The URL can be used to link to this page

95-420o � � ^ � �� R � � � \ \e�� q � Council File � qs �aa �•�� ` � Green Sheet # �p_ ar � RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA a� . �-- fI � Presented By Referred To i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Committee: Date ,- L Whereas, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota made application to the Heritage Preservation Commission for a demolition permit pursuant to the provisions of the Saint Paul Legislative Code for property located at 669 East Third Street, legally described as Lot 4, Block 32, Lyman dayton's Addition to the City of Saint Paul; and VJhereas, The Commission conducted a public hearing on February 23, 1995, after having provided notice to affected property owners. The Commission, by its Resolution 2269, adopted February 23, 1995, decided to deny the application based on the following findings and conclusions: 1. The Swanson House (669 E. 3rd St.) is categorized as pivotal to the Dayton's Bluff district and is important to its integrity. Third Street between Mounds Boulevard and maria Avenue is a major gateway to the community, yet the historic fabric in this area is weak almost to the point of being- non-existent. There are three 187-1882 Italianate style residential buildings, including the Swanson house, huddled together, west of which are vacant lots that once held homes, five new houses across the street, an intrusive gas station, and two large vacant parcels on the other side of Maria. These three pivotal structures are the only historic structures on this block and a half of Third 5treet. To remove one of the three would be a significant loss to the community of their setting and would, therefore, have an adverse impact on the character and integrity of the historic district. 2. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority has not demonstrated that the structure is unsound or that rehabilitation is economically unfeasible. Nor does it appear that the economic value or usefulness of any new structure would be significantiy greater than that of the existing building if it were rehabilitated. A community organization with a track record of accomplishing difficult preservation/rehabilitation projects has expressed interest in rehabilitating the 5wanson House but this possibility has not been pursued by the Authority. Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 73.06, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, duly filed with the City Council an appeal from the determination made by the Heritage Preservation Commission, requesting that a nearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the said Commission; and � 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1� 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 �.2af2 �s-�a a Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 73.Q6, and upon notice to affected parties a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on April 19, 1995, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and Whereas, The CouncIl, having heard the statements made, and having considered tbe application, the report of staff, tbe record, minutes and resolution of the Commission, does hereby , , c�-�-�:�K.�, - ��e.. dc..c.S, Resolve, That the Council of the City of Saint .. -_ -• - - - :: . � � . - - - - .. -- �-o yv�m ♦ �� r �-h �. c i �- : e P4Y'rY. Finally Resolved, That the Council Secretary sha11 mail a copy of this resolution to The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, the Zoning Administrator and the Heritage Preservation Commission. Requested by Department of: By: Form By: BY� "��. �M APProv� Council Approved by May r: Date B - l%�e � 5 � 3 � 1 ��S BY � — by City Attorney Mayor £or Submission to Adopted by Council: Date�\Q �� C Adoption Certified by Council Se tary 7S- �faD DEPAATMENT/OFflCECAUNdL DATE INITIATED ' `O � � � � � City Council . 4/20/95 GREEN SHEE INITIALNATE INITIAUDATE CONTACT PERSON & PHONE � DEPqRTMEM DIRECTOfl � CEN CAUNCIL Nancy Ander son N Y FOfl � CliY ATT�RNEY O ClN CLERK MU5T BE ON CAUNC�L AGENDA BY (DATt� pp�� BUDGET DIRECTOP � FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR. E� Tl]. 26 1995 OHDEH �MAVOfl(OflASSISTAN'n � TOTAL # OF SiGNATURE PAGES (CLfP ALL LOCATfOtiS FOR SfGNATURE) AGTION RE�UESTED: F1II81121IIg C1t�J C011RC1]. action taken on April 19, 1995,� approving the appeal of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Saint Paul to a decision of the Heritage Preserva tion Commission to deny approval o£ a demolition permit for the structure located at 669 E. Third Street in the Dayton's Sluff Heritage Preservation Distiict. RECAMMENDATIONS. /pprove (A) or Reject (q) pER50NAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: _ PL4NNING COMMISSION _ CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION �� Has this person/Firm ever worketl un0er a contract for this Cepartment? _ G�B COMMITiEE _ VES NO _ STAFF 2. Has this personffrm ever been a ciry employee� — YES NO _ D�STRIC7 COURT _ 3. Does this personliirm possess a skitl not normally possessed by any current city employee? SUPPOPTS WHICH CAUNqL OBJECTIVE? YES NO Explain ell yes answers on separate sheet antl ettach to green sheet INITIATING PROBLEM. ISSUE. OPPORTUNITY (Who, What, When, Where, Why) ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED. DISAOVANTAGES IFAPPROVED� DISAWANTAGES IF N07 APPROVED' TOTAL AMOUNT OF THANSACTION $ COST/REVENUE BUDGETEO (qHCLE ONE) YES NO FUNDIfdG SOURCE AC7IVITY NUMBEH FINANCIAL INFORMATION (EXPLAINj � �s� �ao CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor May 24, 1995 390 Cin� Hai( Te(ephone: 612-266-8510 1� West Kellogg Boufevard Facsimile: 612-2668513 Saint Paul. MN 55102 �� `��'� ¢�+;T�; Council President Dave Thune 310B City Hall Saint Pau1, MN 55102 Dear Council President Thune: li��i-A / �L �a7�v'� I am writing to notify you of my veto of resoludon 95-420, passed by the City Council on May 10, 1995. This resoluflon, originally introduced to approve the permit for demoliflon, was amended by the Council to deny the permit and affirm the decision of the Historical Preservation Commission. While I would be the fust to support a rehabilitation of our community's historic homes, I would also be the first to argue that this cannot occur with only an excessive investment of public funds. As you lrnow, we expect significant cuts in federal housing funds and we must share a commitment to masimizing the results of our investment in housing rehabilitafions. Though the developer status and the financing decisions are not affected by this action, I am hopeful that this action will spur a broader discussion of the circumstances wder which the I3RA would consider waiving the guidelines of the Houses to Homes program. The goal of this program are not just goals of the HI2A., but goals of our city and everyone who lives and works here. I would therefore encourage you to broaden your discussion on this issue and include the views of many of our neighborhood organizations, city staff, and my office. Sincerely, O� 1 -- ��--�--�°�-- orm Coleman cc: Members of the City Council Larry Buegler � 1 2 3 4 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ' ^ . � �� ♦ X �� Requested by Department of: Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: Approved by Mayor: By: � - `�a� Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 73.06, and upon notice to affected parties a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on April 19, 1995, where ali interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and Whereas, The Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Commission, does hereby �s�.�e�. � D� c.s � or� Resolve, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul de€s herehy re� that of th@� ai aul i i a be a ereby nted• be it OR � 41 G •} '1�1E � �,v ' �ti►.T � Finally Resolved, That the Council Secretary shall mail a copy of this resohrtion to The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the Caty of Saint Paul, Minnesota, the Zoning Administrator and the Heritage Preservation Commission. Date �� By: Form Ap By: _ Approv� Council By: _ by City Attorney Mayor for Submission to �� . Presented By Referred Where�as, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the C' of Saint Paul, Minnesota ma application to the Heritage Preservation Commissi n for a demolition permit pursuant t the provisions of the Saint Paul L,egislative Co for property located at 669 East Third eet, legally described as L,ot 4, Block 32, L an dayton's Addition to the City of Saint P u2; and Whereas, The Co� having provided notice to a 2269, adopted February 23, findings and conclusions: OR(G(NAL �� ueen1 RESOLUTION� CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA , File # S 7�� Sheet # �O �� conducted a public he: property owners. The decided to deny the ap 1. Tl�e Swanson House 669 Dayton's Bluff district c between Mounds Boulev to the community, yet the to the point of being non- Italianate style residential huddled together, west of homes, five new houses ac and two large vacant parc three pivotal structures and a half of Thud Stre t significant loss to the m therefore, have an a ersa the historic district. Committee: on Pebruary 23, 2995, after �nission, by its Resolution ion based on the following E. 3rd St.) i categorized as pivotal to the is importa t to its integrity. Third Street rd and m ia Avenue is a major gateway ' toric abric in this area is weak almost e7us . There are three 187-1882 buil gs, including the Swanson house, whi e vacant lots that once held :ro s the s eet, an intrusive gas station, � s on the o er side of Maria. These ., the only his ric structures on this block To remove on of the three would be a munity of their se 'ng and would, ; unpact on the char cter and integrity of 2. The Housing an Redevelopment Authority has not emonstrated that the sttucture is un und or that rehabilitation is economic ly unfeasible. Nor does it appea that the economic value or usefulness of ny new structure would be si 'ficantly greater than that of the existing bui ing if it were rehabilitat d. A community organization with a track recor of accompl' hing difficult preseroation/rehabilitation projects ha expressed intere in rehabilitating the Swanson Honse but this possibility as not bee ursued by the Authority. Whereas� Pursuant to the provisions of Section 73.06, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, duly filed with the Cit Council an appeal from the determination made by the Heritage Preservation Commission, requesting that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the said Commission; and SAITi PAULj i � IIIIAA CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor 29 Mazch 1995 Ms. Nancy Anderson Ciry Council Reseazch 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN 55102 Dear Ms. Anderson: OFPICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND "��pZ � ENVIltOND�NTAL PR0IT.CTION � Robert Kessier, ZHrec[o> BUIIDINGINSPECTLONAND Telephone:612-2669D30 DESIGN Facsimile: 612-2669099 350 S[ Pete' SYreet S4dte 300 Saint Pm<I, Minnesata SSIO2-I510 I would like to request that a public hearing before the City CouncIl be scheduled for April 19, 1995 for the following appeal of a Heritage Preservafion Commission decision: Appellant: Housing and Redevelopment Authoriry of the City of Saint Paul HPC FIle: #2269 Purpose: Appeal HPC decision to deny approval of a demolifion permit for the structure located at 669 East Third Street in the Dayton's Bluff Heritage Preservation District Legal Description of Property: Lot 4, Block 32, Lyman Dayton's Addition The Heritage Preservation Commission held a public heazing on this matter on February 23, 1995 and voted 8-0-2 to deny approval of the demolition permit. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appeaz on the agenda for the AprIl 5, 1995 City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the heazing in the Saint Paul L,egal Ledger. Please call me at 266-9087 if you have any questions. Sincerei , Y �, ,� �� ,� � �.,..-,�a ;: , . ;z f/ � .�:.<.,:.-1 ..._..,. . t w,�e� ��'�nr� �.:i .:: 2 : a�� Aazon Rubenstein Heritage Preservation Planner cc: Richazd Murphy, HPC Chair ._> Cynthia Carlson, PED NI81'3 �'NElll, PED The Saint Paul Ci[y Councll will conduc[ a public heazing on Wedne�aq, April 19, 1995, at 3:30 p.m. in [he City Council Chambers. Third Floor, City FIaYl, to consider the appeal of the Fiousing and Redevelopment Authority of the Ca{y of Saint Paul to a decision of the HeriYage Preservation'Commission denying approval of a demolition Qermit for the structure located at 669 East Thfrd Sireet in [he Dayton's Bluff Heritage Preseroation Distric[. Daced: Mazch 29, 1995 � NANCY ANDERSON �' _ , Assistant City Couacll Secretary , , , " (March 31, 1995) �r„� NOTICE OF P'(JBLIC HEARII�SG OFFICE OP LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND ��^ ENVIRONMEN'[AL YROTECCION u Ro&rs Krsakr, Direcmr �S �a D CTTY OF SAINT PAUL Nosm Coleman, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: BI/IIDING INSPECIIONAND DESIGN 350 St Petet SYreet Suiu 300 Saint Pau[, Mirv'esota SSIO2-ISIO City Councilmembers Aazon Rubenstein �� Demolition of 669 East Third Street 25 April 1995 7ekpfione: 672-266-9050 Facsimrle: 612-266-9099 FYI, I have attached the nuisance abatement order, with the listing of code compliance issues, from Public Health conceming 669 East Third Street. This information was not included in the packet you received for last week's council meeting. CIT`Y OF SA1NI` PAUL Nonn Colem¢n, Mayor SAiNT PAUL PUBLIC kbAL'1'K Nea! Haltan, M.D., M.P.H., Director " ' NUISANCE BUIlDINGS CODE , 612-2984I53 ENFORCEMF]JI' 555 Cedar Street '-� SointPaut, MN551 01-2 2 60 `__�'� �f! '+, . :�It � . `=-�. `.p f � � November 17. 1994 ~� � r ' f"i;`;i,IrJC'r ;� . � ��',,, Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) �- Housing & Redevelopment Authoriry Heritage Preservation District City Hall Annex 14th Floor Ciry Hall Annex llth Floor 25 West Fourth Street 25 West Fourth Street St. Paul MN 55102 St. Paul. MN 55102 Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Code Enforcement Unit o£ Saint Paul Public Health hereby declares the premises located at: 669 Third Street East and legally described as follot��s, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition To The City of St. Paul Lot 4 Bik 32 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subjecf fo demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On November 9, 1994, a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is nof necessariIy aIi the deficiencies present at this time. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspectio�► must Ue obtained from the $uilding Inspection and Design Section, 350 Sf. Peter Street Suite 32Q, Lowry Professional Building (612)266-9601. Tliat inspection wiil identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legaI requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a two thousand dollar ($2,OQ0.40) performance bond with the Building Inspection and Design Office before any permits are issued,.,except for a demolition permit. �� a� 669 Third Street East November 17, I994 Page 2 This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shail not again be used for occupancy until such tirne as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. This is two-story, wood frame and stucco dwelling. Exferior - South 1. The retaining wall is crumbling, cracked, buckled and has sections missing. 2. The concrete stairs are broken, tne rise and run is not to code and is lacking a proper handrail. 3. The stairs to the front of the house are settled and sloping away from the house. 4. The front porch foundation is buckled and cracked, the porch floor is not properly sealed or protected. 5. The stucco on the front of the house has been partially removed, the exposed wood is decayed and weathered. 6. All the wood trirn around the doors and windows is weathezed and decayed. 7. The soffit, eaves and facia boards have loose, peeled and flaked paint. Exterior - East 8. The first floor windows are boarded. 9. i ne stucco is cracken and puiied away irom the l:ouse. 10. The soffit and eaves have loose, peeled and flaking paint. Rear Attachment ll. The flashing on the rear addition to the house is not properly installed and shows , evidence of leaking. 12. The soffit and eaves have loose, peeled and flaking paint. 13. There are signs of water damage to the roof and exterior of the house. 669 Third Street East November 17, I994 Page 3 14. Some of the stucco is cracked and pulled away from the house. Rear gorch 15. The porch is boarded. 16. All the wood trim around this area is rotted and decayed. 1�'ofe: There are birds nesting in the soffit and eaves area. Exterior - North 17. All the wood shows signs of rot and decay. 18. The supporting posts forthe porch are cracked, rotted and decayed. 19. The windows and doors are boarded. 20. The concrete apron in back of the house is buckled, broken and cracked.. 21. The concrete slab is broken, buckled and wavy. 22. The chimney lacks proper tuckpointing in the joints. Exterior - West 23. There are trees and shrubs growin� adjacent to the foundation. 24. The foundation is cracked, buckied and has sections missing. 25. �'he concrete window we11 is broken, buckled, and has sections missing. 26. The basement windows are boarded. 27. The stucco siding is cracked, buckled and wavy. 28. The wood trim around the fust and second floor windows has loose, peeled and flaking paint. 29. The storm windows are ill-fittin�. 30. The window glass and screens are missing. 9 � s�a � 669 Third Street East November 17, 1994 Page 4 31. "I'he soffit and eaves are cracked and have boards missing. General I�Tofe: The inspectors were unable to gain access to the inside of the house. The following was viewed through the windows. 32. The floor is buckled, wavy, warped and weathered. 33. The wood is uncoated and unprctected. 34. The baseboards have cracked and peeled paint. 35. The walls and ceiling are cracked with peeled paint and plaster. 36. The ceiling and walls are caving inward. 37. The house is settled. 38. The house is in disrepair. 39. There is visual evidence of water damage to much or most of the ceilings and walls at least to the first floor areas viewed through the windows and it is suspected conditions throughout the second floor are as bad or worse. As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by December 19, 1994 the City of Saint Paul, Public Health will begin a substantial ahatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed abainst the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance wifli law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 350 St. Peter Street Suite 320, Lowry Professional Building (612)266-9001. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to conect this nuisance condition. As an owner or responsible party, you are requized by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. If you sell, transfer, or convey in any manner, the ownership or responsibility for this property, you must within seven (7) days, notify the Enforcement Officer with the names and addresses of any new owners or responsible parties. 669 Third Street East November 17, 1994 Page 5 The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this properry which declares it to be a"nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the Ciry. This placard shall not be removed �aithout the written authority of Public Health. Public Health is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective actzon is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Bnforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Cierk will then schedule dates for Public Hea:ings before the Ciry Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this heazing the Ciry Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fis a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if cosective action is not taken within the specified tune, the City shall abate tlus nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the groperty as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact H. Robinson between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at (612) 298-4153. �, `.r:p,�.,.�r ��` �G!a. Charles A. Votel Prograrn Supervisor Housing Code Enforcement Programs Saint Paul Public Health CAV:ml cc: Nancy Anderson - Council Research Dan Pahl - PED Housing O1-93 � .` °; a k ROBER7A MEGARD Counc�member CITY OF SAINT PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL May 30, 1995 Mr. Tim Marx, City Attomey 400 City Hall Saint Paul MN 55102 Dear Mr. Marx: ANN D. CIESLAK Legislaave Aide I request a legal opinion on the authority of the Mayor to veto the decision of the City Council which affiimed the decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission and denied the demolition permit for 669 East Third Street (Resolufion #95-420). Also, in light of the veto, please advise me on the status of the Heritage Preservarion Commission's decision to deny the demolition. Secfion 64.206 of the Legislative Code states "The city council shall have the power to hear and decide appeals..." Section 64.207 fiuther elaborates.."Decisions of the city councii on all matters within its jurisdiction shall be final subject only to judicial review by a court of competent jurisdiction." This power seems in conflict with the City Charter in Chapter 6: "All actions of the council shall be by ordinance or resolution..." (Sec 6.01) and "Every ordinance or resolution adopted by the council shall be presented to the mayor..." (Sec 6.08} and "Any ordinance or resolurion shall be approved or vetoed by the mayor in its entirety..." (Sec 6.09). The above appeal was not an action of the Council in the sh sense but an appeal to the Council by the HRA. Given the 30 days Council has to over-ride a veto, I would appreciate a quick response to this request. Sincerely, !.J �� Roberta Megard CITY HALL THIRD FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 q5-y2� 612/266-8640 8 46 Prinred on Rery<ted Paper