Loading...
09-863Council File # �'� Green Sheet # 3074456 Presented by RESOLUTION CITY OF S,AINT PAUL, MINNESOTA j L� 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the July 28, 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 Pronertv Appealed Appellant 6 7 719 Stewart Avenue Randall Young 8 9 Decision: Deny the appeal and granting 90 days for bringing the window into compliance. 10 11 1511 Rose Avenue East Brad Notenberg 12 13 Decision: Deny the appeal and grant an extension for one year to bring the windows into compliance (an 14 additional one-year extension is added for each of the appellanY s four buildings). 15 16 604-608 Desnoyer Avenue Jay Olson 17 18 Decision: Crrant a 2-inch vaziance on the openable width of the bedroom egress windows in both basement 19 units. 20 21 1921 Feronia Avenue Dawn Williams 22 23 Decision: Grant a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the sleeping room egress window in Unit B3, 24 and a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the sleeping room egress window in Unit B 1. 25 26 1161 St. Clair Avenue and 1049 Goodrich Avenue Jackie Visnovec 27 28 Decision: 1161 St. Clair Avenue: Grant a�-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress 29 windows throughout the building. 1049 Goodrich: Grant a 2-inch variance on the openable height of the 30 bedroom egress windows in all units. 31 32 183 Chatsworth Street South Jackie Visnovec 33 34 Decision: Grant a 5.25-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the south bedroom of 35 Unit B 1; and a 7.5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the north bedroom of Unit 36 B2. The windows must be code compliant if they are replaced. 37 38 1475 Cleveland Avenue North Dennis Krehlow, o/b/o MN 39 Student's Co-op 40 Decision: Grant a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 13, and a 41 2-inch vaziance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 22. ��'�Ll � 42 147 Virsinia Avenue 43 John Sadusky 44 Decision: Grant an 8-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 2; steps 45 must be installed to address the sill height in units 1 and 2; the living room must not be used as a bedroom 46 in Unit 22. 47 48 1430, 1432, and 1434 Case Avenue 49 Matt Mazanec 50 Decision: Grant a 1-inch variance on the openable width of the bedroom egress windows in all units at all 51 three addresses. 52 53 1329 St. Paul Avenue and Lorri Steffen 54 555 Cleveland Avenue and 2064 Niles Avenue 55 56 Decision: 1329 St. Paul Avenue: Grant a 5-inch variance far the openable height of the bedroom egress 57 windows throughout the building. 555 Cleveland Avenue and 2064 Niles Avenue: Grant a 1.5-inch 58 variance far the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout both the buildings. 59 60 61 62 63 434 En�lish Street #8 Decision: Grant a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 8. Greg Mailand, o/b/o Mailand Properties 64 2389 Universitv Avenue West Joseph Brown 65 66 Decision: Grant the appeal for the missing floar tile in the studio as long as the space was not rented and 67 grant a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout the building. 68 69 Requested by Department oE Adoption Ce by Co 7 Secretary BY� / f fff�9�� �' /�✓ llrS/1r9 Approved by Mayo Date Q� ��-� �� ,/ `���_.T�--�- BY� _ ,.y�IGLt-C'✓ � � Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: Approved by the Office of Financial Services � � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � 6�'��P'/ DepartmerWOfficetCOUncil: ! DatelnAiated: � co_��°���� ' a�-A��-09 � Green Sheet NO: 3074456 ConWci Person & Phone: � O Marcia Moermond � � ; � 1 Assign � 2 Must Be o� Council Agenda by (Date): ; Number 3 ; For i Routing < Doa Type; RESOLUTION � Order I 5 i E-DOCUment Required: Y i � Document Contact: I Contad Phone: 1 Totai # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) DenartmentAiredor Citv C1erk r I Resolution approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Appeals of I.etters of Deficiency for properties at 719 Stewart, 1511 Rose E, 604-608 Desnoyer, 1921 Feronia Ave, 1161 St. Clair, 1049 Goodrich, 183 Chatswor[h S, 1475 Cleveland S, 147 Virginia, 1A30 1432 & 1434 Case, 1329 St. Paul, S55 Cleveland S& 2064 Niles, 434 English #8, and 2389 University W. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB Committee Civtl Sernce Commission Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Foliowing Questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city employee� , Yes No 3. Does ihis personlfirm possess a sk�ll not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet. Initiating Problem, lssues, Opportunify (Who, What, When, Where, Why): AdvanWges If Approved: Disadvantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Not Approved: Totat AmouM of Transaction: Funding Source: Financial Information: (F�cplain) CostlRevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: August 5, 200911:37 AM Page 1 D�1 �Sl�� MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON APPEALS OF LETTERS OF DEFICTENCY Tuesday, July 28, 2009 Room 330 City Hall, 15 Kellogg Blvd. West The hearing was called to oxder at 1:35 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Leanna Shaff, Department of Safety and Inspections (DS� — Fire Prevention; and Mai Vang, City Council Offices 1. Appeal of Randall Young to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 719 Stewart Avenue. Appellant Randy Young (1530 Snelling Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108) appeared. Ms. Moermond confirmed with Mr. Young that the appeal was a building permit issue and asked whether there was staff present from the Building area of DSI. Ms. Shaff said that there was no building permit staff present. She said online recards showed an open building permit and orders relating to an egress window with openable dimensions of 15 inches wide by 42 inches high. Ms. Moermond asked when the orders had been issued. Ms. Shaff said the orders were issued on June 26 and the permit had been issued on May 12. Ms. Moermond asked whether the permit had been issued far those dimensions. Mr. Young said the permit had probably not been issued specifically for those dimensions and aclrno�vledged that the situation was his fault. He said he initially bought a double-hung window but the opanable height had been too short, so he purchased a casement window but was having trouble finding egress hardware. Ms. Moermond asked what the openable dimensions of the double-hung window were. Mr. Young said the width was okay but the height was way too short. Ms. Moermond asked about the permit process and whether the permit had been issued far the double-hung window. Mr. Young said the permit was for a window replacement. Ms. Moermond asked whether the permit office had supplied Mr. Young with a handout or any information on egress requirements. Mr. Young said he had that information from a window replacement he did on another property. Ms. Shaff confirmed with Mr. Young that the building inspector had been out to inspect the window on June 24. Ms. Moermond said there was a note in the Fire inspector's report regarding the need to close the building permit, but that the building permit could not be closed because the window was non- compliant. She asked what the people from the Building area were saying about the situation. Ms. Shaff said she did not know. July 2$, 2009 Property Code Minutes �9 �� Page 2 Mr. Young said the window was listed with the building inspector as non-compliant. He said he had spoken with Inspector Neis who had agreed to extend the compliance date unril after the appeal. He said he would either have to have egress hazdware specially made or cut into the siding to accommodate a larger window. Ms. Shaff asked whether he had gone directly to the manufacturer. Mr. Young said that he had tried the manufacturer and Menards. Ms. Moermond confirmed with Mr. Young that the window in question was in an attic bedroom in the upper unit of an upperflower duplex. She asked how many bedrooms were in the upper unit. Mr. Young said there were four, and that it was a sober house. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Young whether he thought he would meet with success in finding egress hardware to expand the openable width of the window. She said she would be looking for at least 16 inches in openable width. Mr. Young said they would make it work one way or another. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting 90 days for bringing the window into compliance. 2. Appeal of Brad Notenberg to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1511 Rose Avenue East. Appellant Brad Notenberg (3450 Lexington Avenue, #100, Shoreview, MN 55126) appeared. Ms. Moermond confirmed with Mr. Notenberg that the egress windows were the only item being appealed. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She said that Inspector Thomas had conducted a refenal re-inspection and reported that the openable dimensions of the egress windows in all one-bedroom apartments and in the master bedroom of the two bedroom apartments were 15 inches wide by 36 inches high. Mr. Notenberg said that he had done research and had code references, and had spoken with Kevin McGinty at the state inspector level who had told him there was more leniency with older buildings. He said the building being appealed was one of four buildings with low-income housing and that if he was forced to replace the windows, he would be put out of business. He said he had read that easily removable windows were acceptable if residents were instructed as to their removal, and he would be willing to provide training fliers or demonstrations for the on-site caretakers. Ms. Moermond asked about the capital improvement schedule at the properties. Mr. Notenberg said they had completed a large remodeling three years ago that had not included window replacement, and they were now just maintaining the building. He said there had been several inspections over the previous five years and that the window issue had just now been pointed out through a tenant refenal. He said the building was very safe otherwise. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and granting an extension for one year to bring the windows into compliance. She said one year would be added for each of the appellanYs four buildings (four years for all four buildings), and the year would begin on the date the City Council acted on the matter. July 28, 2009 Property Code Minutes ��'�� Page 3 3. Appeal of Jay Olson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 604-608 Desnover Avenue. Appellant Jay Olson (8023 Lake Drive, Forest Lake, MN 55025) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She said that Inspector Imbertson had conducted a Fire Certificate of Occupancy inspection and reported that the openable dimensions of the egress windows in the four basement bedrooms in both units were 38 inches hi� by 18 inches wide. She asked whether the air conditioning units in the upstairs egress windows and the bed in the mechanical room had been taken care of. Mr. Olson said that they had. Ms. Shaff said the only item remaining was the 2-inch shortfall in width. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 2-inch variance on the openable width of the bedroom egress windows in both basement units. 4. Appeal of Dawn Williams to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1921 Feronia Avenue Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendation prior to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. She recommended granting a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit B3, and a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit B 1. 5. Appeal of 7ackie Visnovec to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1161 St. Clair Avenue and 1049 Goodrich Avenue. Ms Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendation prior to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. 1161 St. Clair Avenue: Grant a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout the building. 1049 Goodrich: Grant a 2-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows in a11 units. Additional Address: 183 Chatsworth Street South Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report dated July 24, 2009 and recommended granting a 5.25-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the south bedroom of Unit B 1; and a 7.5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress window in the north bedroom of Unit B2. The windows must be code-compliant if they are replaced. July 2$, 2009 Property Code Minutes 0/�o�J Page 4 6. Appeal of Dennis Krehlow, on behalf of MN StudenYs Co-op, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1475 Cleveland Avenue North. Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendation prior to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. She recommended granting a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 13, and a 2-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 22. Appeal of 7ohn Sadusky, on behalf of MacDusky Holdings, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 147 Virginia Avenue. Appellant John Sadusky (2108 E. 43` Street, Minneapolis, MN 55407) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She said that Tnspector Neis had conducted a Fire Certificate of Occupancy inspection on June 24 and reported that the openable dimensions of the sleeping room egress window in Unit 1 were 15.25 inches high by 26.25 inches wide with a sill height of 53.5 inches, and in Unit 2 were 16 inches high by 26.25 inches wide with a sill height of 53.5 inches. She said that in Unit 22 the inspector had been unable to fully measure the window due to obstructions. Ms. Moermond confirmed with Mr. Sadusky that Unit 1 was in the basement. Mr. Sadusky said they were all basement units. Ms. Moermond said that 15.25 inches was just too short. Mr. Sadusky said he was not appealing that window. Ms. Moermond asked whether he was appealing the window measuring 16 inches high by 34.25 inches wide. Mr. Sadusky said he was. He thought the window in Unit 22 that the inspector had said was un-measureable was the same size. Ms. Moermond said that for a height shortfall that large. she looked for two extra inches in width for every inch in shortfall in height, which would be a 36 inch openable width. She recommended granting an 8-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 2. Ms. Moermond said the inspector's notes indicated that in Unit 22, the living room was being used as a bedroom and there were obshuctions in front of the egress window. Mr. Sadusky said those had been tenant-related issues and had been addressed, and the inspector had been there that morning for a re-inspection. Ms. Shaff asked about the sill height in Units 1 and 2. Mr. Sadusky said he would install steps. Ms. Shaff reviewed the requirements. Mr. Sadusky said he wanted to voice some frustration. He said he hadn't wanted to appeal the orders but had been encouraged to do so by the inspector who had told him that variances were granted in 95% of the cases. He said he felt that if that was the case, the city should establish a consistent policy and the appeal was a waste of his and the city's time. July 28, 2009 Property Code Minutes Qq�(Q / Page 5 Ms. Moermond said she had considered Mr. Sadusky's case and had felt he needed to come in because his windows fell outside of what she would normally consider for a variance. She said the city was working toward getting a system put in place. 8. Appeal of Matt Mazanec to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1430, 1432, and 1434 Case Avenue. (Rescheduled from 7uly 21) Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendat3on prior to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. She recommended granting a 1-inch variance on the openable width of the sleeping room egress windows in all units at all three addresses. [The height and width measurements in the inspector's report for 1434 Case appear to be reversed.] 9. Appeal of Lorri Steffen to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1324 St. Paul Avenue and 555 Cleveland Avenue S. & 2064 Niles Avenue. (Also requested and appeal for 1835 Randolph Avenue which has not been inspected yet) Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendation priar to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. 1329 St. Paul Avenue: Grant a 5-inch variance for the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout the building. 555 Cleveland Avenue and 2064 Niles Avenue: Crrant a 1.5-inch variance for the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout both the buildings. 10. Appeal of Greg Mailand, on behalf of Mailand Properties, to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 434 Bn�lish Street #8. Ms. Moermond reviewed the inspector's report and made her recommendation priar to the hearing. The appellant was contacted and did not appear. She recommended granting a 4-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress window in Unit 8. 12. Appeal of Joseph Brown to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 2389 Universitv Avenue West. Appellant Joseph Brown and Feter Brown (both P.O. Box 8161) appeared. Ms. Shaff said that Tnspector Skow-Fiske had conducted a Fire Certificate of Occupancy inspection on June 18 and reported that the items being appealed were the bathroom tloor at 2397 University, and the egress windows. She said the egress windows were measured at 21.5 inches high by 44 inches wide except in Unit 206 where Yhey measured 22 inches high by 29 inches wide. Peter Brown said they were not appealing the bathroom floor but were appealing item 8, the order to repair and maintain the floor in an approved manner. He said the floor in the artisYs studio was vinyl tiie over plywood and there were some missing tiles, but they didn't feel it made sense to spend money fixing up a studio floor. July 28, 2009 Property Code Minutes ��0�� Page 6 Ms. Moermond asked which room it was and whether it was a one-room shzdio. Peter Brown said the room was Unit 397 and was a storefront studio not used by anyone else. Ms. Moermond asked whether the tile was damaged. Peter Brov✓n said there were some tiles missing; he provided photographs. He said he had called the inspector to ask for clarification of what was required, but didn't feel that he got a clear answer. Joseph Brown said the tiles were about an eighth of an inch thick and the missing tiles did not present a tripping hazard. He said the last inspector had not mentioned the floor and he felt it would a waste af time and money to fix up the studio floor. Ms. Moermond asked what kind of work was done and what materials were used in the studio; specifically, whether heat or water were used. Joseph Brown said he was a sculptor and used a variety of materials but did not use water in the studio. Ms. Moermond asked whether the inspector had made any notes about what the floor issues were. Ms. Shaff said there were not any notes but that orders would normally be written for missing tiles. She said that removing the remaining tiles, replacing the missing tiles or installing different flooring materials were all options for complying. Ms. Moermond asked whether the remaining tiles could be removed. Peter Brown said the studio was 1,200 square feet and filled with sculpting supplies and materials, and removing the tiles would be a major ordeal for no real cause. He reiterated that the space was not a rental space or living space. Joseph Brown said that if they were ever to rent the space out, there was a lot of work that would have to be done on it, but they were not going to rent it out. Ms. Moermond recommended granting the appeal for the missing floor tile in the studio as long as the space was not rented. She said she would not grant a variance, and that the orders could be rewritten at the next inspection. Ms. Moermond also recommended granting a 3-inch variance on the openable height of the bedroom egress windows throughout the building.