09-1147Council File # �r-11 �f�
Green Sheet # 3083976
Presented
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
�
�«
RESOLUTION
OF �SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
1�
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the August
18, 2009 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Appeal on Letters of Certificate of Occupancy
Deficiency List for the following address:
Propertv Appealed
968 Euclid Street
Appellant
Wendy Teeters
Decision: Grant the appeal on the ceiling height and grant a variance on the egress window with the
measurement of 26 inches wide by 26 inches high provided that the whole upstairs continue to be used as
one bedroom.
Sostrom
Carter
Harris
Helgen
Thune
�
�
Adopted by Council: Date
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
BY� ______��.!�1� O/• � �
Appro b �ha�: ate �`� � (}°
By: ,
Absent Requested by Department of.
—�
By:
✓
Form Approved by City Attomey
$y:
Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Counci]
By:
Approved by the Office of Financial Services
�
August 18, 2009 Property Code Minutes
b �— I ( (�.� Page 5
Appeal of Wendy Teeters to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 968
Euclid Street
Appellant Wendy Teeters (2531 Schaler Drive, Maplewood, MN 55119) appeared. She provided
photographs.
Ms. Moermond requested a staff report. Ms. Shaff stated that Inspector Fish had conducted an
inspection for the Fire C of O and reported that on the second floor the middle bedroom window
opened to 16 inches high by 24 inches wide, the north bedroom window opened to 16 inches high
by 25 inches wide and the north/south bedroom window opened to 26 inches high by 26 inches
wide.
Ms. Moermond said that the orders were a little confusing and asked to see the photographs which
she and Ms. Teeters reviewed.
Ms. Shaff asked whether the ceiling height was being appealed as well. Ms. Teeters said it was.
The house was built in the early 1900s and she bought it as a three-bedroom. There were three
bedrooms upstairs and one bedroom downstairs; however, she was renting it as a two-bedroom and
tkae whole upstairs as one bedroom. She spoke to Inspector Fish about it and she indicated it was
okay if it was considered one room.
Ms. Moermond asked whether there were doors separating the rooms. Ms. Teeters said there were
no doors and explained the photographs showing the configuration of the upstairs, the ceiling
height, and the location of the one window that was code-compliant.
Ms. Shaff said that if none of the three rooms had adequate ceiling height, it would not be adequate
if the three rooms were combined.
Ms. Teeters said that if she had to rent the house as a one-bedroom, she could not afford the
mortgage payment and was doing the long-time tenant a favor as it was. She could not tear the roof
off the house and that this was the way most houses were in St. Paul. Everything else was done and
suggested Ms. Shaff and Ms. Moermond talk to Inspector Fish. Ms. Shaff said the inspectors
presented what they found but that the decision would be based on what the code required.
Ms. Moermond stated that the orders were not clear as to ceiling height and that she needed
additional information to determine whether the ceiling complied with the code. Ms. Shaff
concurred.
Ms. Moermond said she would ask Inspector Fish to re-measure the ceiling. Ms. Teeters said the
re-inspection was scheduled for August 24. Ms. Moermond stated that she should have the
measurements from Inspector Fish by September 1 and would call Ms. Teeters with her decision.
On October 2, 2009 Ms. Moermond reviewed the records and recommended granting the appeal on
the ceiling height and granting a variance for the egress window with the measurement of 26 inches
wide by 26 inches high provided that the whole upstairs continue to be used as one bedroom.
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
��- ����
; DepartmentlOffcelCouncil: • Datelnitiated: ' GCP.P.CI SIIP.P.1� NO 3083976
CO -Council �, �3 OCT 2009 �
'� Contact Person & Phone: ' � Department Sent To Person InitiaUDate '
' Marcia Moertnond � � o Co�ocu �
6-$570 , � i 1 Council , DeuaxhnentDi'ector
' Assign ', 2 GStvClerk CitvQerk ���
� Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): � Number I �
Doc.Type:RESOLUTION
E-DOCUment Required: Y
�acumentContact: Mai Vang
Contact Phone: 6-8563
For
Routing
Order
Totai # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature)
Resolution approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on an Appeal of a Letter of Deficiency for property at 968
Euclid Street.
Recommendations� Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commission
Personal Service Contrects Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this persoNfrm ever worked under a contractfor this depaRment?
Yes No
2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. �oes this personffirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
F�cplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
AdvantageslfApproved:
Disadvantages If Approved:
Oisadvan[ages If Not Approved:
Total Amount of
Transaction:
Funding Source:
Fi nancial Information:
(Explain)
CosURevenue Budgeted:
Activity Number:
October 14, 2009 9:45 AM Page 1