires, brush, etc, from yard areas. — ❑ Cut and remove tall grass, weeds and rank plant ❑ Remove and properly dispose of all aniwal feces from yard � IMMEDIAT'ELY secure all buitdings wluch are open to unauthorized entry, including: � k?�-`"� !v'�S .A�Nt7 WIN�t.� f� ��GY,6"� �397 cr's�� ❑ Other: If you do not correct the nuisance or file an appeal before y' �� , the City will correct the nuisance and chazge all costs, including boazding costs, against the properry as a special assessment to be collected in ffie same way as properry taYes. Charees: If the City cosects the nuisance, the chazges will include the cost of correction, inspection, travel time, equipment, etc. The rate will be approumately $260.00 per hour plus expenses for abatement. You must maintain the premises in a clean condition and provide proper and adequate refuse storage at all times FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN A CRIlVIINAL CITATION Issued by: _� c��`� Badge Number ��z Phone Number (65I ) Z�� J�C3 If you have any questions about this order, the requirements or the deadline, you should contact the Inspector listed above, Monday through Friday ° Aooeals You may appeal tlils order and obtain a hearmg before the CiTy Council by completing ari appeal application with the Clry Clerk before the appeal dearlline noted above or seven (7) days after the date mailed, wfuchever comes fust. N�oeais may be filed after that dat You av obtain an aooeal aoolicalion fin the CiN Clerk' Offic Roo 310 CiNH 71 S[ Paul. MN 55102 Th teleohone num6er is (6511266-8685 You must ubmit a ooy f th's O der with yo anp al anvli tlo . °WARN7NG Code inspection and enforcement trips cost the t�payers money. If the viola5ons aze not cottected widtin the time period requued in this nohce, the city's costs in conduceng a reinspecuon after the due date for compliance wIll be collected firom the owner rather than being paid by the tazpayers of ihe ciry. If addifional new violations aze discovered within the next following 12 months, the city's costs in conducIlng additiopal inspeclions at ttus same loca[ion witrun such 12 months will be collectedfinm the ownerratherthan being paid by the L�epayecs of the ciry. Any such futuie costs vri{Ibe colleciedby assessmwt againsTthe ceal pioperry and aze �n addition to any other fines oz assessments wlrichmay he]ened against you and your property.(10/07) / / +� i File Data Search Edit Actions Reportr Window Help - — - - - -- —_- - _ _ -- — - ----- ------- — ------- — — - — � � �� x T � c� � � A-* � � � � ■ � qr•e Updatc MarkAll 6eletc Pi�h httept Retricve �ctal Ruery Exit togOff Ta��oli:t Rcport; Faldcr Pwperty People folder � propeny � PeoQle � info � FeefCha�ge � Pmcess � Oucumem F Cammem � Folder# Ref 2fJ0704b4S8C5000RF 709330 2007 911580 000 00 RF �200712P,039 000 00 CO 109330 �200J 141890 000 06 CD 109;30 `2007144373 CS000 RF 109330 �2005 G15400 D00 OQ CO 109330 �2008 075401 000 00 CO 10A330 2008 015402 000 00 R F 109330 Cen. Yc Sequence 3ec Rev T, umber' 20 ( 08 � 055087 � CSO 00 RF Status Indioators House Prefix Street Type pirection llnit Type Unrt 5 STRYKER UE �� Uiulatioos �J Crty Zp Code PIN Property Row ID Prapedies � ST PAUL 5107-2858 72822110162 181,892 F3rent � �� FolAerUnrt Child � 6ue $.00 InDatekpr8,2008 IssuelApproval� � COFOFilei109330 �� By' 5u6 Citizen Camplaint Wa�k Proposed� Name'A85 STRYKER AVE � ;� . _ _____ _ _ Expiresj Final Date 2008 � Rtio�ityy � Po�ible leatl exposure 8aenclosed front porch. Living room ceiling°isaauing in..Baszmen# f8. ' �_ E � � [C= - 9 Group�FirePre� ParentlD �.� _ ._ �. �_ _.._________�_._______..__ , _�_..__ ��ListView�` ` AelafedView ��' Copy� CreataChild� Revisej IssuelApproue� Print� Re-Oefault� 'm .a> j 1536393 RowID � T 158q914 Summary a From:5nuthern HH Regional Legal Ser �'i12976457 ,� �� Y ��s�� Agreement to VacaEe Og�� Z Victoria Humpfiry of 445 Slryker, St Paul, t1�T agre� that in exchaage for the City of St. Paul's agreement to e?ctend �e vacated date an the condemnation at my re5ideuce to Apr7 14 zaas I will do the fotlowing: I, Will not use the stove or oven in the premises ta heat the aparkaent. 2. I will use only an approved portable space heater to hest the property. 3. I will vacate and remove of my belongings by Apri114, 2008. .�"" � - r S�icLaria Hiunphrey . ��,�/�� D4/1112�8 1U:ta p�8 P.002/0d2 ; ;,s -� �a�� . i _'; n t' ` �'�"k 4 Y 'ri � " . .�1:� $� :. . . _ , {a�;;" � _ fl.' ;Yk :t � '.: � .. - ;= . ^��. ��, � � � � ��t�^�R' P t" �t'.$5'..l�. }�� 1� . �� s �; � � i F ��< .. 7 �� : �v :.,n��"sF_ .....„_ ' , ..:.k.. .... ._._. . _ . .. ._ _,�-:_� _. ....,�, '_+ . `. , _ . . ,.._ ._"-...^--..-.�._,..._ ...,. „-.z_ � �, �, d�� r �_ � �, �. , : , : �. ti;� � � � .:w('/'�� -�, ,. is,i_ � , . ..° " ��v'� �' x; ='ti ` �m' � r'' iC:`..';n' � � »�� x a� _ �, .,:v ``�-�„ , 3 ° � s .' �; k . �y� 2 I "`4. a .. ' G �N� Va� . ` a'' � � @ � i �. �-. >. 'm,e...�. i� �':.1 . } a � 4Y .ei3. Y. . , ,...uR£MV.t.SCat / .r.,._ .x'... . . r . " . W �� y �" , � ';�wtr �•°. _� - . ,.�`i.'_ . ��rv . ?: � . � �`��.� S 9 +F� „ � � .t � �_+3�+'. ., , . _ ...,��,a,r��r�� . o..cc.t�-� i y ., . .: . ... ., � y . � / f f�� c , . ..2a S' �•• Z.i . �� ' iS`F:: � e .�x r,d-" � "- � ,� � �.ti ...—, , .._..._., . ,. .F.. ., _„�.�o-. S �„ � � ' , u . .... . . ... ..: � /.;:. . . ��./.� �"'YS � { }'. X y ` .) : r er x } �: ." �' . .,..+: � ,.-r,,, � a �q` �ac. � <:_: � �. �� m � � " c . _.. - �, +�.: °+c'A��.�.-,�,,i. t ��. � ' ,. .. ' �„ � � .,� a � � ? °� ._ �� a, "''° . �� ;�`` w , �:',: � < .. � _ -. _ . ,.. :� _ � ? z _ - '=�, � �, __ . _ ' , _ *'�'�� . r " _ . t� y h. E a` " k' A ' � . t' � x t t '' ! �. T4'f � > , - M qn^�' ��'Y} `� �+-•� � � � y �� } �.�j � Rln � ... �.S �:.. ��.2 �'y u t '�e i� �( ,.> , �. ., ;t- "�'� �r;�'� , .,, . �� Ty ��i4� f }'^ � :. ��' b T k t.. Pv:.�.i..: .' k � f�� .'..3 �� y .�. � � S t y t � �2t�y E r ��'„� 2' . �i .+�., �. r ? t d 5 . . IS �x ? t °� �� J=�""w � e . �.. - � _ � , - - — � '=,_ _ , °�, . . .�..�. � .-_ � , � . x; . n•w +=5 „?',.__. _ . . ._ __. _ ,'�f%`�reW .,�. ..,�� >i . a : � ` �.. �' t�� '" . ,�. � �.:. . •.} e�.. q 9 „� , „ �� s 4� r �� ti ■ � � � , , . �;.�� r = r , � � ��s v` ��-� ��' ""' ` . y?3 .� � , . , . � � ei � t �fl . . s � * f> �' � .. � � ,. � ��,� _ d �� ; < � �.��...,d._�, �� ° �:s. � - ' � �,: � . �: � . r ,�� . �. ,��P, �,_ .. , . _ � ' ��,14_ "�` z , � �, _: ;?� ,� � �. v � - �— — = - � .`° :�- � �' — _. �. �, , �, _---� w _ _ f. _ �, f °; f '1 :r.�;�:, ,. , .,` ,�. M. .. . . , , ... a . � ��' �� u y � `'�tG � '4, qa+, �. � ,�� ¢�� I I I �� _ '�"�..`�: ,.s La3: f: : �. w�m�� ,: m i` y.. a �":�- s:�.�;. a �� , �:� � h ,,. �... , J� �,., ";� .,. � ' ,x�. � �� . �: P4,� a M�%�_* �I s ��4.. .A4'� ::..� " k`P�'� ubx:.. _ .... . � L:. , , �'„' 3 S: . . -.. 4 ;s�; � _ +� u'` . 'l �. � , s � �� y f,• Y _ �� :� , ' ' :i� R^ s ' f;+' , � .:i� . � �r ��_ �� r � � -';.},.�, . ' � �: r;: �� .h. ' .�� .��,�:�.. , - s�`��' �� ¢' ;� w �t � " * my t� �� _ i , t � . ., <..�;� , . ;��' �.�:' . . 7= � � ' ,` o� ��a-r� �» s.� � �x �� , - � � s �z � �, � � � �� . . _ �� -�� r.�� fi 'i' '� �� : �,�� '� � a sb�i� �, t��'"�.�.+' r f a � a -� � r- Y � ��4�' . } {�- �. � � . ; � �. �� ` �s " ";rF' � i � F {:.. { � r :. :i ' � �2'�'_. � �%ri.n..$WI �._.. . .:r .�., c _ . . .. � ;�� ,� f > v � � �", � �i,�`��,�r�,; ' ... . .�S-.[�� d'� , . . �� -�sa`�"� � �M 1 i . � . ' . � �' ��.% �`�ut`� � , , � , � , , �' g �' �r � $ �5 ,ry�y��-A�+ {+�. �� by w P . _. Cw ._.. � t" c . ..�!i�A`/` . " ....r..rt� . ' -`� � ��t:� � . , � K .-:�- � �ry�� h S ` �� - _�- .. .. � , __. � � � ; , � .,�'�� , t � > P' i � i � ; I e/ - � � � � ? � 1 #' � , � � � :i �� t ��' �i a .f.r. W v t :,:,.;; :�_n,. 1�' �w a:11 ,. rn,.�.�� . Date: April 15, 2008 File #: 08 - 060172 Folder Name: 495 STRYKER AVE P�`: 072822110162 Uarage HP District: D�i/��(/JJ Property Name: Snrvey Info: East and north, postings Front postings West and south sides Apri124, 2008 Legislarive Hearing Minutes (�� {p Page 2 v 4. Appeal of Floyd Unruh to a Notice of Certificate of Occupancy Revocarion and Suminary Abatement Order for property at 495 Strvker Avenue. Floyd Unruh, appellant appeared. Ms. Moermond asked Inspector Neis for a report. Inspectar Neis stated that he first inspected the propezty on October 3, 2007 and issued orders on eight code violations. The owner requested 90 days to make the repairs which agreed to and he scheduled the re-inspection for December 3, 2007 and followed up by sending a letter to the property owner. On December 3, 2007 he went to the propezty for the re-inspection and the owner didn't show up for the appointment; therefore, he considered the repairs had not been made. He scheduled another re-inspection for December 20, 2007 and again, the owner did not show up; therefore, he considered the repairs had not been made. He scheduled a third re-inspecrion for January 1 Q 2008 and again, the owner did not show up and he revoked the Certificate of Occupancy (C of O). The owner contacted him and he scheduled another re-inspection for January 24, 2008 and noted that everything had been done with the exception of the exterior violations. He came to an agreement with the owner that he would give him until April 30, 2008 to complete the repairs on the exterior of the property and he granted him a C of O with deficiencies. He then received a complaint on Apri18, 2008 that there was "no heat; possible lead exposure on enclosed front porch; living room ceiling caving in; basement was very cold." He inspected the property on Apri19 and found many additional violations including the following: a broken window; the woodwork on the main floor was chipped and peeling; there was a bedroom put in on the first floor that did not have a working smoke detector; extension cords being used for permanent wiring; the front door had been completely kicked in and shattered; the basement was disorderly, including combustibles around the fiunace; the thermostat was ripped off of the wall and there were bare wires hanging; light fixhxres and globes that were broken; the tenant had been using the stove for heat; and noted many additional violations at the property. After he completed the inspection, he contacted the property owner and the owner advised him that he was not going to make any of the repairs. He advised him that due to the conditions found at the property, he condemned the home with an immediate vacate date. He informed the occupant of the building that the property was condemned and that they needed to vacate the property by April 10. He also gave the occupant the number to SMRLS and he contacted SMRLS directly to make them aware of what was going on with this property. The following day, he received a call from SMRLS to work out an agreement on the vacate date to avoid displacement of the tenant. The tenant had met with the attorney from SMRLS and signed an agreement in order to extend the vacate date to April 14, 2008. The tenant, Victoria Humphry, signed an a�eement that she would not use the stove or oven to heat the home; that she would use only an approved portable space heater to heat the home; and that she would vacate and remove all of her belongings by April 14, 2008. He went back to the property on April 14 to make sure that the property had been vacated and the property was still occupied. The tenant indicated to him that they and the owner were attempting to make the repairs; however, not everything was completed. The heat had been turned back on; however, there were bare wires on the wall. The tenant and the owner indicated that in order to use the boiler, they had "juxnp it" where they connected the two wires together. He explained that this was unacceptable. He went back to the property later that afternoon and met the property owner at the property who was attempring to make repairs and the thermostat still was not working. He was going to issue a criminal citation; however, since the building was going to be vacated the following day, he decided not to issue the tag. On April 15, he went back to the property to verify that it was vacant and he had contacted Inspector Senty to assist on enforcing the vacate date. There was a male occupant that he didn't know who became very hostile and aggressive and Inspector Senty Apri124, 2008 Legisiative Hearing Minutes �Q �(�/� Page 3 U immediately called the Police. The Police arrived and he found that there were six occupants in the house and they immediately left the property. He and Inspector Senty walked through the house with the Police Officer and found that some additional repairs had been made and found that the oven and stove was still being used to heat the house. The tenant was upset because the door and the thermostat had been fixed and he informed the tenant that she had to immediately vacate the building. He also called the attorney from SMRLS and advised him of the situation. The Officer shut the stove off and Inspector Senty secured the building by normal means. He condemned the building as a Category II and transferred the file the Vacant Buildings Program. He presented photographs dated Apri19 and April 15. Ms. Moermond asked Inspector Senty for a report. Inspector Senty stated that he was called in the field by Inspector Neis on April 15 and was asked to join him at the property for enforcement of the condemnarion-vacate date. When he met Inspector Neis at the property, he heard a lot of "loud discussion" coming from inside the house. He then called the on-staff Police Officer, who was in a meeting, and he refened it to the area Police Officer who came to assist with the inspection. They found the house occupied, the oven door wide open, and the temperature was set at 172 degrees. The Police Officer turned offthe heat and the building was secured. He explained that the definition of a vacant building included the property being illegally occupied which was the case for this property. He then placed a placard on the building and issued a siumnary abatement order to secure the house and the garage in order for the owner to have time to secure the property so that it is not again illegally occupied. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh what he was appealing. Mr. Unruh responded that the property was inspected on Apri19 with a re-inspection of April 10 and he found this to be a violation of what an inspector had the right to do. He believed the orders should be thrown out and re-done since he hadn't even received the written orders by April 10. He claimed he had completed many of the repairs including the exterior handrail. He then gave a history of the property: he had rented the property to Victoria Huxnphry in August, 2007 and she had two sons; some time later, she asked to add "Antonio" to the lease and he had two sons; all children had shazed custody from previous relationships and were not there ali of the rime; Antonio then moved out and Victoria asked to have him removed from the lease; this was a two bedroom home and he didn't care where in the house people slept; he had gone to the property in January and found six adults in the house; he didn't say anything about the people to Victoria as she always paid the rent; on April 18, he found a large ma1e, believed his name was Gene, with two young girls who claimed to be a cousin to Victoria; he told this man that he had to leave and that he was trespassing; he went back to the property on April 19 and Apri121 and the man was still living there and he told him he had to leave; the man told him that he had no place to live and he again told him that he had to leaue and was trespassing. Concerning the heat in the house and the thermostat: he had gone to the house to collect rent in November and found the house to be extremely hot and he asked Victoria what the thermostat was set at; Victoria told him that the thermostat had come off the wall when they were moving a mattress; he asked her how she was heating the house and she claimed that they were putting the "wires together" to operate the boiler; he looked at the thermostat and discovered that it had been twisted off the wall; he asked her why she had done this and she claimed she was cold and freezing; he repiaced the thermostat and had Hinding Heating come to inspect the boiler and it was working fine; he went back to the house in January and discovered the thermostat had once again been twisted off the wall and it was extremely hot in the house; he asked Victoria why the thermostat had been removed and she claimed they were freezing; he discovered that the oven and stove were on and it was exiremely hot; he told Victoria that since she was paying for the heat and she wanted to Apri124, 2008 Legislative Hearing Minutes Dg i �� Page 4 put her life in jeopazdy, it was her choice; every rime he went to the house over the winter, he found the radiators to be extremely hot in every room; and he again replaced the thermostat. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh why he was appealing the orders. Mr. Unruh said that conceiving item #1, he believed he could have the window replaced on the porch by Apri130; concerning item #2, there was nothing wrong with the woodwark in the building; concerning item #3, the smoke detectors were approved in December, 2007 and nothing had changed with them; concerning item #5, he claimed there was nothing wrong with the exterior walls; concerning items #8 and #9, the door latch and door frame were done; concerning item #12, there was nothing wrong with the bathroom floor; concerning item #17, the tenants had punched holes in the walls and he had patched and repaired them. Ms. Moermond asked when these repairs had been done. Mr. Unruh responded that he had done most of the work within the past two weeks. He asked about item #21, discontinue use of unsafe heating appliances, he didn't understand what tlus meant. Inspector Neis responded that in one of the photographs, it showed that the boiler had been dismantled. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh if he owned other rental properties. Mr. Unruh responded that he owned "lots" of them and he had never had any complaints on any of his other properties. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh whether he was appealing the condexnnation and revocation of the C of O as it wasn't clearly identified on the appeal he had filed. Mr. Unruh stated that he didn't quite list it that way; however, he believed this property was absolutely and completely habitable. There were people living in way, way worse houses than this. The boiler works fine for heat; the windows were fine; the doors were fine; the floors were fine; the carpeting was fine; the kitchen was fine; the wiring had been redone. He didn't know what could be done to the building to make it more habitable. It had four walls, it had windows, and it had doors. He wanted the C of O reinstated so that the tenants could move back in as they needed a home. Ms. Moermond asked Inspector Neis for additional history on the property. Inspector Neis stated that in reviewing the records, Inspector Yannazelly, Code Enforcement, had this property in February, 2007 and then it was then transferred to the C of O Program. Inspector Yannarelly also had issued orders that were outstanding which he was unaware of. He said that if he had previously lrnown of those orders, he would not have given the owner the extension of time to complete the repairs. For instance, he had issued orders on the handrail and on the boiler certification back on January 26, 2007 and the boiler certification was not sent to his office until December 31, 2007. Regarding the necessity of a smoke detector in sleeping rooms, if the living room area had not been converted to a sleeping room, a smoke detector would not be necessary. Since the tenants had converted this area to a sleeping room and he actually found someone sleeping there when he inspected the property, a smoke detector would be necessary. He explained that when he inspected the property on April 9 and ordered the compliance date of April 10, it was because of the numerous life/safety issues that he found at the property. This included: no smoke detector in a sleeping room; oven being used for heat; and the front door being kicked in. He had called Mr. Unruh on Apri19 to advise him of these problems and explained to him that he was re-inspecting the following day and Mr. Unruh indicated to him that he was not going to do anything that day. Concerning the bathroom floor, there is a solid piece of linoleum; however, the floor was coming up at the seams and if there was any water leakage, it would go under the seams and rot the floor underneath. Apri124, 2008 Legislative Hearing Minutes /�� y_ � Page 5 V `'/ Ms. Moermond asked Inspector Senty whether he had any additional information for the record. Inspector Senty stated that he issued a sununary abatement order to clean up the exterior of the property and he received another complaint that day about the property that morning. He told Mr. Unruh that if everything was not cleaned up by Apri128, the City would issue a work order to do the clean up and would chazge an assessment against the property. Mr. Unruh stated that Victoria had paid the bill for trash service and everything was supposed to be picked up that day. Ms. Moermond said that she was confused why Mr. Unruh would want to continue renting to ttiese particulaz tenants after all the problems he had experienced with them. She asked him why he would want them back. Mr. Unruh responded that he had a lease with Victoria that was valid for one yeaz and she would like to move back in. Ms. Moermond asked whether she was in violation of the lease since she had broken so many items in the house. Mr. Unruh responded that this was true; however, Victoria had agreed to take care of the building. Ms. Moermond responded that this tenant had broken the thermostat at least three times and she asked what the incentive was to continue to have a rental relarionship with this person. Mr. Unruh stated that his experience with this particulaz property was if the tenants did not pay the rent or damaged the property, he would evict them. When he attempts to evict them, the tenants have sued him in Court and the judge always rules in the tenants' favor; in Ramsey County, a judge never, ever rules in favar of the landlord. Ms. Moermond said that this building needed a fair amount of repairs and she asked Mr. Unruh why he wanted to rush back into the situation with this tenant so quickly. Mr. Unruh responded that he needed the money. He said that if he was not granted a C of O and the tenant couldn't move back in, he was going to put the house up for sale. He believed that the City of St. Paul was too difficult to deal with; these inspectors were inconsiderate many times. Ms. Moermond responded that he had missed three re-inspection appoinhnents before the inspector revoked the C of O and she found him to be the one who was inconsiderate. Mr. Unruh clarified that he believed the inspector was inconsiderate in that he had issued orders on Apri19 to have everything done by April 10. That was not enough time. Ms. Moermond responded that these were life/safety issues that needed to be done immediately and that was the reason the inspector had called him. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh if all of the repairs had been made. Mr. Unruh responded that everything was done and then said that he could have everything completed by April 30. Ms. Moermond recessed the hearing to review the records. Ms. Moermond said that he had an issue with the inspector inspecting the property on Apri19 with a re-inspection on April 10 and whether the action taken by the inspector had merit. In reviewing the list of deficiencies and the photographs, she found that the conditions that were discovered did merit the emergency condemnation. Mr. Unruh responded that he agreed that the front door being kicked was the only thing that would merit the condemnation. There was nothing wrong with the other conditions in the building. Ms. Moermond stated that the City's Legislative Code states that a house has to have hearing facilities and they have to be in good repair. The fact that the wires were being connected to start the fiunace was not safe. Although he had claimed that it was now fixed, she did not believe it would remain fixed if these tenants were to move back into the house. In looking at the record on the history of this property, it was evident that he had let the property fall into very bad condition in Apri124, 2008 Legislative Hearing Minutes �'� �� Page 6 the past. She asked Mr. Unruh why the water had been shut off in July, 2007. Mr. Unruh responded that he had leased the property to a family who had moved out after eight months. He then received a notice from the Water Department that the water was being shut off for non- payment of the bills. Ms. Moermond responded that it was his responsibility to provide water for his tenants. Mr. Unruh responded that the lease stated that it was the tenants' responsibility to pay for water which they had agreed to do. Ms. Moermond asked why the tenants had left. Mr. Unruh claimed that they moved to the reservation in South Dakota. When the tenants left, they had left the house a complete mess. Since they sent him the rent, he didn't feel he needed to go over to the house to check on them. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Unruh whether he did tenant screening such as criminal background checks, credit reports, talked to former landlords, and checked to see if they had a job. Mr. Unruh clanned that he did do background checks on tenants and that the most important thing to him was whether they paid their rent on time and how they treated the property. Ms. Moermond stated that it appeared that he had employed bad management practices at this property given the history and that he had created these bad situations for himself. Ms. Moermond went on to say that the conditions found did merit the condemnation and revocation of the C of O. The issue before her was that he claimed he had made all of the repairs and whether she should recommend granring the appeal so that he could haue the property re-occupied. Since the property had become in such a deteriorated condition, the property was transferred to the Vacant Buildings Program which meant there were strict requirements in brining the property up to code. In reviewing the history, there were many items that he had been issued orders on back to January, 2007 where orders had to be re-issued for non-compliance. Based on his behaviors, she believed the property should be brought up to full code compliance before it can be re-occupied. Therefore, she recommended denying the appeal. The hearing adjourned at 11:50 a.m. Submitted by: Vicki Sheffer (5/21/2008) Marcia Moermond - 495 Stryker �� r C From: Ruth Janisch Lake <arctic.ruth@earthlink.net> To: <Marcia.Moermond@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <Dave.Thune@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 5/21/2008 5:59 PM Subject: 495 Stryker CC: West Side Safe <westsidesafe@gmail.com> May 21, 2008 RE: 495 Stryker To Whom It May Concern: � tG � py �� I am writing on behalf of the Winifred, Robie & Congress Block Club regarding the property located at 495 Stryker owned by Floyd Unruh. When the West Side Safe Neighborhood Council recentVy asked our block club to create a iist of "probiem properties," 495 Stryker appeared at the top of our list. Multiple safety concerns have been raised about this residence at our block ciub In fact, it is one of only a few addresses that nearly everyone in our neighborhood has memorized. Many of us became familiar with this residence on March 7, 2007 after a shooting during a drug deal gone bad created multiple crime scenes acrpss the West Side. Tragicafly, Robert Renville, who was shot while participating in the drug deal and subsequent car chase later died. He resided at 495 Stryker. A few months later, while entering Jerabek's Coffe Shop at 9am on a weekday morning, I was greeted by Police Commander Coyle who had also planned to attend the same community meeting He asked if I had ever watched the police serve a warrant before and then pointed across the street to 495 Stryker as a team of officers prepared to enter the residence. Unfortunately, while the tenants of 495 Stryker have changed, the unsafe and disruptive behavior has not. Police records indicate that there have been over 21 calls for police service to 495 Stryker since the most recent tenants moved into the property in August 2�07. For your reference, we have enclosed a photocopy of calls for service to this address for the past two years totaling 55 calls for concerns including: domestic violence, theft, drugs, weapons, drunkenness, animal complaints (pitbulis), consumption of alcohol by mino�s, fireworks, disorderly disturbances, auto theft, and violation of restraining orders. Please know that the Riverview Block Club, which is also affected by this problem property, has tried to work with Mr. Unruh directly. Unfortunately, he has behaved in a manner that has left us without any hope of reaching a reasonable solution together (please view attached 3/14/2007 email correspondence). We support the decision of the city to revoke the certificate of occupancy for 495 Stryker and the abatement order In the interest of our safety, please do not allow Mr. Unruh to rent this property again. He has consistently demonstrated through both his failure at keeping the property safely maintained and his inability to adequately screen tenants that he is not capable of working with us to keep our community safe. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at (651) 222-5718 or arctic.ruth@eaRhiink.net. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Ruth Janisch Lake Winifred, Robie & Congress Block Club Leader ��d`� 4 Ms. Marcia Moermond Ciry of St. Paul Re. 495 Stryker I understand that the City Council will be considering whether or not to allow Mr. Floyd Unruh to have a certificate of occupancy for this property, and that Mr. Unruh intends to rent to the same tenants previously living in the bui]ding. I strongly urge the City Council to deny the request. I walk by the building several times a week, and it is in horrible shape. It looks as though animals have taken up residence in it. Whatever work has been done, it certainly doesn't look livable from the outside. Regarding the property management and the tenants: the people who have been living in the building appear to be, if not criminals, involved with criminals. When there was a shooting last summer on the West 5ide, one of the drug dealers who was shot ended up in this unit. Concerned neighbors spoke to Mr. Unruh, who claimed all of his tenants were fine and the problem was with the St. Paul Police. We do not want landlords like this to be able to operate their business in the City. The only reason I can imagine that a property owner would want criminals back as tenants is that he stands to profit from their crimina] activity. Please say no to this request for a Certificate of Occupancy. The best thing that could happen is the building be razed and Mr. Unruh not permitted to be a ]andlord in this city. -Anonymous Neighbor Concerned About Retaliation (5/21/2008) Maraa Moermond - 495 �' �� T From: "Paul Scha�" <pwschatz@gmail.com> To: <Marcia.Moermond@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 5/20/2008 12:56 PM Subject: 495 Stryker CC: "Dave Thune" <Dave.Thune@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <mayor@ci_stpaul.mn.us>, <arc... Dear Marcia et al, After reading the hearing report for 495 Stryker it is hard for me to believe that any reasonable person would issue a certificate of occupancy for495 Strykerto Mr. Unruh. To wit: He has endangered the lives of his tenants by faiiing to maintain a safe and adequate heating system. It has, from my reading been out of compliance for the better part of a year. He has endangered the lives of both a St Paul inspector and St Paul Police officers when they entered 495 Stryker with a dangerous and non-compiiant heating system. He has endangered the lives of the neighbors of 495 Stryker with the same heating system. The houses are very close and an explosion would likely cause damage to the neighboring houses. He has shown contempt for the housing ordinances of St Paul by fai{ing to meet their standards, by failing to make timely repairs and by failing to show upforinspections. He has allowed 495 Stryker to be used as a flop house-- he has no idea, from reading, who lives there, what they are doing and further, seems to find it in his best interest to ignore the property as long as the rent is being paid. As a neighbor and a West Side resident, I continually find it disturbing that landlords who are non-compliant, contempuous of city inspectors, contempuous of neighbors and who by their buildings continued and nearly continous disrepair destroy neighborhoods are issued certificates of occupancy. No other busmess, and landlords are businesses, would be allowed to destroy their property and their neighbors properties. I strongly encourage that Mr Unruh be denied a certificate of occupancy for 495 Stryker sincerely Paul Schatz 150 Robie St W pwschatz@gmail.com (5/21/2008) Marcia Moermond_ 495 StrykerAvenue _ _ V Page"1 � � i � ' r From: Anne Larson <anneofstpaul@yahoo.com> To: <Marcia.Moermond@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 5/20/2008 11:29 AM Subject: 485 Stryker Avenue Dear Ms. Moermond: I'm writing concerning the rental property at 495 Stryker Avenue in St. Paul. I own a duplex at 146 W Congress. It was a HUD home/registered vacant building that I bought in 1996. I live on one floor and rent out the other one. It seems to me that the owner of 495 Stryker is not mature enough to take responsibility for what needs to be done to take care of a house or manage a rentaf business. It really is a business and needs to be conducted as such. His electrical wiring and heating problems sound like serious safety issues that could impact the people hving nearby. There are wonderful people living in the West Side neighborhood. There are also peopie living among us who seem dangerous and make us uneasy. Many of these situations are being worked on but it can take time to resolve them. Many we just have to live with and be careful. Jerabek's is a neighborhood treasure and provides a sense of stability for us This seems like a clear-cut opportunity to resolve an ongoing problem. Quite frankly, it seems like a no-brainer. I hope the City Councii agrees. Thank you so much for offering to read our emails. Anne Larson 146 W Congress St. St. Pau155107 Phone: 651-227-2252