Loading...
10-23Council File # 10-23 Green Sheet # 3093336 RESOLUTION OF Presented by PAUL, MINNESOTA _+ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the December 1, 2009 decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Appeals to Letters, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency Lists and Vacant Buildang Registration Notice and Fee for the following addresses: 5 Pronertv Anpealed 6 7 888 Burr Street 8 Anpellant Diana Morales 9 Decision: Deny the appeal and grant an extension for one week to clean-up the property; a code 10 compliance inspection will need to be conducted. ]1 12 700 Edgerton Street 13 14 Decision: Grazit the appeal. 15 16 1074 Arkwri�ht Avenue 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 34 31 Ahti Hujanen Telly Wilcox Decision: Grant a 5.5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress windows for the bedroom measuring 18.5" high x 33" wide; deny the appeal for the bedroom windows measusing 14" high x 36" wide and grant a 90-day extension to bring the windows into compliance. 1607-1609 Van Buren Avenue Kent Peterson Decision: 1607 Van Buren: grant a 6.25-inch variance on the openable height for the third floor egress bedroom windows; and 1609 Van Buren: deny the appeal for the third floor egress bedroom windows and grant a six-month extension to bring the windows into compliance. 1751 Fourth Street East Nailah Butler Decision: Grant a 2-inch variance on the openable height of the egress bedroom windows on the 2" floor 32 and grant a variance on the ceiling height. 33 34 1817 Ashland Avenue. Josephine Daly 35 36 Decision: Grant a 4-inch variance on the openable width of the egress bedroom windows in Unit 5; deny 37 the appeal on the egress bedroom window in t3nit b and grant a six-month extension to bring the window 38 into compliance. Appellant also needs to install perxnanent, fixed steps to address the sill height issue in 39 Unit 5. 40 41 10-23 42 1756 Beech Street 43 Chazles Dodge 44 Decision: Grant a 5-inch variance on the openable heig�t of the egess windows in the upstairs and 45 downstairs bedrooms; deny the appeal for installation of deadbolt lock; deny the appeai on the sidewalks, 46 walkways and stairs, allowing for a temporary patch of problem areas unril a permanent repair can be done 47 in spring 2010. 48 49 1344 Suumait Avenue 50 Edward Kaye 51 Decision: Grant the appeal provided prominent signage is placed on the door that it must be pulled to 52 open; the entire building must be a smoke-free facility. 53 Bostrom Cartex Hanis Helgen Rec�uested by Deparhnent of :� 5tark Thune Adopted by Council: Date Adoprion Certi�fie / b / y Council S cretary �Y � / /C1�7 ��� y o/� Approved pydGI'�yo ate � j . B y' �� � ��— Form Approved by City Attomey By: Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: Approved by the Office of Financial Services By: 1Q-23 � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � . DepartmenUO�ce(Councik Datelnitiated: i ; co_�°°n°�' ; 2g4EC2009 ; Green Sheet NO: 3093336 Gontact Person 8 Phone: Marda Moertnond ; Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): T RESOLUTION E•Dxument Required: Y Document Gontact: CnnWCtPhnne: �► : Assign Number I For Routing Order � Total # of Signature Pages _, (Clip All Locations for Signature) U 'Couacil i� 1 1Council ' Depar[mentDirector I 2 iCtitv Clerk City Clerk � 3 I ! 4 ' I �— j � ' �—� Resolufion approving the decisions of the Legislative Hearing Officer for Appeals to Letters, Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency Lists and Vacant Building Registration Notice and Fee for the following: 888 Bwr Street, 700 Edgerton Street, 1074 Arkwright Avenue, 1607-1604 Van Buren Avenue, 1751 Fourth Street East, 1817 Ashland Avenue, 1756 Beech Street, and 13A4 Summit Avenue. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB CommiHee Qvd Service Commission Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions: 1. Has this personlfirm ever worked under a coMract for this departmenY? Yes No 2 Has ihis personnrm ever been a city empioyee? Yes No 3. Does this person)firm possess a skili not normaliy possessed by arry current ciry employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet. Initiating Probiem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, Whaq When, Where, Why): Ativantages If Approved: Disadvantages If Approved: DisadvanYages If Not Approved: Tota( Amount of Transaction: Fundtng Source: Financial information: (EzpiainJ December 28, 2009 11;52 AM CosURevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: Page � 10-23 MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OFFICER ON APPEALS OR LETTERS OF DEPICIENCY, VACANT BUILDING REGTSRATION NOTICES & FEES AND DBNIAL OF BiJII�DING PERMTTS Tuesday, December 1, 2009 Room 330 CityHall, 15 Kellogg Blvd. 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 (DSn — Fire; Rich Singerhouse, ASI— Vacant Buildings; and Mai Vang, City Councii Offices Appeal of Diana Morales to a Vacant Building Reo strarion Notice and Fee for property at 888 Burr Street. Appellant, Diana Morales, (888 Bun St, St Paul, MN 55130) appeared. Inspector Singerhouse gave a staff report. The property was condemned on December 8, 2007 which resulted in a vacant building file being opened on December 12, 2007 and DSI had been monitoring the building since that time. He did an inspection of the property on March 10, 2009, finding Ms. Morales there who claimed she was at the property from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., cleaning and maintaining the house, but was not staying there. He received a call on November 16, 2009, notifying him that both the Police Department and Animal Control were at the property reporting that someone was living in the house, that numerous cats were there, and that the house was a mess. At that time, he informed Ms. Morales that he would give her two weeks to clean up the house and get a code compiiance inspection or he would begin the demolition process. He noted that since the vacant building status will be two years old on December 12, 2009, its status would automat]cally be changed from a Category 2 to a Category 3. Ms. Morales said that the two-week timeframe for clean-up was the only thing ti�at she is appealing. She said she had numerous personal issues: unemployment, health issues, a death in her family, and it had been very difficult for her. This property was le8 to her by her father, it was the only thing that she owned, and she had paid the house off with her inheritance. She said she would like to do the required clean-up and repairs so that she may reoccupy the house. She just recently became employed and believed her life was beginning to look up. She indicated that her new income will afford her the ability to begin making the required repairs. Ms. Moermond asked how many cats were found in the building. Ms. Marales responded that there �uere 15-16 cats. She indicafed that the complainant also had issues with another neighbor who lets her cats outside. She said Animal Control had been coming out for all of the cats and they have a11 been removed, both inside and outside. Ms. Moermond asked what efforts had been made to clean up the building. Ms. Morales responded that the pron ess has been slow but she did some work. She had been staying with the neighbor next door off and on until this neighbor moved out last month; she had also been staying with her slgnificant other. She said she did not want to live like a vagabond 10-23 December 1, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 2 anymore; she wanted to get herself togett�er and get this matter put behind her and move forward. She was prepued to begin working on the clean-up when she was not at work. She admitted that she had been very negligent, but her personal issues held her back. She was now looking to arrive at a reasonable rimeframe for her to prepare the house for an inspection, perhaps two months or so. Mr. Singerhouse explained that the building deficiency inspection will give her six months to rehab the house, but wili require a code compliance inspection first, as well as for her to pull the necessazy pernuts to complete the work. He reiterated that what he had told her was that she had two weeks to clean up the house and get a code compliance inspecrion done or he would begin the demolition process, which means he would send her an appoinhnent letter in two weeks and come out to do a building deficiency inspection of the property. At that time, ffie vacant building status would change from a Category 2 to a Category 3, which would then require a$5,000 bond be posted. Ms. Morales stated that she had misunderstood what he had told her and thou�t that in the two week period that if a11 the code compliance items were not completed, then her home would be boarded up and then demolished. Ms. Moermond recommended Mr. Singerhouse complete a Building Deficiency Inspection and that Ms. Marales schedule a Code Compliance Inspection right away as it took approximately two to three weeks to schedule. 5he emphasized that the sooner she gets the code compliance inspection, the sooner she will be able to assess what the necessary repairs wili cost her, and what is involved to bring the house into full compliance. She suggested she have a general contractor look at the code compliance list and wallc through the house to advise her. Ms. Morales stated that she was very concerned about this process costing a lot of money, as well as the rimeframe, and that if this happens, she will be out on the street in two months because the City will decide iYs not livabie, Ms. Moermond said it appears that she is already living in the house. Ms. Morales denied that, indicating that she goes there to check her mail. Ms. Moermond reiterated that the house will not be able to be occupied until all of the repairs have been completed, and if they cannot be completed, that the house will be demolished. Ms. Morales said that she believes the timeframe to be unfair. Ms. Moermond pointed out that if the City Council does determine that to be the case, they can provide her with an extension to complete the repairs, and that such extensions are of six-month intervals for the fixes to be made. She emphasized that a urine and feces-damaged house is a huge health issue. Ms. Morales said that she would like to be given the chance to have a week to continue with clean- up and then have the inspection. Ms. Moermond stated that while Ms. Morales was living in the hoase with her father, there were 25 cats living there with them. As of November 15, 2009 there were 15-16 cats and that some had babies and were downstairs. Ms. Moermond said that there were pictures of dead cats in the house with cat feces throughout and pointed out that she was not seeing this situation as others are viewing it. 10-23 December 1, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 3 Ms. Morales responded that she did understand that it was a problem that they got into which escalated. Ms. Moetmond stated that the code compliance list will likely state specifics, such as replacement of sub-floors and flooring, and may or may not talk about needing a new fiuuace or having the house re-wired, etc. It is common that when a house is in this state of disrepair it is not unlikely that the cost far such repairs could approximate $75,OOQ. She advised Ms. Morales that she consider what she may be able to do to finance the repairs. She also asked her to consider what steps she will be taking to avoid finding herself in a similar situation again, if she's able to complete the required repairs. She also stated that if it was difficult for her to come up with the $433 to get the code compliance inspection, she was concerned that she would not be able to post the $5,000 bond to pull the permits or pay for the potential $75,000 of work necessary to complete the repairs. Ms. Moermond recommended denying the appeal and a an extension for one week to clean- up the property; a code compliance inspection will then need to be scheduled. Appeal of Ahti Hujanen to a Vacant Building Registration Notice and Fee for property at 700 Ed�erton Street. Appellants Hillary and Ahti Hujanen (7545 43 St N, Oakdale, MN 55128) appeared. Mr. Singerhouse provided a staff report. A category 1 vacant building was opened on October 29, 2008 due to a C of O revocation on October 28, 2008. The vacant building fee for 2008 was paid on December 3, 2008 and was now past due for 2009. Ms. Hujanen said that they have been attempting to get the C of O renewed but had been unable to connect with Inspector Thomas to arrange for an Inspection. Ms. Shaff suggested that the best time to call Inspectar Thomas was between 7:30 and 9:00 a.m. Ms. Moermond azivised the appellants not to pay the vaca2it building fee for 2009-2010 and if the fee did go to assessment, that they appeal the assessment by attending the Legjslative Hearing. She recommended granting the appeal. 4. Appeal of Telly Wilcox to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 107A Arkwriaht Avenue. The Appellant, Telly Wilcox (75 Wentworth Ave W, West St Paul, MN 55118) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. 5he stated that Inspector Barb Cuuunings had inspected far the Fire C of O and reported that openable dimensions of the two bedrooms in each unit were 21 inches wide by 14 inches high and 33 inches wide by 18 '/z inches high, where the code requires 20 inches wide by 24 inches high. Mr. Wilcox reported that he had received a permit to replace the two 21 inch wide by 14 inch high �vindows with sliders. Photos were submitted. With respect to the two remaining windows of 33 inches wide by 18 %z inches high, he found nothing to replace them with in arder to meet the egress standards. 10-23 December 1, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 4 Ms. Moermond recommended granring a 5.5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress windows for the bedroom measuring 18.5" high x 33" wide; she recommended denying the appeat for the bedroom windows measuring 14" high x 36" wide and granting a 90-day extension to bring the windows into compliance. 5. Appeal of Kent Peterson to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1607- 16Q9 Van Buren Avenue. The P,ppellant, Kent Peterson (1043 Grand Ave #172, St Paul, MN 55105} appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspector Jim Prill had inspected for the Fire C of O on November 4, 2009 and reported that in 1607, on the 3 Td floor that double-hung windows openable dimensions measured 17 3 1< inches high and 35 inches wide, and in 1609 on the 3 floor, that double-hung windows openable dimensions measured 14 'h high by 31 inches wide. Ms. Moermond established from Mr. Peterson that 1 b09 3` floor egress window, is a large dormer with the porch roof down one level. There was discussion regarding the 1609 3` floor double-hung window openable dimensions measuring 14 % high by 31 inches wide. She nated thal the height requirement is 24 inches and Yhat when addressing windows of 16-18 inches openable dimensions draws significant concem and she looks for 2 inches for each 1 inch in shortfall, so if the window is 1 inch short in height then 2 mare inches in width is what she looks for. Mr. Peterson provided that these are the original double-hung windows with the sash cords and weights wath the pulley wheels that restrict opening any higher. Ms. Moermond acknowledged the need for an extended period of time to allow Mr. Peterson to speak with a window contractar to come up with an appropriate solution in texms of dimensions, yet which maintains some of the architecturai design. She noted that the HPC has been looking at casement windows that look like double-hung which maintain the integrity of the faqade. Ms. Moermond recommended the following: 1607 Van Buren: grant a 6.25-inch variance on the openable height for the third floor eg bedroom windows; and 1609 Van Buren: deny the appeal for the third floar egress bedroom windows and grant a six- month extension to bring the windows into compliance. 7. Appeal of Nailah Butler to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1751 Fourth Street East. Cazl Hendrickson, father-in-law of the property owner, Nailah Butler, (6802 Crest Place, Live Oak, TX 78233) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Inspectar James Thomas had inspected for the Fire C of O on November 5, 2009 and reported that openable dimensions of the 2" $edroom is 22 inches 10-23 December 1, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 5 high and 27 inches width, and additionally that the ceiling height being appealed does not meet the height requirements. Ms. Shaff presented a diagram of the area which Ms. Moermond reviewed. Mr. Hendrickson reviewed that the attic windows would not open high enough, as well as the ceiling height of the two-bedroom expansion were in question. The variance is requested relative to the pitch of the roof, as a certain part of it is not 7 feet in height. Photos were submitted for Ms. Moermond's review. Ms. Moermond clarified that the attic windows were not in question. She noted that the inspector's orders did not identify what proportion of the attic roof is 7 feet or higher; however, the diagram that Ms. Shaff presented did include a measurement that indicates the room is ll feet in width and three feet of this space is at the 7 foot height. Therefore, she recommended granting a 2-inch variance on the openabie height of the egress bedroom windows on the 2" floor and granting a variance on the ceiling height. 8. Appeal of Josephine Daly to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1817 Ashland Avenue. The Appellant, Josephine Daly, 38467 Riverview Hills, St. Peter, MN 5b082, appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that Tnspector Kelly Booker had inspected far the Fire C of O on November 3, 2009 and reported that in Unit 5 openable dimensions of window of 30 inches high by 16 inches wide. Unit 6 in the basement, openable dimensions of window to be lA inches high by 29 inches wide, with a sill height of 55 `lz inches, where the code requires a maximum of a sili height of 48 inches. Ms. Daly reviewed that they had steps that were built into the wa11 for the basement windows. Due to water leaking new sheet rock was installed and they removed the steps to put up the sheet rock. The steps have been put back in. The Unit 5 apartment has a front and back door and Ms. Daly stated that if the window was opened and used to escape that there is no ledge outside it and it, and that it is on the third floor. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 4-inch variance on the openable width of the egress bedroom windows in Unit 5; denying the appeal on the egress bedroom window in Unit 6 and granting a six-month extension to bring the window into compliance. Appellant aiso needs to install permanent, faxed steps to address the sill height issue in Unit 5. 1 l. Appeal of Charies Dodge to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency List for property at 1756 Beech Street. The Appellant, Chazles Dodge, (12340 Radisson Rd, Blaine, MN 55449) appeared. Ms. Shaff gave a staff report. She stated that in response to a refenal Inspector 7ames Thomas conducted an inspection on October 28, 2009 and prepazed a list of six deficiencies. The appeal includes all six of the deficiencies. Ms. Shaff reviewed each of these deficiencies with the appellant, 10-23 December 1, 2009 Property Code Minutes Page 6 Mr. Dodge reported that it was his tenant that was present at the time of the inspection and the tenant did not relay any information relative to the inspection to him. He explained that he was unaware that Inspector Thomas was coming out when he did and learned after the fact. With respect to item 1, Mr. Dodge said iY wasn't clear to him which window sash was in need of repair. He indicated that he has checked the 2 bedroom windows in the lower level and removed the sash stops, as they are weighted windows and now the windows open to 24 inches. Ms. Moermond directed Mr. Dodge to check all of the windows and to make sure that they aze all in compliance. Related to item 2, Mr. Dodge reported that repairs were made and the windows now open to 24 inches. Ms. Moermond indicated that she would also be comfortable with the openable area of 19 inches and if he were to put the stops back in she would recommend ganting a variance on that window. Ms. Shaff verified with Mr_ Dodge that he teplaced the second story windows and she established that a permit is required for that and no permit is on record. Mr. Dodge questioned whether a permit is necessary for window replacement of less than $500.00. Ms. Moermond suminarized that a window permit was not covered in the repair orders that were issued by I�ispector Thomas, thereby she wasn't going to include it as part of her recommendation. Ms. Moermond recommended granting a 5-inch variance on the openable height of the egress windows in the upstairs and downstairs bedrooms; denying the appeal for installation of deadbolt lock; denying the appeal on the sidewalks, walkways and stairs, allowing for a temporary patch of problem areas until a permanent repair can be done in spring 2010. 13. Appeal of Edward Kaye to a Certificate of Occupancy Deficiency Last for property at 1344 Summit Avenue. (Foilow up from July 21 hearing) The Appellant was not present. Ms. Moermond recommended granting the appeal provided prominent signage is placed on the door that it must be pulled to open; the entire building must be a smoke-free facility.