09-797Council File # 09-797
Green Sheet # 3072596
RESOLUTION
CITY OF,SAINT PpUL, MINNESOTA a5
Presented by
1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the July 7,
2 2009 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Appeals on Letters of Certificate of Occupancy
3 Deficiency Lists for the following addresses:
4
5 Prooertv Appealed Anpellant
6
7 1295 Danforth Street John Beard o/b/o Twin City Roofing
8 Construction and the property owners
9 Decision: Deny the appeal for a variance on the bedroom egress windows and grant 90 days to come into
10 compliance.
11
12 1671 Hovt Avenue East Angela and Eric Teegarden
13
14 Decision: Grant a 5-inch variance for the egress bedroom windows.
15
16 1890 Mechanic Avenue Terry Fransen
17
18 Aecision: Grant a variance for the egress bedroom windows in the entire building.
19
20 1074 Euclid Street John and Mary Dolan
21
22 Decision: Deny the variance request for the egress bedroom windows in the second floor apartments and
23 granting one year to come into compliance; deny the appeal for the furnace inspection report.
24
25 1756 Iowa Avenue East Grant Pylkas
26
27 Decision: Grant a 1.5-inch variance for the egress bedroom window in bedroom 1, and a 1-inch vaziance
28 for the egress bedroom window in bedroom 2.
29
30 435 Front Avenue Randy Peterson
31
32 Decision: Granting a 2.5-inch variance for the width for the slider, egress bedroom windows in Units 1, 2
33 & 3; grant a one-inch variance for the height of the egress bedroom windows in Units 4 through 7.
34
35 658 Conwav Street Keith Pederson
36
37 Decision: Grant a 3-inch variance for the egress bedroom windows in Units 1 and 2.
38
39 1319 Conwav Street Charles Crotty
40
41 Decision: Grant a 3-inch variance of the openable height for the egress bedroom windows in Units 4-11.
09-797
42 63 Macalester Street 176 Vernon Street Terry Gorman, o/b/o Macalester
43 and 200 Vernon Street College
44
45 Decisions: 63 Macalester Street: grant a 4-inch variance for the upper east egress bedroom window;
46 recommend denying the variance for the north egress bedroom window and granting 90 days to come into
47 compliance or compliance must be obtained before the unit is reoccupied. 176 V ernon Street: grant a
48 variance for the egress bedroom windows. 200 Vernon Street: grant a 7.5-inch variance of the openable
49 height for the bedroom egress windows.
50
51 729 Tuscarora Avenue and 891 Hudson Road Callan Crawford
52
53 Decisions: 729 Tuscarora Avenue: deny the appeal. 891 Hudson Road: deny the appeal for egress
54 bedroom windows and grant 120 days to come into compliance
55
56 1619 Marvland Avenue East #115 Lisa Moe, o/b/o Stuart Management
57
58 Decision: Grant a 6-inch variance for the egress bedroom windows.
59
60 349 Geor�e Street West and Tarryl Olson
61 1326 Third Street East
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
Decision: 349 George Street West: grant a two-year variance for the egress windows in the upper unit and
grant the variance for the egress bedroom windows for the first floor bedroom unit. 1326 Third Street
East: grant a 2-inch variance far the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in the upper south
and north units.
160 Curtice Street East
HerschelJacobson
Decision: Deny the appeal.
Adoprion Certified by Council Secretary
BY !/ //aA �iE�""l�it
ApprovedbyMayo. Date �2(p�y�.rq
�—�—
BY� _ �A...�. ✓I
Requested by Department oG
Sy:
Form Approved by City Attomey
By:
Foim Appzoved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By:
Approved by the Office of Financial Services
�
Adopted by Council: Date 7 �f ���q
09-797
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sfieet �
��� DeparLnenHOffice/Council: � Date Initiated: �
I co-�°°°��� ; ,�-,��,09 _ !, Green Sheet-NO;-3072596 -
� Contact Person & Phone:
; Marcia Moertnond
� Must Be on Cauncit Agenda by (Date):
t
p T RESOLUTION
E-Document Required: Y
Document Contact:
ConWctPhone:
.,� ' o
i
Assign i 2
Number 3
For
Routing � 4
Order , g
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All L f Sign
Action Requested:
Resolution approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of Le[ters of Deficiency and Permit Denial for
properties at: 1295 Danforth, 1671 Hoyt E, 1890 Mechanic, 1074 Euclid, 1756 Iowa E, 435 Front, 658 Conway, 1319 Conway, 63
Macalester, 196 Vemon, 200 Vernon, 729 Tuscarora, 891 Hudson, 1619 Maryland E, 349 George W, 1326 Third E, and 160 Curtice
E.
Recommendations: Appmve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commission
Personal Service Contracts 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 normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
AdvantageslfApproved:
Disadvantages If Approved:
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
ToWI Amount of
Transaction:
Funding Source:
Financial Information:
(Erzplain)
CosURevenue Budgeted:
Activity Number:
July'I5, 2009 10:15 AM Page 1
09-797
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ON LETTERS OF DEFICIENCY, CORRECTION NOTICES
AND CORRECTION ORDERS
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Room 330 City Hail, 15 Kellogg Blvd. West
STAFF PRESENT: Leanna Shaff, Department of Safety and Inspections (DSn — Fire Prevention;
and Mai Vang, City Council Offices
Appeal of Twin City Roofing Construction to a Variance Request for Egess Windows for
property at 1295 Danforth Street.
John Beard appeared on behalf of Twin City Roofing Construction, the appellant, on a building
permit for replacement windows for Arla and Anbrose Kruuip, the property owners.
Ms. Moermond stated that it appeared the window measurements were 14 inches in height by 30
inches in width and asked if this was correct. Mr. Beard stated that he believed the actual height
was 28 inches which was double the sash height. He said that the Krumps wanted to keep the same
window size so that they wouldn't have different types of windows throughout the house. The
building inspector indicated to him that he could not issue a permit and would have to appeal for a
variance on the size of the windows.
Ms. Moermond reviewed the memorandum from DSI regarding egress bedroom window
requirements. Based on those requirements, she recommended denying the appeal for the e�ess
bedroom windows as the heaght was 10 inches short of the 24 inch requirement. She said the height
would need to be at least between 16 to 18 inches. She recommended granting 90 days for the
property to come into compliance.
2. Appeal of Angela and Eric Teegarden to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for
property at 1671 Hovt Avenue East.
Angela Teegarden, property owner, appeared.
Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Teegarden whether she was only appealing the egress windows. Ms.
Teegarden confirmed that this was conect. Ms. Moermond stated that the window measured 19
inches in height and 27 inches in width. Since each inch in short fall for height was made up for in
by an inch in width, she recommended granting a 5-inch variance for the egress bedroom windows.
3. Appeal of Terry Fransen to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1890
Mechanic Avenue
Terry Fransen, property owner, appeared.
Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Fransen whether he was only appealing the egress windows. Mr.
Fransen confirmed that this was correct. Ms. Moermond stated that the window measurements
were as follows: l floor south — 20 inches in height and 26 inches in width; 1�' floor north — 22
inches in height and 26 inches in width; and 2 floor west — 20 inches in height and 26 inches in
width. Since each inch in short fall for height was made up far in by an inch in width, Ms.
09-797
July 7, 2009 Property Code Minutes
Moermond recommended granting a variance for the egress bedroom windows in the entire
building.
Page 2
4. Appeal of John and Mary Dolan to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List far property
at 1074 Euclid Street
John Dolan, property owner appeared. Ms. Moermond asked NIr. Dolan whether he was only
appealing the egress windows. Mr. Dolan responded that he was also appealing the heating
equipment inspection as a brand new boiler and water heater had been installed within the past four
to five years.
Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Shaff for a report. Ms. Shaff stated that according to the inspector's
report, the basement windows were 9 inches in height and 26 inches in width; the second floor north
and east bedrooms were 15.5 inches in height and 22 inches in width. As far as the heating
inspection report, if the new equipment had been installed within the past year, the report would not
be required. However, since the equipment was four to five years old, the inspection was required.
Mr. Dolan stated that the basement was not a bedroom; however, he was aware the tenant had a
futon in this room which had since been removed. Ms. Shaff stated that since the bed or fixton had
been removed, they would not consider this to be a bedroom.
Mr. Dolan stated that the windows had also been replaced approximately four to five years ago and
were casement windows which could easily be folded down and out. Ms. Shaff stated that there
was no permit on recard for replacement of the windows.
Ms. Moerxnond recommended denying the variance request far the egress bedroom windows in the
second floor apartments and granting one yeaz to come into compliance. The furnace inspection
report will need to be completed by a lacensed contractar.
5. Appeal of Grant Pylkas to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1756
Iowa Avenue East.
Ms. Moermond stated that the appellant had received a letter indicating the time of the hearing was
at 11:30 rather than 1:30. She said she reviewed the records and recommended granting a 1.5-inch
variance for the egress bedroom window in bedroom 1, and a 1-inch variance for the egress
bedroom window in bedroom 2.
6. Appeal of Randy Peterson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 435
Front Avenue.
Randy Peterson, property owner, appeared.
Ms. Moermond confirmed with Mr. Peterson that he was only appealing the egress windows. Mr.
Peterson responded this was correct. He said that the windows he currently had allowed for the
windows to be removed up and down. He said that the brick fagade of the building would not allow
for double-hung windows. He had attempted to find a sliding-type window that would give the
height and width requirements; however, he could not find one.
09-797
July 7, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 3
Ms. Moermond stated that the windows in units 1 and 2 measured 13 inches in height and 42 inches
in width; in unit 3 the measurement was 15 inches in height and 37 inches in width; and in units 4
through 7, the measurements were 19 inches in height by 36 inches in width. She said that windows
that could be removed which needed instructions to tenants on how to remove the windows was not
allowed.
Ms. Shaff asked whether he had looked at replacing the windows with casement windows. Mr.
Peterson responded that he had looked at them; however, they did not make them wide enough to
fill the gap which would require patching either side of the window. He said he could not find a
sliding window that was big enough to meet the requirements. He said he had gone to Menazds and
they had checked with all the window manufacturers and they did not have a slider that didn't have
a middle piece that encroached on the 20 inch width.
Ms. Moermond stated that the opening would then need to be 30 inches in glazed area. Mr.
Peterson responded that the glazed area on the upper sash was 33.5 inches wide and the lower sash
was 34.25 wide. The entire glazed area was 41 inches in height. Ms. Moermond stated that she
would rather recommend granting the variance for width rather than height. She said if he could
find a slider that had 18 or 19 inches in width, she could make a recommendation for the width.
She said she could not make a recommendation on an 11-inch variance in height.
Mr. Peterson contacted Ms. Vang after the hearing and said he had found sliding windows that were
17.5 inches in width and 36.75 inches in height.
Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 2.5-inch variance for the width for the slider, egress
bedroom windows in Units l, 2& 3. She recommended granting a one-inch variance for the height
of the egress bedroom windows in Units 4 through 7.
7. Appeal of Keith Pederson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 658
Conwav SYreet.
Keitk� Pederson, property owner, appeared.
Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Pederson whether he was only appealing the egress windows. Mr.
Pederson confirmed that tl�is was conect. Ms. Moermond stated that the window measurements
were as follows: Unit 1— 21 inches in height and 24 inches in width; and Unit 2— 21 inches in
height and 24 inches in width. Since each inch in short fall for height was made up for in by an inch
in width, Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 3-inch variance far the egress bedroom windows
in Units 1 and 2.
8. Appeal of Charles Crotty to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1319
Conwav Street.
Chaxies Crotty, property owner, appeared.
Ms. Moermond stated that in reviewing the arders, the egress windows measured 17 inches in
height and 24 inches in width. She asked Mr. Crotty whether he had any pictures of the windows.
Mr. Crotty responded that he did.
09-797
7uly 7, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 4
Ms. 5haff asked whether all of the windows in this building were the same size as the inspector only
noted unit 6 in the orders. Mr. Crotty responded that he was unsure on the size of the other
windows; however, he believed the gazden level units had casement windows and the rest of the
windows were doubl�hung windows.
Ms. Shaff asked how many units were garden level units. Mr. Crotty responded that there were
three. Ms. Shaff responded that there would then be eight windows which were double-hung which
would be approximately the same size.
Mr. Croriy stated that the double-hung windows all had stops at the top and by reznoving the stops,
it gained an extra two inches of openable height. He said he also had units that were similar to this
building at 1305 and 1311 Conway. He said the building at 1329 Conway was built in the mid-60s
and was a little bit of a different construction.
Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Shaff what the history was at this building. Ms. Shaff responded that in
2005 and 2006 there were issues with tenants at the property which required police activity. In
2007 and 2008, there were minor issues including one unit that did not pay Xcel. Ms. Moermond
asked Mr. Crotty when he had purchased the buildings. Mr. Crotty responded that he believed he
purchased the buildings in 1996. He said he was unaware of the police issues at the buiiding. Ms.
Moerniond suggested Mr. Crotty attend Crime-Free Multi-Housing and that he insert the necessary
language into his future leases concerning eviction of tenants.
Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 3-inch variance of the openable height for the egress
bedroom windows in Units 4-11. For buildings 1305 and 1311 Conway, she requested orders be
written regarding egress bedroom windows so that compliance may be achieved and she will
recommend granting the same variance without having to conduct another hearing.
9. Appeal of Terry Gorman, on behalf of Macalester College, to a Certificate of Occupancy
Deficiency List for property at 63 Macalester Street. 176 Vernon Street and 200 Vernon
Street.
Terry Gorman appeared on behalf of the proper[y owner, Macalester College. He presented
photographs of the buildings and the windows.
63 Macalester Street: Ms. Shaff stated that the window measurements for the upper east bedroom
were 16 inches in height and 25 inches in width. The measurements for the north bedroom were 15
inches in height and 23 inches in width. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 4-inch variance
for the upper east egress bedroom window; recommended denying the variance for the north egress
bedroom window and granting 90 days to come into compliance or compliance must be obtained
before the unit is reoccupied.
176 Vernon Street: Ms. Shaff stated that the measurements for the egress windows in the west
bedroom were 20 inches in height and 27 inches in width. Ms. Moermond recommended granting
a variance for the egress bedroom windows.
200 Vernon Street: Ms. Shaff stated that the measurements for the egress bedroom windows were
16.5 inches in height and 35 inches in width. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 7.5-inch
variance of the openable height for the bedroom egress windows.
09-797
July 7, 2049 Properiy Code Minutes Page 5
10. Appeal of Callan Crawford to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for properties at
729 Tuscazora Avenue and 891 Hudson Road.
Callan Crawford, property owner, appeared.
729 Tuscarora Avenue: Ms. Shaff stated that there was a single window in the bedroom which had
an air conditioning unit which was not allowed as it was blocking egress from the bedroom. Mr.
Crawford stated that this was a first floor unit and he had informed the tenant that he could not have
a window au conditioner as they can easily fall out. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the
appeal as no air conditioner is allowed in the window.
891 Hudson Road: Ms. Shaff stated that the window measurements were 19 inches in height and 18
inches in height in both third floor bedrooms. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal for
egress bedroom windows and granting 120 days to come into compliance.
11. Appeal of Lisa Moe, on behalf of Stuart Management, to a Certificate of Occupancy
Deficiency List for property at 1619 Maryland Avenue East #115.
Lisa Moe appeared on behalf of the property owner, Stuart Management.
Ms. Moermond stated that the window measurements were 18 inches in height and 42 inches in
width. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 6-inch variance for the egress bedroom windows.
12. Appeal of Tarryl Olson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 349
Geor�e Street West and 1326 Third Street East.
Tarryl Olson, property owner, appeared.
349 Gearge Street West Ms. Moermond stated that the egress bedroom window measurements in
the upper unit were 17 inches in height by 24 inches in width. The first floor egress bedroom
window measurements were 23 inches in height by 42 inches in width. Ms. Moermond asked what
the history was at this property. Ms. Shaff stated that it was listed as a category 1 vacant building
which file was opened June 17, 2008. Mr. Olson stated that he bought the building when it was
vacant and was beginning the inspection process to obtain a C of O. Ms. Shaff stated that the list of
violations were prior to Mr. Olson's ownership of the property. Ms. Moermond recommended
granting a two-year variance for the egress windows in the upper unit and granting the variance for
the egress bedroom windows for the first floor bedroom unit.
1326 Third Street East: Ms. Moermond stated that the egress bedroom window measurements in
the upper south unit were 22 inches in height by 24 inches in width. She recommended gxanting a
2-inch variance for the openable height of the bedroom egress window. The egress bedroom
window measurements in the upper north unit were 22 inches in height by 30 inches in width.
Ms. Moermond recommended Mr. Olson attend Crime-Free Multi-Housing and utilize the language
in his lease provisions with his tenants. Ms. Olson responded that he had attended the classes. Ms.
Moermond stated that she would consider granring a permanent variance for the egress bedroom
windows for the upper unit of 349 Gearge Street West provided Mr. Olson obtains a good history of
maintaining the property.
09-797
July 7, 2009 Property Code Minutes
Page 6
13. Appeal of Herschel Jacobson to a Team Inspection Report for property at 160 Curtice Street
East.
Herschel Jacobson, property owner, stated that he was appealing the entire orders that were issued
against the property. He said he owned other rental properties on the same block and had owned
properties for over 16 yeazs. He said the previous owner had asked him to buy the property or he
said he was going to collect the rent and let the properiy go into foreclosure. He had refizsed to
purchase the property at that tune. The property then went into foreclosure and he purchased the
property for $96,000 as a category 2 vacant building. He clauned he had paid all of the fees,
provided financial documentation that he could do the rehab and had fixed up the property as
required. He had called to have the property inspected by Fire and was informed he could not have
it inspected. He then had a building inspector come out to inspect the property and was informed he
had to put up a fire wall because of the electrical which he had not upgraded yet; however, he
intended to have it done. He said he wanted the vacant building status removed as he had tenants
who wanted to move in. He wanted to know which deparhnent had oversight of this process so he
could have the building inspected and signed off.
Ms. Shaff responded that since this was a vacant building, Fire would not be responsible for the
fmal inspection to obtain a C of O. She said the team inspection report was done on December 15,
2008 and a list of deficiencies was developed. Those items were listed on the report which
indicated that permits needed to be pulled by licensed contractors. The only permit she saw was for
a general building permit.
Mr. Jacobson stated that he didn't believe he needed an electrical permit for the work that needed to
be done such as outlet plates. Ms. Shaff reviewed the orders and stated that an electrical contractor
would need to pull a permit to do the work. Mr. Jacobson said there were fuse boxes in the units
which he wanted to replace with circuit breakers and believed that then he wouldn't need to put up a
fire wall. If he had known this was going to be such a`hightmare" he wouldn't have purchased the
property.
Ms. Moerxnond told Mr. Jacobson that he would need to hire an electrician, a plumber, and
mechanical contractars who would need to pull pernuts to do the work. The building inspector
could then go through the property and sign off on the C of O if all items were completed. Ms.
Moermond recommended denying the appeal.