Loading...
98-602Council File # 9���Go Green Sheet # 62166 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA / . _ B /l,,!',,C_ �,1 Presented 3h, Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the June 16, 1998 2 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer: 3 Properiy Ap�ealed 4 960 Juno Avenue 5 Decision: Appeal denied. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman f Hazris �� Benanav ✓ Reiter ✓ Bostrom ✓ Iantry ✓ c�- 13 Adopted t 14 Adoption 15 By: 16 Approved 17 By: Appellant Ronald Staeheli Requested by Depaztment of: !'3'� Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: 1 � �. . city council ���� 6-25-98 Chris Coleman, 266-8620 1 � Pi1b�.iC laIYBFR FoR RWi111G TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES qg GREEN SHEET No 62166 �e. mre,uom. oF..R,�ro.ceroie rnreawra ❑ arr�nouar ❑ ana.vK ❑ RiY1CULiF1IY1CFt0�t ❑ q1UlGlifltll/i/ACCTO ❑Y�'ORl�11flIRYRI ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals Eor the 6-16-98 meeting for property located at 960 Juno Avenue. vuA � iurv qpprwe (A) w ne�ee[ PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMRTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION r_,.�:ra�,�.7 mur+r oc tn�wsnerwH SOURCE fias Mia Pe���m erer wwked urWer a conhaU ior thie OepaAment? YES NO tias thin aersoMirtn ever bw.n a dry emdmee9 YES NO Doec thic persoNfirm poaeesc a sidll not namellypocsessetl by any wrtent aty employee7 YES NO �s m� x�� a m.�sea.eoaon rES No Yain an yes ancv.ers on aecarate sheH ene attacn to nrcen sheet L��a°�a�t �M,.�. 4'a\a� �`�".�§'nw� s JUN 2 � � COSTIREVENUE BUDQETm (CIRCLE ON� RC7IVITYNUI�ER YE5 NO :• • � NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 7une16,1998 Room 330, City Hall Gerry Strathman, I.egislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Pat Fish, Fue Prevention; Carrolyn Shepherd, Vacant Buildings Gerry Strathman called the meeung to order at 1:33 p.m. 359 Maria Avenue Peter McCarty, owner, and his attorney Richazd Gabriel, 175 Lafayette, appeazed. � �� ���� Richazd Gabriel stated his client is appealing the condemnarion order because some requests aze unreasonable and others aze satisfied. It would be an econoaric hazdship on the owners to lose the tenants and a hazdship on the residents to be evicted. This is a fourplex and each family has minor children. Pat Fish reported that this property has a long history going back several yeazs. Ms. Fish went back in the file to August 1997. Ms. Fish received complaints on August 14,19, and 29. There were two tenant complaints on October 27 and November 20. A reinspection was done in November. Ms. Fish went out again in February. The complaints range from violations of exterior conditions such as gazbage and trash, condition of the back porch, access doors to the basement. There were conditions cited in the units that were not taken care of after several reinspections. In February, Ms. Fish revoked the certificate of occupancy on the building because of the conditions there. In March, she did a certiflcate of occupancy inspection and gave the owners until May 2 to get the conditions corrected. Ms. Fish did a reinspection in May. Very litde if any progress was made. She went back yesterday and took pictures. In the appeal, the owner says the porch did not need straightening. Ms. Fish had a certified building inspector looked at the porch, and the inspector's conditions were added to the certificate of occupancy list. The building was condemned based on the fact that the management has not been kept up in accordance with the Saint Paul Property Maintenance Code. (Ms. Fish showed photographs to Gerry Strathman and Richazd Gabriel.} Gerry Strathman asked for clarification on the certificate of occupancy. Pat Fish responded it was revoked in February 1998 and it has not been reinstated. The next step would be condemnation because the letter of revocation said the building had to be vacated or the rep3irs made. Father 7ames Notebaart, Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis at 3045 Pazk Avenue, Minneapolis, owns 667 Fifth Street East, which abuts the property at 359 Maria. Father Notebaart stated he would like to speak on three issues: health, safety, and historic preservation. 1) Health - Father Notebaart has kept a photographic record of the trash problem at 359 Matia. He showed these photographs to Michael McCazry. When asked for a response, Mr. McCarty shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Also, scavengers come into the yazd. 2) Safety - The cellaz entrance is left open sometimes which could be a danger to children. Father Notebaart stated he has a police list of 220 calls to the building. He has seen a number of drug deals take piace behind the �1Ss�SZg NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 2 • residence. The owners have never responded to any letter from Father Notebaart. 3) Historic preservation district - The windows have been changed without the Historic Preservarion Commission's permission. (Father Notebaart submitted the police calls list and the photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Juliet Smebakken, 657 Fifth Street East, appeared and stated she and her husband Brian have lived on the same blcek as 1171 Minnehaha for 15 years. Ms. Smebakken fully supports what Pat Fish and Father Notebaart have said about the property. She is afraid to have her chiid walk in front of the building. She has seen some of the crime. Dayton's Bluff is slowly becoming safe, however this property has not changed. Ms. Smebakken does not believe the owner cazes where the tenants go. Her home is a possibility. Cliff Carey, 635 Bates, appeared and stated he lives about five blocks away. He has been awaze of tliis property for about four years. The number of police calls has not changed. Mr. Carey has had no luck convincing people to buy property on this block because of this type of activity. Mr. Cazey asked Gerry Strathman to support this condezanation. Karen Dupaul, Crime Prevention Person for Dayton's Bluff Dishict 4 Community Council, 281 Maria, appeared and stated it is important to have safe living conditions for the tenants there and an adequate playing azea for cluldren. Landlords aze very important to the neighborhood, but they need to be responsibie. Richard Gabriel stated the only issue here is the appropriateness of the condemnation. However, • these other issues have been raised and they feel compelled to respond. Peter McCarty stated a printout of the 1998 police calls shows there has only been about six police aails from January l, 1998 to May 29. He aclmowledges there have been a lot of calls in the past. (This printout was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Richazd Gabriel stated if the City wants to remove a property, there is a process for that. His clients feels that low income people should have a pIace to live also and this place gives them that opportunity. A certificate of occupancy was granted on Apri110, 1997 and expired on October 3, 1998. The closing paragaph says the following: `°To the owners, you should be commended for your attentativeness and interest in providing a safe and well maintained property. Thank you for helping making ihe City of Saint Pavl a most liveable City." (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Pat Fish responded that is a computer generated letter and a standard statement when a certificate of occupancy is issuect TYie certificate was revoked on February 2 and not reissued. Richazd Gabriel stated the letter from the City dated February 1 S about a certificate of occupancy revocation had five items listed and all have been corrected. Pat Fish later inspected that property and the McCartys were not no6fied that any of the violauons were still outstanding. Peter McCariy stated the letter cleazly says that if the owners complied, the certificate of occupancy would be reinstated. Gerry Strathman asked was it assumed that it would be automatically reinstated. Mr. McCarty responded that is what the letter said. Ms. Fish reinspected on Mazch 25 for a renewal inspecGon. The above five items were not cited in the currem certificate of occupancy with • corrections. � a--�� . . ; - �_ : NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 3 Pat Fish stated on February 18, 1998, the certificate of occupancy revocation letter cleazly states "this letter serves as official norice of revocation: ' The letter does not state that once complied, the cer[ificate of occupancy wouid be automaticaily reinstated. In order to reinstate it, Ms. Fish has to do a certificate of occupancy inspection which was done on Mazch 25. On Apri12, Ms. Fish sent a letter with the corrections and things that needed to be done. In addition, she was also responding to complaints to specific units, so there was another letter on May 8 sent about a particulaz unit. That has not been coaected as faz as Ms. Fish lrnows. Gerry Strathman asked which items on the May 29 correction list were unreasonable. (Item #1: Paint exterior including him. Finish southwest and northwest exterior with siding and crim.) Peter McCarty stated it does not need to be painted. Pat Fish responded there is graffiti all over the building and the shakes aze dirty. The gutters look like they will come down. Gerry Sh�athman stated he did not see gr�ti in the pictures. Ms. Fish responded the photographs showed the doors that were taken out and the siding that was never replaced. The stairs are barred off with wood. There is siding missing. Peter McCarty stated that siding is not available anymore, so it has to be obtained from salvage. He intends to side and paint the building. Mr. Strathman summarized it is unreasonable for the entire building to be painted, but not unreasonable for the siding and trim to be done. Peter McCarty agreed. Mr. Gabriel stated the short period of time to accomplish the task is unreasonable. Mr. Strathman asked when these violations were cited. Ms. Fish responded in Mazch and at the end of May. • (Item #4: Provide sufficient gazbage containers and trash pickup.) Peter McCarty stated he used to have a 2 yazd dumpster there. The apartment next door also had a 2 yazd dumpster. The pictures that Father Notebaart submitted did happen. Mr. McCarty has talked to Pat Fish about Neil, the next door neighbor, who does not have a big enough dumpster and his tenants dump their trash in the dumpster for 359 Maria. Eazlier this year, Mr. McCarty had 90 gallon carts put on his property. The situation was monitored. Ms. Fish came out and saw that the next door neighbor's dumpster looked like the previous picture of his. There has not been a problem on his property since. (Item #2: Repair steps in east entryway. Front porch pillars/supports need rebuilding.) Richard Gabriel stated he had an opinion from an architect regazding this same issue which is in conflict with the opinion of the housing inspector. (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) The 6x6 post have been installed. The pillars have been repaired per the azchitecYs suggestion. (Item #3: Repair reaz exterior light.) Peter McCarty stated the light bulb has been replaced. (Item #5: Post Certificate of Occupancy and new ownership information.) Peter McCarry stated this has been done. (Item #6: Repair holes in bedroom in #3. Repair hole azound cable wues in Bedroom #3.) Peter McCarty stated the broken plastic cover has been replaced. • (Item #7: Provide RH-i test on 4 boilers.) Peter McCarty stated when a licensed hearing contractor does the RH-1 test, they forward the informauon to the Fire Department. It was done on 6-8-98. � � �Z� NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 (Item #8: Adjust door closer #2, #4.) Peter McCazty stated they have been rightened. Page 4 � (Item #9: Repair closet door #4, hallways/stairs need painting and cleanup, repair ceiling Unit #1, paint Unit #1, repair broken mirror in bathroom of Unit #2, clean carpet in Unit #2 and #1, Unit #1 needs painting and cleaning, repair bathroom door #4.) Peter McCarty stated all is done. (Item 10: Itepair vanity door bathroom #1, fix leak under bathroom sink #1.) Peter McCarty stated the hinge has been replaced and the plumbing has been tightened. (Item 11: Repair bathroom floor #4.) Peter McCarty stated the linoleum has been irimmed. (Item 12: Provide smoke detector affidavit.) Peter McCarry stated it has been filled out, but he has not mailed it in yet. (Item 13: Properly support the load bearing columns on the front porch - each column cames half of the roof load - the e�sting fooungs/supports have settled causing structural instabilityJ Peter McCarty stated this is redundant to Item 2. (Item 14: Rebuild to code the steps on the reaz of the building.) Peter McCarry stated the pictures show what was done. Pat Fish stated all t6ese things were done recently. Most of the problem is that it takes revocation or condemnation to get work done. Richard Gabriel stated one of the problems is that when Peter McCarty works on one list, he is later told there aze other things he needs to work on. Many of the problems aze cosmetic in nature and not serious. It has been difficult to get work done because contractors are wo=king on storm damage projects. Gerry Strathman denied the agpeal. Mr. Strathman requested an inspection in the next seven days to check the items that have been said to be corrected. As for the other items, they are sufficient for the basis of condemnation. Mr. Strathman stated he understands that different inspections produce different violations, but some of these buildings are dynanuc and changes aze needed at one time and not another. 1494 Rose Avenue East Heuky Chu-Yang-I�ieu, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing Item 10 on the conection list. (Item 10 reads as follows: Provide approved size unit escape windows or provide variance from appeals board.) Gerry Strathman asked how lazge is the window. Pat Fish responded these are sliding metal windows. They are four inches too narrow. . C � J =-_---�. •; ._ NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 5 • Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that when the windows are replaced, they aze to be replaced with conforming windows. 960 Tuno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeazed and stated 960 Juno was declazed a vacant building and he just purchased the house. He asked Carrolyn Shepherd to show him the file on it. Ms. Shepherd gave him a piece of paper. Mr. Staeheli stated he told Ms. Shepherd that the house was suppose to have multiple housing code violations. Ms. Shepherd told him that her department does not need multiple housing code violations and that they can just go out and find another violation. Mr. Staeheli stated the previous properiy owner never received a list of housing code violations, there was never a notice of appeal, there was never a work order written. Gerry Strathman asked is the building vacant and secure. Ronald Staeheli responded the building may have been vacant since February 1998, and the doors aze locked. Carrolyn Shepherd stated there were multiple violations at the property eeen though there was oniy one violation on the conection order. Any issues not addressed by the complaint inspector aze noted by the vacant building inspector before the vacant building file is opened. The former owner paid the vacant building fee and submitted a form saying she vacated the building in the • fall because of storm sewer backup which caused stmcwral damage anc3 the fonndation had shifted due to ground frost. The former owner expected the buiiding would be raised when the insurance money was received. There was no attempt to verify the damage because the building would be raised or a code compliance inspections would resolve that problem. Ronald Staeheli knew this was a registered vacant building when he purchased the properry. Gerry Strathman asked about the one building code violauon cited. Carrolyn Shepherd responded only the one had orders. The code does not specify whether it is orders or violations. Gerry Strathman stated the issue of contention has to do with the question of whether this is a vacant building as met by the phrase "unoccupied and has multiple housing or building code violation." Mr. Strathman asked is it Ronaid Staeheli's view that the violations need to have been cited to the owner, and Carrolyn Shepherd's view that they only have to exist. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct and standing operating procedure. Mr. Staeheli stated there should be some sort of due process citing what is wrong with the property. Gerry Strathman stated he was puzzled why Mr. Ronald Staeheli is claiming it should not be considered a vacant buiiding. Mr. Staeheli stated the person he purchased the house from was the contract holder and the person who paid the fee was a contractee who was seriously in arreazs. Her perception of caring about his property would have been less than the contract holder for sure and less for Mr. Staeheli because he has no intention of losing it for a contract for deed. Mr. Staeheli filed the appeal because the city has a considerable amount of power of � people and they shouid have to do things correctly. If they ate going to decIaze a building vacant, ��--�Z� . NOTES OF TE� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 6 there should be multiple housing code violations presented in such a way that the violations can � be corrected or appealed. Gerry Strathman asked what Ronald Staeheli's intentions are with the building. Mr. Staeheli responded he plans to redo the back stairs and paint the house. He has not decided whether he will sell or rent the building. (He showed Mr. Strathman pictures of what he will do with the foundation.) Gerry Strathman stated the ordinance dces not say the building has to be ci�ed for multiple violations. They just have to exist. However, everyday fairness says the building owner should be notified of the violations. Ronald Staeheli stated the City does not lose anything by closing the vacant building file. The Ciry can still say the stairs have to be fixed and cite other violations. Carrolyn Shepherd stated the building needs to be inspected and there needs to be a code compliance. Gerry Strathman stated a wde compliance would be required if it a vacant building and not required if it is not a vacant building. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct. Gerry Strathman asked about possible structural damage. Ronald Staeheli responded he has every intention of righting the building and doing it under code. Gerry Strathman asked Carrolyn Shepherd would there be any circumstances whereby she would be willing to move this off the vacant building list. Ms. Shepherd responded she is not so inclined, however it may be advantageous to have a building inspector in the building to determine the extent of any structural damage. Most buildings that have substantial structural problems also have substantial other problems which is why she would prefer a code compliance. Gerry Strathman statecl he is not finding a ready solution on this one. Ae does not like it being on the vacant buiiding list without there being multiple citations. On the other hand, it is a fair reading ofthe ordinance. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. The actions taken are a reasonable interpretation of the ordinance. VJhether they are the coaect or only interpretation is for the courts to decide. Ronald Staeheli stated he would like to see a list of violations. Mr. Strathman asked could an inspection be done at the request of the owner. Carrolyn Shepherd responded normally not, but he can request a code compliaace inspection. Mr. Staeheli stated that would cost $100. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:55 p.m. CJ . Council File # 9���Go Green Sheet # 62166 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA / . _ B /l,,!',,C_ �,1 Presented 3h, Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the June 16, 1998 2 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer: 3 Properiy Ap�ealed 4 960 Juno Avenue 5 Decision: Appeal denied. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman f Hazris �� Benanav ✓ Reiter ✓ Bostrom ✓ Iantry ✓ c�- 13 Adopted t 14 Adoption 15 By: 16 Approved 17 By: Appellant Ronald Staeheli Requested by Depaztment of: !'3'� Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: 1 � �. . city council ���� 6-25-98 Chris Coleman, 266-8620 1 � Pi1b�.iC laIYBFR FoR RWi111G TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES qg GREEN SHEET No 62166 �e. mre,uom. oF..R,�ro.ceroie rnreawra ❑ arr�nouar ❑ ana.vK ❑ RiY1CULiF1IY1CFt0�t ❑ q1UlGlifltll/i/ACCTO ❑Y�'ORl�11flIRYRI ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals Eor the 6-16-98 meeting for property located at 960 Juno Avenue. vuA � iurv qpprwe (A) w ne�ee[ PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMRTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION r_,.�:ra�,�.7 mur+r oc tn�wsnerwH SOURCE fias Mia Pe���m erer wwked urWer a conhaU ior thie OepaAment? YES NO tias thin aersoMirtn ever bw.n a dry emdmee9 YES NO Doec thic persoNfirm poaeesc a sidll not namellypocsessetl by any wrtent aty employee7 YES NO �s m� x�� a m.�sea.eoaon rES No Yain an yes ancv.ers on aecarate sheH ene attacn to nrcen sheet L��a°�a�t �M,.�. 4'a\a� �`�".�§'nw� s JUN 2 � � COSTIREVENUE BUDQETm (CIRCLE ON� RC7IVITYNUI�ER YE5 NO :• • � NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 7une16,1998 Room 330, City Hall Gerry Strathman, I.egislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Pat Fish, Fue Prevention; Carrolyn Shepherd, Vacant Buildings Gerry Strathman called the meeung to order at 1:33 p.m. 359 Maria Avenue Peter McCarty, owner, and his attorney Richazd Gabriel, 175 Lafayette, appeazed. � �� ���� Richazd Gabriel stated his client is appealing the condemnarion order because some requests aze unreasonable and others aze satisfied. It would be an econoaric hazdship on the owners to lose the tenants and a hazdship on the residents to be evicted. This is a fourplex and each family has minor children. Pat Fish reported that this property has a long history going back several yeazs. Ms. Fish went back in the file to August 1997. Ms. Fish received complaints on August 14,19, and 29. There were two tenant complaints on October 27 and November 20. A reinspection was done in November. Ms. Fish went out again in February. The complaints range from violations of exterior conditions such as gazbage and trash, condition of the back porch, access doors to the basement. There were conditions cited in the units that were not taken care of after several reinspections. In February, Ms. Fish revoked the certificate of occupancy on the building because of the conditions there. In March, she did a certiflcate of occupancy inspection and gave the owners until May 2 to get the conditions corrected. Ms. Fish did a reinspection in May. Very litde if any progress was made. She went back yesterday and took pictures. In the appeal, the owner says the porch did not need straightening. Ms. Fish had a certified building inspector looked at the porch, and the inspector's conditions were added to the certificate of occupancy list. The building was condemned based on the fact that the management has not been kept up in accordance with the Saint Paul Property Maintenance Code. (Ms. Fish showed photographs to Gerry Strathman and Richazd Gabriel.} Gerry Strathman asked for clarification on the certificate of occupancy. Pat Fish responded it was revoked in February 1998 and it has not been reinstated. The next step would be condemnation because the letter of revocation said the building had to be vacated or the rep3irs made. Father 7ames Notebaart, Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis at 3045 Pazk Avenue, Minneapolis, owns 667 Fifth Street East, which abuts the property at 359 Maria. Father Notebaart stated he would like to speak on three issues: health, safety, and historic preservation. 1) Health - Father Notebaart has kept a photographic record of the trash problem at 359 Matia. He showed these photographs to Michael McCazry. When asked for a response, Mr. McCarty shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Also, scavengers come into the yazd. 2) Safety - The cellaz entrance is left open sometimes which could be a danger to children. Father Notebaart stated he has a police list of 220 calls to the building. He has seen a number of drug deals take piace behind the �1Ss�SZg NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 2 • residence. The owners have never responded to any letter from Father Notebaart. 3) Historic preservation district - The windows have been changed without the Historic Preservarion Commission's permission. (Father Notebaart submitted the police calls list and the photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Juliet Smebakken, 657 Fifth Street East, appeared and stated she and her husband Brian have lived on the same blcek as 1171 Minnehaha for 15 years. Ms. Smebakken fully supports what Pat Fish and Father Notebaart have said about the property. She is afraid to have her chiid walk in front of the building. She has seen some of the crime. Dayton's Bluff is slowly becoming safe, however this property has not changed. Ms. Smebakken does not believe the owner cazes where the tenants go. Her home is a possibility. Cliff Carey, 635 Bates, appeared and stated he lives about five blocks away. He has been awaze of tliis property for about four years. The number of police calls has not changed. Mr. Carey has had no luck convincing people to buy property on this block because of this type of activity. Mr. Cazey asked Gerry Strathman to support this condezanation. Karen Dupaul, Crime Prevention Person for Dayton's Bluff Dishict 4 Community Council, 281 Maria, appeared and stated it is important to have safe living conditions for the tenants there and an adequate playing azea for cluldren. Landlords aze very important to the neighborhood, but they need to be responsibie. Richard Gabriel stated the only issue here is the appropriateness of the condemnation. However, • these other issues have been raised and they feel compelled to respond. Peter McCarty stated a printout of the 1998 police calls shows there has only been about six police aails from January l, 1998 to May 29. He aclmowledges there have been a lot of calls in the past. (This printout was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Richazd Gabriel stated if the City wants to remove a property, there is a process for that. His clients feels that low income people should have a pIace to live also and this place gives them that opportunity. A certificate of occupancy was granted on Apri110, 1997 and expired on October 3, 1998. The closing paragaph says the following: `°To the owners, you should be commended for your attentativeness and interest in providing a safe and well maintained property. Thank you for helping making ihe City of Saint Pavl a most liveable City." (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Pat Fish responded that is a computer generated letter and a standard statement when a certificate of occupancy is issuect TYie certificate was revoked on February 2 and not reissued. Richazd Gabriel stated the letter from the City dated February 1 S about a certificate of occupancy revocation had five items listed and all have been corrected. Pat Fish later inspected that property and the McCartys were not no6fied that any of the violauons were still outstanding. Peter McCariy stated the letter cleazly says that if the owners complied, the certificate of occupancy would be reinstated. Gerry Strathman asked was it assumed that it would be automatically reinstated. Mr. McCarty responded that is what the letter said. Ms. Fish reinspected on Mazch 25 for a renewal inspecGon. The above five items were not cited in the currem certificate of occupancy with • corrections. � a--�� . . ; - �_ : NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 3 Pat Fish stated on February 18, 1998, the certificate of occupancy revocation letter cleazly states "this letter serves as official norice of revocation: ' The letter does not state that once complied, the cer[ificate of occupancy wouid be automaticaily reinstated. In order to reinstate it, Ms. Fish has to do a certificate of occupancy inspection which was done on Mazch 25. On Apri12, Ms. Fish sent a letter with the corrections and things that needed to be done. In addition, she was also responding to complaints to specific units, so there was another letter on May 8 sent about a particulaz unit. That has not been coaected as faz as Ms. Fish lrnows. Gerry Strathman asked which items on the May 29 correction list were unreasonable. (Item #1: Paint exterior including him. Finish southwest and northwest exterior with siding and crim.) Peter McCarty stated it does not need to be painted. Pat Fish responded there is graffiti all over the building and the shakes aze dirty. The gutters look like they will come down. Gerry Sh�athman stated he did not see gr�ti in the pictures. Ms. Fish responded the photographs showed the doors that were taken out and the siding that was never replaced. The stairs are barred off with wood. There is siding missing. Peter McCarty stated that siding is not available anymore, so it has to be obtained from salvage. He intends to side and paint the building. Mr. Strathman summarized it is unreasonable for the entire building to be painted, but not unreasonable for the siding and trim to be done. Peter McCarty agreed. Mr. Gabriel stated the short period of time to accomplish the task is unreasonable. Mr. Strathman asked when these violations were cited. Ms. Fish responded in Mazch and at the end of May. • (Item #4: Provide sufficient gazbage containers and trash pickup.) Peter McCarty stated he used to have a 2 yazd dumpster there. The apartment next door also had a 2 yazd dumpster. The pictures that Father Notebaart submitted did happen. Mr. McCarty has talked to Pat Fish about Neil, the next door neighbor, who does not have a big enough dumpster and his tenants dump their trash in the dumpster for 359 Maria. Eazlier this year, Mr. McCarty had 90 gallon carts put on his property. The situation was monitored. Ms. Fish came out and saw that the next door neighbor's dumpster looked like the previous picture of his. There has not been a problem on his property since. (Item #2: Repair steps in east entryway. Front porch pillars/supports need rebuilding.) Richard Gabriel stated he had an opinion from an architect regazding this same issue which is in conflict with the opinion of the housing inspector. (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) The 6x6 post have been installed. The pillars have been repaired per the azchitecYs suggestion. (Item #3: Repair reaz exterior light.) Peter McCarty stated the light bulb has been replaced. (Item #5: Post Certificate of Occupancy and new ownership information.) Peter McCarry stated this has been done. (Item #6: Repair holes in bedroom in #3. Repair hole azound cable wues in Bedroom #3.) Peter McCarty stated the broken plastic cover has been replaced. • (Item #7: Provide RH-i test on 4 boilers.) Peter McCarty stated when a licensed hearing contractor does the RH-1 test, they forward the informauon to the Fire Department. It was done on 6-8-98. � � �Z� NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 (Item #8: Adjust door closer #2, #4.) Peter McCazty stated they have been rightened. Page 4 � (Item #9: Repair closet door #4, hallways/stairs need painting and cleanup, repair ceiling Unit #1, paint Unit #1, repair broken mirror in bathroom of Unit #2, clean carpet in Unit #2 and #1, Unit #1 needs painting and cleaning, repair bathroom door #4.) Peter McCarty stated all is done. (Item 10: Itepair vanity door bathroom #1, fix leak under bathroom sink #1.) Peter McCarty stated the hinge has been replaced and the plumbing has been tightened. (Item 11: Repair bathroom floor #4.) Peter McCarty stated the linoleum has been irimmed. (Item 12: Provide smoke detector affidavit.) Peter McCarry stated it has been filled out, but he has not mailed it in yet. (Item 13: Properly support the load bearing columns on the front porch - each column cames half of the roof load - the e�sting fooungs/supports have settled causing structural instabilityJ Peter McCarty stated this is redundant to Item 2. (Item 14: Rebuild to code the steps on the reaz of the building.) Peter McCarry stated the pictures show what was done. Pat Fish stated all t6ese things were done recently. Most of the problem is that it takes revocation or condemnation to get work done. Richard Gabriel stated one of the problems is that when Peter McCarty works on one list, he is later told there aze other things he needs to work on. Many of the problems aze cosmetic in nature and not serious. It has been difficult to get work done because contractors are wo=king on storm damage projects. Gerry Strathman denied the agpeal. Mr. Strathman requested an inspection in the next seven days to check the items that have been said to be corrected. As for the other items, they are sufficient for the basis of condemnation. Mr. Strathman stated he understands that different inspections produce different violations, but some of these buildings are dynanuc and changes aze needed at one time and not another. 1494 Rose Avenue East Heuky Chu-Yang-I�ieu, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing Item 10 on the conection list. (Item 10 reads as follows: Provide approved size unit escape windows or provide variance from appeals board.) Gerry Strathman asked how lazge is the window. Pat Fish responded these are sliding metal windows. They are four inches too narrow. . C � J =-_---�. •; ._ NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 5 • Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that when the windows are replaced, they aze to be replaced with conforming windows. 960 Tuno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeazed and stated 960 Juno was declazed a vacant building and he just purchased the house. He asked Carrolyn Shepherd to show him the file on it. Ms. Shepherd gave him a piece of paper. Mr. Staeheli stated he told Ms. Shepherd that the house was suppose to have multiple housing code violations. Ms. Shepherd told him that her department does not need multiple housing code violations and that they can just go out and find another violation. Mr. Staeheli stated the previous properiy owner never received a list of housing code violations, there was never a notice of appeal, there was never a work order written. Gerry Strathman asked is the building vacant and secure. Ronald Staeheli responded the building may have been vacant since February 1998, and the doors aze locked. Carrolyn Shepherd stated there were multiple violations at the property eeen though there was oniy one violation on the conection order. Any issues not addressed by the complaint inspector aze noted by the vacant building inspector before the vacant building file is opened. The former owner paid the vacant building fee and submitted a form saying she vacated the building in the • fall because of storm sewer backup which caused stmcwral damage anc3 the fonndation had shifted due to ground frost. The former owner expected the buiiding would be raised when the insurance money was received. There was no attempt to verify the damage because the building would be raised or a code compliance inspections would resolve that problem. Ronald Staeheli knew this was a registered vacant building when he purchased the properry. Gerry Strathman asked about the one building code violauon cited. Carrolyn Shepherd responded only the one had orders. The code does not specify whether it is orders or violations. Gerry Strathman stated the issue of contention has to do with the question of whether this is a vacant building as met by the phrase "unoccupied and has multiple housing or building code violation." Mr. Strathman asked is it Ronaid Staeheli's view that the violations need to have been cited to the owner, and Carrolyn Shepherd's view that they only have to exist. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct and standing operating procedure. Mr. Staeheli stated there should be some sort of due process citing what is wrong with the property. Gerry Strathman stated he was puzzled why Mr. Ronald Staeheli is claiming it should not be considered a vacant buiiding. Mr. Staeheli stated the person he purchased the house from was the contract holder and the person who paid the fee was a contractee who was seriously in arreazs. Her perception of caring about his property would have been less than the contract holder for sure and less for Mr. Staeheli because he has no intention of losing it for a contract for deed. Mr. Staeheli filed the appeal because the city has a considerable amount of power of � people and they shouid have to do things correctly. If they ate going to decIaze a building vacant, ��--�Z� . NOTES OF TE� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 6 there should be multiple housing code violations presented in such a way that the violations can � be corrected or appealed. Gerry Strathman asked what Ronald Staeheli's intentions are with the building. Mr. Staeheli responded he plans to redo the back stairs and paint the house. He has not decided whether he will sell or rent the building. (He showed Mr. Strathman pictures of what he will do with the foundation.) Gerry Strathman stated the ordinance dces not say the building has to be ci�ed for multiple violations. They just have to exist. However, everyday fairness says the building owner should be notified of the violations. Ronald Staeheli stated the City does not lose anything by closing the vacant building file. The Ciry can still say the stairs have to be fixed and cite other violations. Carrolyn Shepherd stated the building needs to be inspected and there needs to be a code compliance. Gerry Strathman stated a wde compliance would be required if it a vacant building and not required if it is not a vacant building. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct. Gerry Strathman asked about possible structural damage. Ronald Staeheli responded he has every intention of righting the building and doing it under code. Gerry Strathman asked Carrolyn Shepherd would there be any circumstances whereby she would be willing to move this off the vacant building list. Ms. Shepherd responded she is not so inclined, however it may be advantageous to have a building inspector in the building to determine the extent of any structural damage. Most buildings that have substantial structural problems also have substantial other problems which is why she would prefer a code compliance. Gerry Strathman statecl he is not finding a ready solution on this one. Ae does not like it being on the vacant buiiding list without there being multiple citations. On the other hand, it is a fair reading ofthe ordinance. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. The actions taken are a reasonable interpretation of the ordinance. VJhether they are the coaect or only interpretation is for the courts to decide. Ronald Staeheli stated he would like to see a list of violations. Mr. Strathman asked could an inspection be done at the request of the owner. Carrolyn Shepherd responded normally not, but he can request a code compliaace inspection. Mr. Staeheli stated that would cost $100. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:55 p.m. CJ . Council File # 9���Go Green Sheet # 62166 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA / . _ B /l,,!',,C_ �,1 Presented 3h, Referred To Committee Date 1 BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul hereby certifies and approves the June 16, 1998 2 decision of the L.egislative Hearing Officer: 3 Properiy Ap�ealed 4 960 Juno Avenue 5 Decision: Appeal denied. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Yeas Na s Absent Blakey � Coleman f Hazris �� Benanav ✓ Reiter ✓ Bostrom ✓ Iantry ✓ c�- 13 Adopted t 14 Adoption 15 By: 16 Approved 17 By: Appellant Ronald Staeheli Requested by Depaztment of: !'3'� Form Approved by City Attorney � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: 1 � �. . city council ���� 6-25-98 Chris Coleman, 266-8620 1 � Pi1b�.iC laIYBFR FoR RWi111G TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES qg GREEN SHEET No 62166 �e. mre,uom. oF..R,�ro.ceroie rnreawra ❑ arr�nouar ❑ ana.vK ❑ RiY1CULiF1IY1CFt0�t ❑ q1UlGlifltll/i/ACCTO ❑Y�'ORl�11flIRYRI ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Approving the decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals Eor the 6-16-98 meeting for property located at 960 Juno Avenue. vuA � iurv qpprwe (A) w ne�ee[ PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMRTEE CIVIL SERVICE CAMMISSION r_,.�:ra�,�.7 mur+r oc tn�wsnerwH SOURCE fias Mia Pe���m erer wwked urWer a conhaU ior thie OepaAment? YES NO tias thin aersoMirtn ever bw.n a dry emdmee9 YES NO Doec thic persoNfirm poaeesc a sidll not namellypocsessetl by any wrtent aty employee7 YES NO �s m� x�� a m.�sea.eoaon rES No Yain an yes ancv.ers on aecarate sheH ene attacn to nrcen sheet L��a°�a�t �M,.�. 4'a\a� �`�".�§'nw� s JUN 2 � � COSTIREVENUE BUDQETm (CIRCLE ON� RC7IVITYNUI�ER YE5 NO :• • � NOTES OF Tf� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING 7une16,1998 Room 330, City Hall Gerry Strathman, I.egislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Pat Fish, Fue Prevention; Carrolyn Shepherd, Vacant Buildings Gerry Strathman called the meeung to order at 1:33 p.m. 359 Maria Avenue Peter McCarty, owner, and his attorney Richazd Gabriel, 175 Lafayette, appeazed. � �� ���� Richazd Gabriel stated his client is appealing the condemnarion order because some requests aze unreasonable and others aze satisfied. It would be an econoaric hazdship on the owners to lose the tenants and a hazdship on the residents to be evicted. This is a fourplex and each family has minor children. Pat Fish reported that this property has a long history going back several yeazs. Ms. Fish went back in the file to August 1997. Ms. Fish received complaints on August 14,19, and 29. There were two tenant complaints on October 27 and November 20. A reinspection was done in November. Ms. Fish went out again in February. The complaints range from violations of exterior conditions such as gazbage and trash, condition of the back porch, access doors to the basement. There were conditions cited in the units that were not taken care of after several reinspections. In February, Ms. Fish revoked the certificate of occupancy on the building because of the conditions there. In March, she did a certiflcate of occupancy inspection and gave the owners until May 2 to get the conditions corrected. Ms. Fish did a reinspection in May. Very litde if any progress was made. She went back yesterday and took pictures. In the appeal, the owner says the porch did not need straightening. Ms. Fish had a certified building inspector looked at the porch, and the inspector's conditions were added to the certificate of occupancy list. The building was condemned based on the fact that the management has not been kept up in accordance with the Saint Paul Property Maintenance Code. (Ms. Fish showed photographs to Gerry Strathman and Richazd Gabriel.} Gerry Strathman asked for clarification on the certificate of occupancy. Pat Fish responded it was revoked in February 1998 and it has not been reinstated. The next step would be condemnation because the letter of revocation said the building had to be vacated or the rep3irs made. Father 7ames Notebaart, Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis at 3045 Pazk Avenue, Minneapolis, owns 667 Fifth Street East, which abuts the property at 359 Maria. Father Notebaart stated he would like to speak on three issues: health, safety, and historic preservation. 1) Health - Father Notebaart has kept a photographic record of the trash problem at 359 Matia. He showed these photographs to Michael McCazry. When asked for a response, Mr. McCarty shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Also, scavengers come into the yazd. 2) Safety - The cellaz entrance is left open sometimes which could be a danger to children. Father Notebaart stated he has a police list of 220 calls to the building. He has seen a number of drug deals take piace behind the �1Ss�SZg NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 2 • residence. The owners have never responded to any letter from Father Notebaart. 3) Historic preservation district - The windows have been changed without the Historic Preservarion Commission's permission. (Father Notebaart submitted the police calls list and the photographs to Gerry Strathman.) Juliet Smebakken, 657 Fifth Street East, appeared and stated she and her husband Brian have lived on the same blcek as 1171 Minnehaha for 15 years. Ms. Smebakken fully supports what Pat Fish and Father Notebaart have said about the property. She is afraid to have her chiid walk in front of the building. She has seen some of the crime. Dayton's Bluff is slowly becoming safe, however this property has not changed. Ms. Smebakken does not believe the owner cazes where the tenants go. Her home is a possibility. Cliff Carey, 635 Bates, appeared and stated he lives about five blocks away. He has been awaze of tliis property for about four years. The number of police calls has not changed. Mr. Carey has had no luck convincing people to buy property on this block because of this type of activity. Mr. Cazey asked Gerry Strathman to support this condezanation. Karen Dupaul, Crime Prevention Person for Dayton's Bluff Dishict 4 Community Council, 281 Maria, appeared and stated it is important to have safe living conditions for the tenants there and an adequate playing azea for cluldren. Landlords aze very important to the neighborhood, but they need to be responsibie. Richard Gabriel stated the only issue here is the appropriateness of the condemnation. However, • these other issues have been raised and they feel compelled to respond. Peter McCarty stated a printout of the 1998 police calls shows there has only been about six police aails from January l, 1998 to May 29. He aclmowledges there have been a lot of calls in the past. (This printout was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Richazd Gabriel stated if the City wants to remove a property, there is a process for that. His clients feels that low income people should have a pIace to live also and this place gives them that opportunity. A certificate of occupancy was granted on Apri110, 1997 and expired on October 3, 1998. The closing paragaph says the following: `°To the owners, you should be commended for your attentativeness and interest in providing a safe and well maintained property. Thank you for helping making ihe City of Saint Pavl a most liveable City." (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) Pat Fish responded that is a computer generated letter and a standard statement when a certificate of occupancy is issuect TYie certificate was revoked on February 2 and not reissued. Richazd Gabriel stated the letter from the City dated February 1 S about a certificate of occupancy revocation had five items listed and all have been corrected. Pat Fish later inspected that property and the McCartys were not no6fied that any of the violauons were still outstanding. Peter McCariy stated the letter cleazly says that if the owners complied, the certificate of occupancy would be reinstated. Gerry Strathman asked was it assumed that it would be automatically reinstated. Mr. McCarty responded that is what the letter said. Ms. Fish reinspected on Mazch 25 for a renewal inspecGon. The above five items were not cited in the currem certificate of occupancy with • corrections. � a--�� . . ; - �_ : NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 3 Pat Fish stated on February 18, 1998, the certificate of occupancy revocation letter cleazly states "this letter serves as official norice of revocation: ' The letter does not state that once complied, the cer[ificate of occupancy wouid be automaticaily reinstated. In order to reinstate it, Ms. Fish has to do a certificate of occupancy inspection which was done on Mazch 25. On Apri12, Ms. Fish sent a letter with the corrections and things that needed to be done. In addition, she was also responding to complaints to specific units, so there was another letter on May 8 sent about a particulaz unit. That has not been coaected as faz as Ms. Fish lrnows. Gerry Strathman asked which items on the May 29 correction list were unreasonable. (Item #1: Paint exterior including him. Finish southwest and northwest exterior with siding and crim.) Peter McCarty stated it does not need to be painted. Pat Fish responded there is graffiti all over the building and the shakes aze dirty. The gutters look like they will come down. Gerry Sh�athman stated he did not see gr�ti in the pictures. Ms. Fish responded the photographs showed the doors that were taken out and the siding that was never replaced. The stairs are barred off with wood. There is siding missing. Peter McCarty stated that siding is not available anymore, so it has to be obtained from salvage. He intends to side and paint the building. Mr. Strathman summarized it is unreasonable for the entire building to be painted, but not unreasonable for the siding and trim to be done. Peter McCarty agreed. Mr. Gabriel stated the short period of time to accomplish the task is unreasonable. Mr. Strathman asked when these violations were cited. Ms. Fish responded in Mazch and at the end of May. • (Item #4: Provide sufficient gazbage containers and trash pickup.) Peter McCarty stated he used to have a 2 yazd dumpster there. The apartment next door also had a 2 yazd dumpster. The pictures that Father Notebaart submitted did happen. Mr. McCarty has talked to Pat Fish about Neil, the next door neighbor, who does not have a big enough dumpster and his tenants dump their trash in the dumpster for 359 Maria. Eazlier this year, Mr. McCarty had 90 gallon carts put on his property. The situation was monitored. Ms. Fish came out and saw that the next door neighbor's dumpster looked like the previous picture of his. There has not been a problem on his property since. (Item #2: Repair steps in east entryway. Front porch pillars/supports need rebuilding.) Richard Gabriel stated he had an opinion from an architect regazding this same issue which is in conflict with the opinion of the housing inspector. (This was shown to Gerry Strathman.) The 6x6 post have been installed. The pillars have been repaired per the azchitecYs suggestion. (Item #3: Repair reaz exterior light.) Peter McCarty stated the light bulb has been replaced. (Item #5: Post Certificate of Occupancy and new ownership information.) Peter McCarry stated this has been done. (Item #6: Repair holes in bedroom in #3. Repair hole azound cable wues in Bedroom #3.) Peter McCarty stated the broken plastic cover has been replaced. • (Item #7: Provide RH-i test on 4 boilers.) Peter McCarty stated when a licensed hearing contractor does the RH-1 test, they forward the informauon to the Fire Department. It was done on 6-8-98. � � �Z� NOTES OF TI� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 (Item #8: Adjust door closer #2, #4.) Peter McCazty stated they have been rightened. Page 4 � (Item #9: Repair closet door #4, hallways/stairs need painting and cleanup, repair ceiling Unit #1, paint Unit #1, repair broken mirror in bathroom of Unit #2, clean carpet in Unit #2 and #1, Unit #1 needs painting and cleaning, repair bathroom door #4.) Peter McCarty stated all is done. (Item 10: Itepair vanity door bathroom #1, fix leak under bathroom sink #1.) Peter McCarty stated the hinge has been replaced and the plumbing has been tightened. (Item 11: Repair bathroom floor #4.) Peter McCarty stated the linoleum has been irimmed. (Item 12: Provide smoke detector affidavit.) Peter McCarry stated it has been filled out, but he has not mailed it in yet. (Item 13: Properly support the load bearing columns on the front porch - each column cames half of the roof load - the e�sting fooungs/supports have settled causing structural instabilityJ Peter McCarty stated this is redundant to Item 2. (Item 14: Rebuild to code the steps on the reaz of the building.) Peter McCarry stated the pictures show what was done. Pat Fish stated all t6ese things were done recently. Most of the problem is that it takes revocation or condemnation to get work done. Richard Gabriel stated one of the problems is that when Peter McCarty works on one list, he is later told there aze other things he needs to work on. Many of the problems aze cosmetic in nature and not serious. It has been difficult to get work done because contractors are wo=king on storm damage projects. Gerry Strathman denied the agpeal. Mr. Strathman requested an inspection in the next seven days to check the items that have been said to be corrected. As for the other items, they are sufficient for the basis of condemnation. Mr. Strathman stated he understands that different inspections produce different violations, but some of these buildings are dynanuc and changes aze needed at one time and not another. 1494 Rose Avenue East Heuky Chu-Yang-I�ieu, owner, appeared and stated he is appealing Item 10 on the conection list. (Item 10 reads as follows: Provide approved size unit escape windows or provide variance from appeals board.) Gerry Strathman asked how lazge is the window. Pat Fish responded these are sliding metal windows. They are four inches too narrow. . C � J =-_---�. •; ._ NOTES OF THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 5 • Gerry Strathman granted the variance on condition that when the windows are replaced, they aze to be replaced with conforming windows. 960 Tuno Avenue Ronald Staeheli, owner, appeazed and stated 960 Juno was declazed a vacant building and he just purchased the house. He asked Carrolyn Shepherd to show him the file on it. Ms. Shepherd gave him a piece of paper. Mr. Staeheli stated he told Ms. Shepherd that the house was suppose to have multiple housing code violations. Ms. Shepherd told him that her department does not need multiple housing code violations and that they can just go out and find another violation. Mr. Staeheli stated the previous properiy owner never received a list of housing code violations, there was never a notice of appeal, there was never a work order written. Gerry Strathman asked is the building vacant and secure. Ronald Staeheli responded the building may have been vacant since February 1998, and the doors aze locked. Carrolyn Shepherd stated there were multiple violations at the property eeen though there was oniy one violation on the conection order. Any issues not addressed by the complaint inspector aze noted by the vacant building inspector before the vacant building file is opened. The former owner paid the vacant building fee and submitted a form saying she vacated the building in the • fall because of storm sewer backup which caused stmcwral damage anc3 the fonndation had shifted due to ground frost. The former owner expected the buiiding would be raised when the insurance money was received. There was no attempt to verify the damage because the building would be raised or a code compliance inspections would resolve that problem. Ronald Staeheli knew this was a registered vacant building when he purchased the properry. Gerry Strathman asked about the one building code violauon cited. Carrolyn Shepherd responded only the one had orders. The code does not specify whether it is orders or violations. Gerry Strathman stated the issue of contention has to do with the question of whether this is a vacant building as met by the phrase "unoccupied and has multiple housing or building code violation." Mr. Strathman asked is it Ronaid Staeheli's view that the violations need to have been cited to the owner, and Carrolyn Shepherd's view that they only have to exist. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct and standing operating procedure. Mr. Staeheli stated there should be some sort of due process citing what is wrong with the property. Gerry Strathman stated he was puzzled why Mr. Ronald Staeheli is claiming it should not be considered a vacant buiiding. Mr. Staeheli stated the person he purchased the house from was the contract holder and the person who paid the fee was a contractee who was seriously in arreazs. Her perception of caring about his property would have been less than the contract holder for sure and less for Mr. Staeheli because he has no intention of losing it for a contract for deed. Mr. Staeheli filed the appeal because the city has a considerable amount of power of � people and they shouid have to do things correctly. If they ate going to decIaze a building vacant, ��--�Z� . NOTES OF TE� PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT MEETING, 6-16-98 Page 6 there should be multiple housing code violations presented in such a way that the violations can � be corrected or appealed. Gerry Strathman asked what Ronald Staeheli's intentions are with the building. Mr. Staeheli responded he plans to redo the back stairs and paint the house. He has not decided whether he will sell or rent the building. (He showed Mr. Strathman pictures of what he will do with the foundation.) Gerry Strathman stated the ordinance dces not say the building has to be ci�ed for multiple violations. They just have to exist. However, everyday fairness says the building owner should be notified of the violations. Ronald Staeheli stated the City does not lose anything by closing the vacant building file. The Ciry can still say the stairs have to be fixed and cite other violations. Carrolyn Shepherd stated the building needs to be inspected and there needs to be a code compliance. Gerry Strathman stated a wde compliance would be required if it a vacant building and not required if it is not a vacant building. Ms. Shepherd stated that is correct. Gerry Strathman asked about possible structural damage. Ronald Staeheli responded he has every intention of righting the building and doing it under code. Gerry Strathman asked Carrolyn Shepherd would there be any circumstances whereby she would be willing to move this off the vacant building list. Ms. Shepherd responded she is not so inclined, however it may be advantageous to have a building inspector in the building to determine the extent of any structural damage. Most buildings that have substantial structural problems also have substantial other problems which is why she would prefer a code compliance. Gerry Strathman statecl he is not finding a ready solution on this one. Ae does not like it being on the vacant buiiding list without there being multiple citations. On the other hand, it is a fair reading ofthe ordinance. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal. The actions taken are a reasonable interpretation of the ordinance. VJhether they are the coaect or only interpretation is for the courts to decide. Ronald Staeheli stated he would like to see a list of violations. Mr. Strathman asked could an inspection be done at the request of the owner. Carrolyn Shepherd responded normally not, but he can request a code compliaace inspection. Mr. Staeheli stated that would cost $100. The meeting was adjoumed at 2:55 p.m. CJ .