Loading...
09-1221Council File # 09-1221 Green Sheet # 3086056 RESOLUTION ` CiTY OF SAI{�},T PAUL, MINNESOTA `�I Presented by 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Pau1 hereby certifies and apprQVes the Octuber 2 6, 2009 decision of the Legislative Hearing O�cer for Appeals to Letters of Certificate of Occupancy 3 Deficiency Lists and Correction Notice far the following addresses: 4 5 Propertv Anuealed Appellant 6 7 1765 Carroll Avenue David Homel 8 9 Decision: grant a 3-inch variance on the openable width of that window. 10 11 419 Fairview Avenue Rory Anderson 12 13 Decision: grant a 1-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window measuring 23 inches high 14 by 33 inches wide, deny the appeal for the window measuring 18 inches high by 25 inches wide and grant 15 90 days to bring the window into compliance. 16 17 1085 Jessamine Court OVT Family LLC 18 19 Decision: den the appeal and grant an extension of 120 days to replace the second floor egress bedroom 20 windows; grant a variance of up to two inches on the openable width of the windows. 21 22 476 Howard Street North Kao Yajwangchaij 23 24 Decision: deny the appeal and grant an extension of four months to bring the egress windows into 25 compliance in all bedrooms. 26 27 1668 Da�ton Avenue Daniel Thom, o/b/f Arthur Thom 28 29 Decision: deny the appeal and grant an extension for 90 days to bring the bedroom egress windows into 30 compliance in Unit 9 and Unit 10. 31 32 1155 Norton Street Phyllis Thomas 33 34 Decision: grant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the egress windows in the upper right and left 35 unit bedrooms; grant a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the upper center 36 unit bedroom; deny the appeal and grant an extension for 120 days to bring the egress windows in the 37 lower left and end unit bedrooms into compliance. 38 39 40 41 09-1221 42 1033 Galtier Street 43 Philip Schloss 44 Decision: grant a 1-inch variance on the openable width of the egress window in the first floor front 45 bedroom. 46 47 1871-1877 Grand Avenue 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Bryan Spille Decision: 1871 Grand Avenue: grant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in Units 1, 2, 3 and 5, and in the first bedroom in Unit 4; deny the appeal and grant a 90-day extension to bring the egress window in the second bedroom in Unit 4 into compliance. Step units must be installed to address sill heip�t in the basement units. 1877 Grand Avenue: grant a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in Units 1, 2 and 3; a 1-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in the first and second floor units; deny the appeal and grant an extension for 90 days to bring the bedroom egress window in Unit 4 into compliance. Step units must also be installed to address the sill height in Units 1, 2 and 3. 58 1350 Pavne Avenue Yendung Van 59 60 Decision: deny the appeal and grant an extension to June 30, 2010 to bring the bedroom egress windows 61 in Units 1, 2 and 3 into compliance. A step unit must also be installed to address the sill height in Unit I. 62 63 368 Thomas Avenue David R. Busch, DRB #24 LLC 64 65 Decision: deny the appeal. 66 67 889 Hudson Road 68 69 Decision: grant a variance on the bedroom egress window square footage, and a variance of up to 2.5 70 inches on the openable width of the windows provided the openable height was at least 30 inches. 71 72 1604 Charles Avenue Lynne Swalchick, Charles Avenue Partners LLC 73 74 Decision: deny the appeal and grant an extension of 60 days to bring the bedroom egress windows in Units 75 14 and 15 into compliance. A step unit may also be installed to address the sill height. 76 77 78 09-1221 79 Bos4om Carter Haais eas Requested by Deparhnentof: � Stazk Thune Adopted by Council: Date ✓ Adophon Certified by Co il Secretary By: � Approve M Date By: Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: Approved by the Office of Financial Services � 09-1221 � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �� DepartmentlOffiWCoundl: �' Date Initiated: I � �o_��U^� ; Z,a�T2oa9 I Green Sheet NO: 3086056 � Contact Person & Phone: , Marcia Moertnond � Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Doc. Type: RESOLUTION E-Document Required: Y Dowment Contact: Contact Phone: � � Ii Assign I Number For ; Routing I Order � o Council � ' 1 Council �' �- 2 [,tiry Cierk Ciry Clerk Total # of Signature Vages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) Resolution approving the decisions of the Legislarive Hearing Officer on appeals of C of O Deficiency Lists for the following: 1765 Cazroll, 414 Fairview, 1085 Jessamine Ct, 476 Aowazd N,1668 Dayton, 1155 North, 1033 Galtiez, 1877 Gcand,1350 Payne, 368 Thomas, 889 Hudson, and 1604 Charles. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Sernce Commwsion Personal Service Conirects Must Answer the Following Questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? � Yes No 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not nortnally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Expiain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet. Initiating Problem, Issues, OppoRunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): AdvanWges If Approved: Disadvantages If Approved: DisadvanWges IfNotApproved: Total Amount of Transaction: Funding Source: Financial Information: (Explain) CosVRevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: October 27, 2009 11:45 AM Page 1 09-1221 MIN UTES OF TAE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON APPBALS O� LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY AND CORRECTION NOTICES Tuesday, October 6, 2009 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Blvd. West Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:45 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Leanna Shaff, Deparhnent of Safety and Inspections (DS� - Fire; Tom Friel, DSI — Code Enforcement; Amy Spong, DSI — HPC; and Mai Vang, City Council Offices 2. Appeal of David Homel to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1"765 Carroll Avenue. Property managers David Homel and Dennis Homel (both 14 N. Mallard Court, St. Paul, MN 55127) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Booker had inspected for the Fire C of O and reported that the openable dimensions of the windows in bedroom 1 of Unit 9 were 38 inches high by 17 inches wide and 16 inches high by 21 inches wide. Ms. Moermond asked whether both windows were in the same bec�oom and how many bedrooms there were. Mr. Homel stated that there was one bedroom and it was a corner room with two windows. Ms. Moermond stated that the window measuring 38 inches high by 17 inches wide would be considered the egress window; therefore, she recommended granting a 3-inch variance on the openable width of that window. 3. Appeal of Rory Anderson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 419 Fairview Avenue Appellant Rory Anderson (809 Ridge Street, St. Paul, MN 55116) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Fish had inspected for the Fire C of O and reported that the openable dimensions of the bedroom window in Unit 10 were 18 inches high by 25 inches wide, and in Unit 9 were 23 inches high by 33 inches wide. Ms. Moermond asked what kind of windows they were. Mr. Anderson said they were double-hung windows; he provided photogxaphs which he and Ms. Moermond reviewed. Mr. Anderson said Units 9 and 10 were garden level apartments and described the layout and the location of the windows. Ms. Moermond stated that she was comfortable granting a variance far the window in Unit 9 but in Unit 10, the window height shortfail was substantial and not made up in sufficient extra width. Mr. Anderson referred to the photographs and noted the proximity of the bedroom to the door and the structural constraints to changing the size of the window. 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 2 Ms. Moermond asked whether the windows were new. Mr. Anderson said they were from the 1950s. Ms. Moermond asked whether the windows had stops at the top. Mr. Anderson responded that they did not. Ms Shaff reviewed the photogaphs and said that based on the measurements, the opening size could accommodate a casement window with adequate openable dimensions. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 1-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window measuring 23 inches high by 33 inches wide, she denied the appeal for the window measuring 18 inches high by 25 inches wide and granted 90 days to bring the window into compliance. Mr. Anderson noted that the Unit 9 and Unit 10 window dimensions were reversed in the inspector's orders. Ms. Shaff noted that the windows would have to be replaced under permit. Appeal of OVT Family LLC to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1085 Jessamine Court. Appellant Landon Taylor (1087 W. Jessamine Ct., St. Paul, MN 55117) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Cummings had conducted an inspection for the Fire C of O and reported that the openable dimensions of the second floor bedroom windows were 16 inches high by 26 to 27 inches wide. Ms. Moermond asked for a description of the structure of the window space. Mr. Taylar said he grew up in the house and that there had never been any issues with the windows. He presented photographs which he and Ms. Moermond reviewed and which he believed there were shuctural constraints to installing lazger windows. Ms. Moermond asked whether another window type could be installed in the same window opening. Mr. Taylor stated that he didn't think the size would be adequate. Ms. Shaff stated that the raw opening size would accommodate a casement window with adequate openable dimensions. Ms. Moermond clarified that the window type would have to be changed but not the opening size. Ms. Shaff stated that egress hardware would be required for the casement window. Mr. Taylor said he called several window companies and been told that a casement window would not meet egress requirements. Ms. Shaff stated that the existing opening was adequate to accommodate a casement window that would meet requirements. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting an extension of 120 days to replace the second floor egress bedroom windows and granted a variance of up to two inches on the openable width of the windows. 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 3 Appeal of Kao Yajwangchaij to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 476 Howazd Street North. Appellant Kao Yajwangchaij (2582 Eldridge Avenue E., St. Paul, MN 55109) appeared. Ms. Shaff stated that Inspector Thomas had conducted an inspection for the Fire C of O and reported that all bedrooms had awning-type windows with glazed dimensions of 21 by 36 inches, and an openable space of 17 inches. All bedroom egress window sill heights were 57 inches but there were ladders. Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Shaff to talk about the departmenYs concerns with awning windows. Ms. Shaff stated that the concern was with the center hardware obstructing the opening space. Ms. Moermond asked whether the hardware could be moved to one side. Ms. Shaff said that awning- style windows were usually too large and heavy to be opened with hardware on just one side. She said they were considered to be grossly non code-compliant because of the hardware and because they tended to not stay open. Mr. Yajwangchaij stated that he purchased the house in 2003 and was renting to a Section S tenant. He was told the window was too small because the law had changed. Ms. Moermond asked how many bedrooms there were. Mr. Yajwangchaij responded that there were four bedrooms. Ms. Moermond asked whether a casement window was a possibility. Ms. Shaff said a casement was a possibility but the windows were wide, and heavy-duty hardware would be required. Ms. Moermond said the windows would have to be replaced but the opening size would not have to be changed. Mr. Yajwangchaij stated that Section 8 rent did not cover the mortgage and utilities and that he couldn't afford to do anything with the property. Ms. Moermond stated that the windows fell under the category of maintenance. She asked Mr. Yajwangchaij whether he taiked to a window contractor. Mr. Yajwangchaij said he hadn't but that he estimated the window replacement would cost $2,000 to $3,000 per window. Ms. Moermond stated that there was a lot wrong with the windows and they needed to be changed to meet dimension and sill height requirements. She recommended denying the appeal and a anting an extension for four months to bring the egress windows into compliance in all bedrooms. Mr. Yajwangchaij asked whether he could have until next sununer. Ms. Moermond said it was a life/safety issue and she wasn't willing to grant more time. 7. Appeal of Daniel Thom, on behalf of Arthur Thom, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1668 Davton Avenue. Appellants Daniel and Shirley Thom (55 East 5` Street, Suite 950, Saint Paul, MN 55101) appeared. Ms. Thom stated that the building was built in 1922 and they owned it for 41 years. She said they had wonderful long-term tenants, one of whom had been there far 27 years. She stated that the windows cited were in two basement apartments and there were exits at both ends of a lighted hallway. She said an egress window installed at another property had cost $1,600. 09-1221 October 6, 2004 Property Code Minutes Page 4 Ms. Moermond asked what type of windows they were. Mr. Thom said they were double-hung windows and that replacing them would probably require cutting into the building's foundation. Ms. Moermond asked whether the existing window opening could be used. Mr. Thom described the configuration of the existing windows and stated that a slider window might be an option. Ms. Shaff confiimed that the raw opening would be adequate if both windows and center mullion were removed. Mr. Thom described the layout of the efficiency aparlments. Ms. Shaff stated that the windows would be acceptable for egress in either situation because the kitchen and sleeping area were sepazated by only a half wall. Ms. Moermond asked how much time would be needed to replace the windows. Mr. Thom asked for 90 days. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting an extension far 90 days to bring the bedroom egress windows into compliance in Unit 9 and Unit 10. 8. Appeal of Phyllis Thomas to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1155 Norton Street. Appellant Phyllis Thomas (491 Wheelock Parkway E., St. Paul, MN 55130) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Cummings had inspected for the Fire C of O and reported that the openable dimensions of the egess windows were 20 inches high by 39 inches wide window in the upper right unit bedroom; 20 inches high by 31 inches wide in the upper left unit bedroom; 19 inches high by 30 inches wide in the upper middle u bedroom, 16 inches high by 35 inches wide in the lower left unit bedroom and 16 inches high by 31 inches wide in the lower end unit bedroom. Ms. Moermond stated that she was comfortable granting variances far the three egress windows in the upper unit but not the lower unit. She said that for windows with an 8-inch height shortfall, she liked to see an extra 16 inches in openable width, the lower unit windows did not meet that criteria and would have to be changed. She asked what kind of windows they were. Ms. Thomas stated that they were garden-level apartments with double-hung widows that easily popped out. She said the bottom of the window was just a few inches from the floor and asked whether a casement window would work. Ms. Shaff said a casement would be fine. Ms. Thomas stated that she didn't want to install windows and then haue them not be approved. Ms. Shaff said the work would have to be done under permit and a permit could not be obtained for noncompliant windows. Ms. Moermond asked whether 90 days would be enough time to replace the windows. Ms. Thomas asked foz 120 days to replace the windows. Ms. Moermond recommended granring a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the egress windows in the upper right and left unit bedrooms, and a 5-inch variance on the openable height of 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 5 the egress window in the upper center unit bedroom. She recommended denying the appeal and granting an extension for 120 days to bring the egress windows in the lower left and end unit bedrooms into compliance. 9. Appeal of Philip Schloss to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1033 Galtier Street Appeliant Philip Schloss (15925 Hyland Point Court, Apple Valley, MN 55124) appeared. Mr. Schloss stated that the window had passed inspection in 2007. He provided photographs. Ms. Moermond reviewed the photographs and documentation from 2007. Ms. Shaff also reviewed the history and the correspondence with the DSI and PHA inspectors. Ms. Moermond asked about appeal of the order to replace the storm windows. Mr. Schloss responded that he was waiting for clarification of the code and what was required for compliance; he said the inspector had not responded to his e-mail inquiry. He said the storm windows could not be replaced because they were no longer made and he might have to remove the storms completely or install a permanent screen. Ms. Shaff clarified the requirements. Mr. Schloss responded that he would completely remove the exterior storm windows or install screens. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 1-inch variance on the openable width of the egress window in the first floor front bedroom. 10. Appeal of Bryan Spille to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1871- 1877 Grand Avenue. Lonnie Budziak, property manager, (800 4 th Street S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55414) appeared on behalf of the appellant. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Booker had conducted an inspection far the Fire C of O and reported that at 1871 Grand, the egress windows measured 20 inches in openable height by 32 inches in openable width in Units 1, 2, 3, 5, and the first bedroom in Unit 4. The sill heights in the basecnent units were 52 inches. The openable dimensions of the egress window in the second bedroom in Unit 4 were 12.5 inches high by 21 inches wide. At 1877 Grand, the egress windows in Units 1, 2 and 3 measured 19 inches high by 24 inches wide with sill heights of 52 inches. The egress windows in Unit 4 measured 16 inches high by 21 inches wide, and the egress windows in the first and second floors units measured 23 inches high by 31 inches wide. She asked for clarification of which were the first and second floar units. Ms. Budziak stated that the first floor were the garden level units and included the units listed in the inspector's report. She said the windows were double hung. Ms. Moermond recommended the following: 1871 Grand Avenue: Grant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in Units 1, 2, 3 and 5, and in the first bedroom in Unit 4; deny the appeal and grant a 90- day extension to bring the egress window in the second bedroom in Unit 4 into compliance. Step units must be installed to address sill height an the basement units. 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 6 1877 Grand Avenue: Grant a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in Units 1, 2 and 3; a 1-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in the first and second floor units; deny the appeal and grant an extension for 90 days to bring the bedroom egress window in Unit 4 into compliance. Step units must also be installed to address the sill height in Units l, 2 and 3. 1 l. Appeal of Yendung Van to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1350 Pavne Avenue. Appellant Yendung Van (6830 River Road, St. Paul, MN 55130) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Skow-Fiske had conducted an inspection for the Fire C of O and reported that the bedroom egress windows in Unit 1 had openable dimensions of 15.5 inches high by 42.5 inches side and a sill height of 52 inches, and in Units 2 and 3 had openable dimensions of 16.5 inches high by 26.5 inches wide. Ms. Moermond asked how many units there were. Ms. Van responded that there were four. Ms. Moermond asked if there were photographs. Ms. Van provided photographs showing the windows and the brick exterior. Ms. Shaff and Ms. Moermond reviewed the photographs. Ms. Moermond stated that she would only grant a variance for windows at least 16 inches high and at least 16 inches wide. She said the windows could be replaced with a different window type without damaging the brick; she recommended a crank-out window. Ms. Van said it seemed that cranking open a window would take longer than opening a double-hung window. Ms. Moermond stated that the issue at hand was window size. Ms. Van asked whether she could have until suminer to replace the windows. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting an extension to June 3Q 2010 to bring the bedroom egress windows in Units 1, 2 and 3 into compliance. A step unit must also be installed to address the sill height in Unit 1. 12. Appeal of David R. Busch, DRB #24 LLC, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 368 Thomas Avenue. Appellant David Busch and attorney Mark Kallenbach (2260 Ridge Drive, #13, Minneapolis, MN 55416) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Cummings had inspected for the Fire C of O on September 2 and reported 19 deficiencies. She said it wasn't clear what was being appealed. Ms. Moermond asked for clarification of the appeal. Mr. Busch stated that the improvements to the property had been done under pexmit and were approved when they were made, but ultimately he had only a coupie of objections: the short amount of time allowed for compliance and the overcrowding order forcing lum to remove a tenant. He said he had no authority to remove a tenant. 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 7 Ms. Shaff stated that she had spoken to the tenanYs attorney and that the tenant had moved out. Mr. Busch stated that the tenant had been "run out" by the fire inspector. Ms. Moermond asked whether the tenant had been forced out by the orders or actually run out by the inspector. Mr. Busch responded that the tenant had moved out because of the orders but had also told him the inspector had said she (the tenant) would have to leave or be thrown out. He asked for clarification of the code being enforced. Ms. Shaff reviewed the sleeping room squaze footage requirements. She stated that any room could be used for sleeping as long as the requirements for egress and smoke and carbon monoxide detectors were met. Mr. Busch asked whether those requirements were published somewhere. Ms. Moermond stated that it was in the St. Paul Legislative Code. Mr. Busch asked whether it was his responsibility to remove the tenants or the tenanYs responsibility to move out. Ms. Moermond stated that the letter was written to the owner, Mr. Busch. Mr. Busch said that the letter also ordered him to clean up the dog mess in the basement. He said he didn't feel that was his responsibility and asked for clarification of what his responsibilities were as a landlord. Ms. Moermond said that it was Mr. Busch's property. Mr. Busch stated that he leased to the tenants and had no right to go into the house. Ms. Moermond stated that city code held landlords responsible for managing the property. She said she was not interested in debating the issue but that Mr. Busch could take it up with the City Council. Mr. Busch stated that he had no problem conecting the life/safety issues. He asked whether the fire inspectars were also inspecting for other things, and referred specifically to Item 1 ordering that the fence/gate be repaired or replaced. He said his contractor had told him that it was in fine shape. Ms. Moermond suggested that Mr. Busch ask for clarification from the inspector. Ms. Shaff asked who had accompanied the inspectar during the inspection. Mr. Busch stated that he didn't know and hadn't been aware until he received the orders that the inspection had taken place. He said he assumed he had received a notice but had probably given it to someone else. Ms. Moermond suggested that the occupancy limit be included in the lease in the future. She recommended denying the appeal. Mr. Busch stated that his attorney was present to address the City's declination to hear his appeal of the vacant building status of the property at 771 Fulier Avenue. Mr. Kallenbach stated that notice requirements had not been met. He said Mr. Busch did not recall receiving the August 5 notification letter from the City, and was not aware of the Certificate of Occupancy revocation or Order to Vacate until the building was posted on September 8. He said the building was not vacant at that tixne and had passed a Section 8 inspection. 09-1221 October 6, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 8 Ms. Moermond stated that she would review the file and read her recommendation into the record in two weeks. 14. Follow up discussion regazding an appeal for an egress window permit for property at 889 Hudson Road. Ms. Spong stated that the property was classified as a pivotal historic structure, and the egress windows in question were in two third floor bedrooms which had openable dimensions of 19 inches high by 18 inches wide. She reviewed the inspection appeal history and correspondence with DSI, and said the design review application was incomplete. She said the contractor had ordered a large slider window that would require lowering the sill height from 20 to 18 inches, which was close to a level requiring safety glass. She said the HPC would prefer not to lose the center mullion and would like to see a casement window installed in the existing opening, which was 40 inches lugh by 22 inches wide. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a variance on the bedroom egress window square footage, and a variance of up to 2.5 inches on the openable width of the windows provided the openable height was at least 30 inches. She asked for documentation of the specific window being installed. Additional Address: Appeal of Lynne Swalchick, on behalf of Charles Avenue Partners LLC, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1604 Charles Avenue. (Continued from August 11) Appellant Lynne Swalchick (7800 Metro Parkway #300, Bloomington, MN 55425) appeared. Ms. Shaff reviewed the inspector's report which gave openable dimensions of 15.5 inches high by 30 inches wide for the double-hung egress windows in Units 14 and 15; and egress window sill heights of 49 inches in Unit 14, and 50.5 inches in Unit 15. Ms. Sawlchick asked whether steps could be installed to address sill height. She said they were garden-level apartments and the sill height was only an inch off. Ms. Shaff stated that the sill height requirement was 44 inches for replacement windows. Ms. Moermond reviewed the minutes from the August 11 hearing. She recommended denying the appeal and granting a 60-day extension to bring the bedroom egress windows in Units 14 and 15 into compliance. A step unit may also be installed to address sill height.