Loading...
09-1357Council File # � �� Green Sheet # 3090236 Presented by RESOLUTIOPI CITY OF SAINT,QAUL, MINNESOTA �� 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the 2 November 3, 2009 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Appeals to Letters of Certificate of 3 Occupancy Deficiency Lists, Vacant Building Registration Notice & Fees, and Denial of Building Permits 4 to Replace Egress Windows for the following addresses: 5 6 Propertv Appealed Appellant 7 8 1666 Jessamine Avenue East Daryl and Nancy Olson 9 10 Decision: Deny the appeal and waive the vacant building fee for 90 days. 11 12 507 Frv Street 13 14 Decision: Deny the appeal and grant an extension for 90 days to bring the egress bedroom windows into 15 compliance. 16 17 1349 Asburv Street 18 19 Decision: Deny the appeal. 20 21 1359 Seventh Street East 22 23 Decision: Crrant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the southeast bedroom. 24 25 1004 Faiimount Avenue 26 27 Decision: Grant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of replacement egress windows in three 28 bedrooms. 29 30 1878-1880 I�lehart Avenue Michael Mugaas 31 32 Decision: Grant a variance on the ceiling height requirement in the basement bedrooms and hall at 1878 33 Iglehart and in the third floor bedrooms at 1880 Iglehart. 34 35 985 Jenks Avenue Youa Vue 36 37 Decision: Grant variances for the egress bedroom windows. 38 Mark Tracy, Tracy Brothers John Costello Mai Vang David and Kathleen McManus lYj- I �7 39 Requested by Depamnent of: � Form Approved by City Attorney By: Adopted by Council: Date � � Form Approved by Mayor foT Subuussion to Council Adoption Certified by Coun Secretary B BY� — / � 1 //{n/.c�/1, %//y/1 � Approved by Mayor: �Date I 2� 'ZZ�D 5 Approved by the Office of Financial Services BY� CX.I�(.`il__�1� Og. h �� By: � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet jy� ' f J�� : DepartmentlOffice/Council: ! Date initiated: , � CO -Council � 02 DEC 2009 � Green Sheet NO: 3090236 - ConWct Person 8 Phone: ' � � Marcia Moermond , Assign � Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): f Number i Por � Rou6ng � Doa Type: RESOLUTION I Order E-Document Required: Y Document Contact: ConWctPhone: Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip AN Locations for Signature) ucumuuem xwwreuvu nuuauua�e 0 Council � I � 1 1 Council i i DepartmentD'uector -! � 3 , Ii i 4 � �I i 5 � � i ResoluYion approving the decisions of the Legislafive Hearing Officer for Appeals to Letters, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency Lists, Vacant Building Registration & Fees, and Denial of Building Permits to Replace Egress Windows for the following addresses: 1666 Jessamine Ave E, 507 Fry St, 1349 Asbury St, 1359 Seventh St E, 1004 Faicmount Ave, 1878-1880 Iglehart Ave, and 985 Jenks Ave. ' Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Personal Service Contracts Must Mswer the Fallowing Questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract (or this depadment? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain ail yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet. Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): Advantages if Approved: DisadvanWges If Approved: Disadvantages If Not Approved: Totai AmouM of Trensaction: Funding Source: Financiai Information: (Euplain) CosURevenue Budgeted: Activity NUmber: December 2, 2�09 12:23 PM Page 1 ��'��� NIINUTES OF THE LEGISLATNE HEARING ON APPEALS OF LETTERS, LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION NOTICE5 & FEES AND DENIAL OF BUtLDING PERMITS TO REPLACE EGRESS WINDOWS Tuesday, November 3, 2009 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg B1vd. West Marcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 1:40 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Leanna Shaff, Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI) - Fire; Rich Singerhouse, DSI — Code Enfarcement; and Mai Vang, City Council Offices Appeal ofDaryl and Nancy Olson to a Vacant Building Registration Notice and Fee for property at 1666 Jessamine Avenue East. Appellant Nancy Olson (W8296 Highway 10, Ellsworth, WI 54011) appeazed. Mr. Singerhouse gaue a staff report. He said the building had been condemned on September 8 due to gas and electric shut off, among other deficiencies. He said the building had been refen from the C of O Program, Inspector Nelmark had inspected the property on October 14 and opened a Category 1 Vacant Building file. Ms. Moermond asked why it had been opened as a Category 1. Mr. Singerhouse said it should have been a Category 2, but might have been opened as a Category 1 if the inspector believed the building's exterior was in good condition in spite of the gas and electric shut-off. Ms. Moermond asked whether Ms. Shaff had a copy of the C of O file. Ms. Shaff said the items on the C of O inspection report included exit obstruction, inadequate egress windows, failure to provide access to all of the building, gas and electric, and storm door. Ms. Moermond asked whether it had been a full C of O inspection. Ms. Shaff said they had not been able to access all areas. Ms. Moermond asked whether the attic had been accessed. Ms. Olson stated that the attic was locked at the time of the inspection but the tenants that had been using the atric as a bedroom had been evicted. She said she had tried to contact Inspector Thomas prior to the October 8 inspection to ask for more time. Everything had been done except the carbon monoxide detector, but the home had then been burglarized. The water heater had been removed, the fiunace and air conditioner had been dismantled and were ready to be removed, and all of the copper piping was stripped from the house. Ms. Moermond asked when the house had been burglarized. Ms. Olson said it had been during the third week in September. 3he said they had reached a settlement with the insurance company and had a contractor ready to finish the work. She said she wanted to get a renter in as soon as possible and couldn't afford to pay the fee. Ms. Moermond asked when the Vacant Building file was opened. Mr. Singerhouse responded that it was opened October 16. November 3, 2009 Property Code Minutes �� � f��� Page 2 Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and waiving the vacant building fee for 90 days, but that the registration paperwork would have to be completed. Ms. Shaff asked whether it would remain a Category 1. Ms. Moermond responded that the C of O inspection report could be used so a full code compliance would not be required. Ms. Shaff noted that the appeal said the copper had been stripped and there was no water heater. Ms. Moermond responded that a full code compliance was not necessary and the Fire inspector would see that those things were not there. She told Ms. Olson that there would be additional orders on the furnace, air conditioner, water heater and pipes. 2. Appeal of Mark Tracy, Tracy Brothers, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 507 Fry Street. Appellant Mark Tracy (2467 Whitfield Drive, Mendota Heights, MN 55120) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Prill had conducted an inspection far the Fire C of O on September 25. She said the measurements taken at that time had been incomplete and read the new measurements. The new openable dimensions were 16 inches high by 30.5 inches wide for the Unit C bedroom egress window, 16,5 inches high by 26 inches wide for the north side window in the Unit D bedroom, and 16.5 inches high by 22.5 inches wide for the east side window in the Unit D bedroom. The southeast room in Unit C was not being used as a bedroom but had two windows the same size as those in the bedroom. Ms. Moermond asked whether anything else was being appealed. Mr. Tracy said he wasn't appealing anything else. He said the building had been in the family for 30 years and the windows had never been cited, and according to the fire code, if the windows were in compliance when they were installed they were in compliance now. He said the property didn't generate enough income for him to be able to replace the windows. Ms. Moermond asked whether there were photographs. Mr. Tracy and Ms. Shaff said there were not. Ms Moermond asked Ms. Shaff to address the code. Ms. Shaff reviewed the code being enforced and said it had not changed, and the fact that the windows hadn't been called in the past didn't make them acceptable now. Ms. Moermond asked whether they were double-hung windows. Mr. Tracy said they were. Ms. Moermond reviewed her criteria for granting a variance. She said for windows that opened 16 inches, she looked for two inches in extra width for every inch in height shortfall, and that in this case the width wasn't adequate. She said she would like to see photoa aphs showing the window dimensions and their locations. Mr. Tracy said he would provide photos of the windows. Ms. Moermond's decision is forthconling. On November 24, 2004, Ms. Moermond reviewed the photographs provided by the property owner showing the dimensions of the window openings. Based on the documentation, Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting a 90 day extension for the egress bedroom windows to come into compliance. November 3, 2009 Property Code Minutes �� 2�� Page 3 'i 3. Appeal of John Costello to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1344 Asbury Street. Appellant John Costello (2139 Moccasin Street, Mahtomedi, MN 55115) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She said the inspector had cited the windows and asked that the beds be removed from the basement bedrooms but had not provided measurements for the windows. Mr. Costello said the inspector had come back and taken measurements and condemned the bedrooms. He said an adjacent room was a walk-out. He said he had spoken with the Fire Marshal that day and everything else was done. Ms. Moermond asked for the window dimensions. Mr. Costello said they were regular basement windows. Ms. Shaff asked whether they were small and close to the ceiling. Mr. Costello said they were and he had never considered those windows as being usable for egress but had assumed the adjacent walk-out was adequate. Ms. Moermond stated that egress which required going thorough an adjacent room was not acceptable. 3he asked Ms. Shaff to clarify the requirement. Ms. Shaff said that every room also had to have two means of egress. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal. Appeal of Mai Vang to a Code Compliance Inspection Report to replace egress windows for property at 1359 Seventh Street East. Appellant Mai Vang and Mong Lee (1342 Winchell Street, St. Paul, NIN 55106) appeazed. Ms. Shaff said that the orders being appealed were from a code compliance inspection and she had not spoken with the inspector. Ms. Moermond read from a follow-up e-mail from DSI that the openable dimensions of the egress window in the center bedroom or office were 17 inches high by 31.5 inches wide and the sill height was 60 inches. Mr. Lee clarified that that room was a dining room with doors at both ends. He said the window cited had been in the master bedroom and had openable dimensions of 21 inches high by 33 inches wide. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the southeast bedroom. The window in the northeast bedroom is in compliance, and the center bedroom/office was not being used as a sleeping room. 10. Appeal of David and Kathleen McManus to the denial of a building permit to replace egress windows for property at 1004 Fairmount Avenue. Appellants David and Kathleen McManus appeared. November 3, 2009 Property Code Minutes D � ! 2 �� Page 4 ��J'l Ms. Moermond reviewed the paperwork submitted by the appellants and recommended granting a 4-inch variance on the openable height of replacement egress windows in three bedrooms. 11. Appeal of Michael Mugaas to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1878-1880 Iglehart Avenue. Appellant Michael Mugaas (1899 Marshall Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104) appeazed. Mr. Mugaas stated that he was only appealing the ceiling height requirement. He said he had obtained a building permit. Ms. Moermond noted that the permit was a rehabilitation permit for $90,000. Ms. Shaff said that she had conducted the inspection and that Mr. Maggus had provided good measurements, photos and diagrams. She said the basement ceiling height varied, and in some spaces didn't meet the 7-foot requirement by as much as huo inches. She said the ceiling on the third floor had steep angles and met the 7-foot requirement over 40 percent of the area. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a variance on the ceiling height requirement in the basement bedrooms and hall at 1878 Iglehart and in the third floor bedrooms at 1880 Iglehart. She said it should have been cited earlier if it were an issue. November 3, 2004 Property Code Minutes ��,, ��� Page 5 4. Appeal of Youa Vue to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 985 Jenks Avenue. Appellant Youa Vue (11991 30` Street N., Lake Elmo, MN 55042) appeared. Ms. Moermond confirmed that the windows were the only item being appealed. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She said Inspector Urmann had conducted an inspection for the Fire C of O and reported that the first floor windows were awning windows with openable dimensions of 12 inches high by 28 inches wide. The second floor windows had openable dimensions of 17 inches high by 27 inches wide in bedrooms 1 and 2; and 21 inches high by 27 inches wide in bedroom 3. Ms. Mcermond asked what type of window was on the second floor. Ms. Shaff said it wasn't specified in the inspector's report but she suspected they were double-hung based on the glazed azea. Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Vue what he was being appealed. Ms. Vue said the upper floor was okay but the stair units on the lower level had been there when they bought the house. He said he had fixed the upper windows so they opened to 22 inches. The lower level windows were high and had stair units with two steps but he could make them four steps. He had modified the window hardware on the awning windows so they also opened to 22 inches. Ms. Moermond said she did not see that sill height had been noted on the inspector's report. Ms. Shaff concurred. Ms. Moermond told Mr. Vue not to worry about the sill height. She said she was concemed about his repair of the awning windows and asked whether the windows stayed open on their own. Mr. Vue said they did. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Vue whether he could provide photographs of the awning windows, and the double hung windows in bedrooms 1 and Z on the second floor. Mr. Vue said he would. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in upper bedroom #3. Mr. Vue will provide photographs showing the openable dimensions and hardware of the main floor awning windows and the openable dimensions of the egress windows in upper bedrooms 1 and 2. The decision on those windows is forthcoming. Ms. Moermond said she would grant 90 days if the windows needed to be replaced. On December 2, 2009, Ms. Moermond reviewed the photographs provided by the property owner showing the hardwaze being used for the awning windows and the openable dimensions of the egress windows in upper bedrooms 1 and 2. Based on the documentation, Ms. Moermond recommended granting variances for the egress bedroom windows.