Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 05-15 HCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 15, 1984 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairperson Phyllis Plummer at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Phyllis- Plummer, Commission members Don Lawrence, Ron Turner, Dolores Hastings, Barb Sorenson, Phil Cohen and Ray Haroldson. Also unc' member Rich Theis Director of Planning and Ins resent were Co it 9 Inspection P Ron Warren and Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman. Excused from the meeting were Commission members Ken Felger and Cliff Williams. APPROVAL OF MINUTES APRIL 10, 1984 There was a motion by Commissioner Hastings and seconded by Commissioner Turner to approve the minutes of the April 10, 1984 Housing Commission meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. HEARING APPEAL FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLIANCE ORDER Chairperson Plummer opened the hearing on an Appeal from a Compliance Order by noting for the Commission that it was the responsibility of the Housing Commission to review and comment on appeals from Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances. She noted for the Commissioners that it was their prerogative to recommend to the City -Council an affirmation of the compli- ance order a modification or a denial of the same. She then recognized Commissioner Cohen who noted that the appeal before the Housing Commission involved an HRA inspection for the Metropolitan HRA and he wanted to disclose for the record that he was Chairman of the Metroplitan HRA and that he had earlier requested that Administrative Assistant Hoffman check with the City Attorney to obtain their opinion as to any potential con- flicts. Administrative Assistant Hoffman noted that he had discussed the matter with Dave Kennedy from the City. Attorney's office and it was his opinion that there was not a conflict of interest on the part of Commis- sioner Cohen sitting in on the hearing involving the appeal from the compliance order. Chairperson Plummer recognized Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren. Director Warren reviewed for the Commission the appeal from a compliance order as submitted by Harold Liefschultz, owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments, in Brooklyn Center. He noted that the appeal was received on May lst and that it was an Appeal from the Compliance Order issued by the City on April 24, 1984. He noted that the compliance order was in writing, described the location, the nature of various orders of the Housing Maintenance Occupancy ordinance, established specific times for correcting the violations and notified the recipient of an appeal course. The violations were noted by the Building Inspector while conducting a Housing Quality Inspection for a Metro HRA Section 8 rent assistance participant on April 20th. He further stated that the appeal was filed 5 -15 -84 1- by Mr. Paul C. Steffenson, an attorney representing Chippewa Park Proper- ties. He stated that Mr. Steffenson's appeal which was part of the Commission's agenda packet was based on four points. Point 1, he alleged that the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy ordinance required that notice be given of the specific sections of the ordinance violated and that the compliance order issued failed to cite the ordinance sections with respect to the 13 violations noted. Director Warren brought the Commission's attention to Section 12 -1201 of the City's ordinance which states "describe the location and nature of the violations of this ordinance." He noted that nothing in Chapter 12 required a specific citation but rather a description of the violation. It should be noted however, that as a courtesy the City has supplied the appelant with the applicable ordinance sections and as such it was recommended to the Housing Commission that the Compliance Order as modified be the compliance order for record. Point 2, the appellant states that Section 12 -1201 requires a compliance official to establish reasonable time for the correction of such violations. He further states that Chippewa Park Apartments were given only 72 hours to correct 4 specific violations. He further notes that the fire department had given them 30 days to correct certain violations including the same fire doors cited by the Building Inspector. Director Warren noted that the ordinance requires that we establish a reasonable time for correction. He noted that the Inspector was doing a Metro HRA Section 8 inspection for the renwal of rental assistance provided for the occupant of one of the units located at 6417 Camden Avenue North. He further stated that the renewal of assistance was for May 1, 1984. The first four violations for which the 72 hours compliance period was established are considered to be life safety concerns. The fact that the violations existed meant that the unit failed the housing quality standards and rent assistance for the occupant would not be extended until the violations were corrected. The corrections for these violations were the responsibility of the owner to correct and not the tenant. The purpose of the 72 hour period was to get proper compliance within a short but reasonable period of time so that the rental assistance could be continued. It should be noted that all four of the items were relatively simple items to correct within that period of time and that in fact they were corrected. In point three, the appellant argued that the compliance order was a result of an HRA inspection on apartment 112 at 6417 Camden Avenue North and that the alleged violations had no relationship to a HRA inspection of an individual unit. Director Warren noted that the point was totally meritless. The HRA Section 8 Housing Quality standards include all common areas as well as the individual unit. He.noted that the Housing Quality standards dove tail the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy ordinance as well. He also noted that a Building Inspector cannot be expected to ignore obvious violations of the Housing Maintenance ordinance while per forming any inspection on the property. In point four, he alleges that several of the violations do not violate the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy ordinances but rather were reflecting the Housing Inspector's own perception of haw an apartment complex should be maintained. He specifically states that there is no section of the ordinance requiring the maintenance of driving and parking areas or the 5 15 -2- removal of miscellaneous debris in the parking and driving areas. Director Warren noted that enforcement of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy ordinance is not a matter of the inspector's own perception of how an apartment should be maintained. The Housing Commission's attention was then drawn to Section 12 -316 regarding the maintenance and driving of parking areas. This section states "the owner of a multi family dwelling or dwellings shall be responsible for providing and maintaining in good condition pavement and delineated parking areas and driveways for tenants consistent with Chapter 35 of the City's ordinances." Section 35 -710 of cin drainage and curbin g zonin ordinance relating to the surfacing, the City's g g g g. states "in all districts, other than Rl and R2, all off street driving and parking areas shall be improved with a minimum of two inches hot mix paver laid bituminous mat, or a comparable concrete slab, placed over a well compacted sub grade and gravel base. The base shall conform to Minnesota Highway Department's specifications for Class 5 gravel." Direc- tor Warren then made reference to Section 12 -302 regarding the maintenance of shared or public areas which states "every owner of a dwelling containing two or more dwelling units shall maintain in clean and sanitary conditions the shared or public areas of the dwelling and premise thereon." Director Warren noted that this section establishes the owners responsibility for maintaining common areas free of debris thus the Building Inspector's request for compliance. In summary Director Warren stated that he felt the compliance orders were appropriate in all respects and not based on erroneous interpretations of the ordinance and that the appellant had not shown a basis for his appeal. He therefore recommended that the Housing Commission take action to recommend that the compliance order issued to the Chippewa Parks Apart- ments on April 24th be affirmed in its entirety. For that purpose the Commission's attention was drawn to a proposed resolution drafted by the staff outlining the compliance order issued. Commissioner Cohen inquired of Director Warren if any of the items had been corrected. Director Warren informed the Commission that they are being corrected and that he has been informed that the appellant will comply. Commissioner Lawrence inquired if the City performed continuous inspections. Director Warren noted that this inspection was a renewal of a Metro HRA Section 8 contract with the owner and that the City has a contract with Metro HRA to do such inspections. He noted that each year a follow up inspection is required to insure that the apartments comply with the requirements of the program. He also noted that inspections are made based upon complaints and that further inspections are made every two years relative to the renewal of their license. Chairperson Plummer inquired if the compliannce orders issued were the same life safety kinds of issues. Director Warren indicated that it was not his impli- cation that they were always for life safety inspections but in other buildings within the Chippewa Park complex similar violations have been noted and included life safety violations. He also stated that tags have been issued for such life safety violations for the other buildings. He also stated that this was not the first time the owner had been cited for such violations. Commissioner Haroldson inquired as to any potential problems within apartment #112 that was inspected. Director Warren noted that the apartment did pass the inspection. He also stated it was the common areas that failed. Commissioner. Hastings expressed her concern with the fire door issue and her greater concern for the safety of the volunteer firemen that would have to fight any potential fire in that building. Director Warren then requested that the Housinig Commission again meet to hear a second appeal from the same party on May 29th at 7:30 p.m. 5 -15 -84 -3- Chairperson Plummer then recognized Mr. Paul Steffenson, attorney for Chippewa Park apartments. Mr. Steffenson noted that he was not in a hurry to pursue the second appeal and that it could wait until a later date but noted that it was the staff's desire to be in compliance with the City's ordinance requirements. He also stated that all of the items had been corrected with the exception of the parking lot. Mr. Steffenson briefly indicated to the Commission that he felt there were certain short comings in the ordinancne. He stated that he felt that fundamental fairness requies a specific citation of a section of the ordinance being violated. He noted that in Section 12 -709 the word facility is not defined. He further indicated that no where in the ordinance is the word facility defined and felt that the staff gave to broad of an interpretation to that wording. He also noted a conflict or lack of coordination between the fire department's inspec- tion which required a 30 day compliance and the Planning and Inspection department's 72 hours. He noted the purpose of his appeal was one for fairness. Chairperson Plummer then inquired how he proposed to modify the proposed compliance order. Mr. Steffenson indicated he would have item #2 state that the ordinance does require specific cita- tion of the violations and that item #5 be changed to reflect the same date as the fire departments. Chairperson Plummer inquired as to the length of time that Mr. Liefschultz has owned the apartments to which Mr. Steffenson replied since approximately 1975. Director Warren indicated that Mr. Liefschultz has always been one of the princi- ples in that building. Commissioner Haroldson briefly read from Section 12 -1001 and indicated to Mr. Steffenson that he felt the 72 hours was justified baSEd upon a reading of that section of the ordinance. He then inquired of Mr. Steffenson if the owner was aware of any of these problems prior to the compliance order. Mr. Steffenson stated that prior to the inspection R 0 Elevator had been called to repair the elevator but had not arrived at that point in time. He indicated that the owner does have a maintenance contract withi R 0 Elevator to keep the elevators in operational condition. Following Mr. Steffenson's presentation Chairperson Plummer requested Director Warren to comment on Mr. Steffenson's request. Director Warren indicated he felt the appellant was making an erroneous interpretation of the ordinance. He further indicated that he doesn't dispute the need to coordinate with the fire department but he noted that the fire department is =,a volunteer department. The two departments meet on a monthly basis and that they had had received the fire department's compliance orders until after their citation had been issued. Commissioner Haroldson inquired of Director Warren if other apartment owners have been given similar time frames for similar violations. Director Warren indicated that they had. Commissioner Turner inquired if the appellant had failed to make the corrections within 72 hours, would the unit have failed the Section 8 standards. Director Warren indicated that they would have in fact been failed, but they would have been failed on April 20th not May 1st. RECESS The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission recessed at 8:56 and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. Chairperson Plummer stated that she felt the ordinance does not require specific citations but indicated that perhaps in the future the Commis- sion should give consideration to reviewing the ordinance and require such explicit citations in the future. Commissioner Lawrence concurred 5 -15 -84 -4- with Commissioner Plummer. Commissioner Hastings also concurred. Commissioner Haroldson indicated that he felt that in the future, out of courtesy, we should provide specific section numbers when issuing compliance orders. Chairperson Plummer indicated that she understood a need for consistency but stated that the fire department order does not negate those of the Planning and Insepctions. Commissioner Cohen stated that the order was actually for the benefit of the landlord and in fact beneficial to both parties. Commissioner Hastings agreed and noted that the Section 8 item required the 72 hour completion in order for th owner to receive the rental assistance for which he had contracted with Metro HRA. Chairperson Plummer indicated that she felt that the items cited in the compliance order were covered under Chapter 12. There was a motion by Commissioner Cohen and seconded by Commissioner Hastings to adopt the proposed resolution but amending the resolution to include a statement reflecting that the Commission had received an appeal from Items 1 and 5 of the resolution and that the Commission did hear the appeal and that they discussed the same and second that the appeal was denied and the resolution upheld. The motion passed unanimously. Director Warren briefly discussed the May 29th meeting with the Commis sion. Following a brief discussion it was agreed that the Commission would again meet on May 29th for the second appeal. Chairperson Plummer indicated that -she felt the Commission should discuss the ordinance and perhaps requiring the specific citation number when issuing the compliance order. Commissioner Cohen recommended that it be brought back as a future discussion item on the most expeditious way to handle that. Commissioner Haroldson indicated that he wanted to commend the Chippewa Park for complying with the compliance order. Commissioner Cohen indicated that he would like a staff report on the 29th on the degree to which Chippewa Park actually did comply with the compliance order. ENFORCEMENT OF THE HOUSING MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman introduced the next agenda item by referring to the letter from Mary Neilson from the City Attorney's office relative to a Minnesota Statute that would allow the City to enforce it's Housing Maintenance Ordinance by depriving the rental owner from any of the tax advantages of the property. Commissioner Cohen gave a brief history of that law noting that he had been active in seeking its passage in the State Legislature and that it had origi- nally been sought by the City of Minneapolis. There was a brief discus- sion of potential use of the ordinance and general support for the same. It was recommended that the item be brought back to the Housing Commission in the fall for further consideration and potential action. O'T'HER BUSINESS Chairperson Plummer took this opportunity to announce her resigning from the Housing Commission as of July 31, 1984. She indicated to the Commission that she has enjoyed her stay with the Commission but at this point in time was no longer able to serve on the Commission. She also reminded the Commission that they would be meeting on May 29th. 5 -15 -84 -5 AJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Turner and seconded by Commissioner Lawrence to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Chairperson 5 -15 -84 -6- adoption: Member Phil Cohen introduced the following resolution and moved its HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 84 -1 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DISPOSITION OF AN APPEAL OF A HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE ORDER GIVEN CHIPPEWA PARK APARTMENTS WHEREAS, on April 20, 1984 the Building Inspector conducted a Housing (duality inspection at the Chippewa Park Apartments, specifically 6417 Camden Avenue North, Apartment No. 112, at which time certain violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance were discovered; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 1984 the Building Inspector issued a Compliance Order listing 13 violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance found at 6417 Camden Avenue North and directed such Compliance Order to Mr. Harold Liefschultz, owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments, which was received on April 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, on May 1, 1984 pursuant to Section 12 -1202 of the City Ordi- nances the Planning and Inspection Department of the City of Brooklyn Center received an appeal filed by Paul C. Steffenson, an attorney representing Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz, owners of the Chippewa.Park Apartments in Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, said appeal set forth in writing four specific grounds on which the appeal was being based; and WHEREAS, Section 12 -1203 of the City Ordinances requires the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, to hear the appeal within 30 days after said appeal is filed, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the Advisory Housing Commission; and WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the Compliance Order based on an erroneous interpretation of the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 77 -22 establishes the Housing Advisory Commission as the initial review and advisory body for the Board of Appeals regarding contested Compliance Orders; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 1984 the Housing Advisory Commission conducted a review of the contested Compliance Order and took comments from the City's Director of Planning and Inspection on behalf of the City and from a representative of Harold Liefschultz, owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments; and WHEREAS, the Housing Advisory Commission makes the following recommended findings; 1. The appeal received by the Planning and Inspection Department on May 1, 1984 was a properly submitted appeal. 2. That the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance does not specifically require that each section of the ordinance must be cited to make a Compliance Order valid only that the Com- pliance Order describe the nature and location of the violations. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -1 3. That the appellant was later supplied the applicable section numbers of the ordinance and that the modified Compliance Order shall be the Compliance Order of record. 4. That the 72 hours given the owner of Chippewa Park Apartments to correct four specific violations was reasonable in that these life- safety concerns were easily correctable within that time and that failure to correct them would cause an undue penalty to the Rent Assistance recipient living at that complex. 5. The fact that the Fire Department had given the owner 30 days to correct some of the same violations does not negate the Building Inspector's 72 hour compliance notice in light of No. 4 above. 6. The fact that the Building Inspector was at the Chippewa Park Apartments on April 20, 1984 to conduct a Metro HRA Section 8 Rent Assistance Housing Quality Standards Inspection does not negate the Building Inspector's responsibility to enforce the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance and issue Compliance Orders for violations found at that time. 7. That the violations listed on the Compliance Order issued on April 24, 1984 are supported by a review of the provisions of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. WHEREAS, the representative of the Chippewa Park Apartments requested the Housing Commission to modify Point Nos. 2 and 5 of the above recommended findings; and WHEREAS, the Housing Commission reviewed, discussed and deliberated the request and decided that the recommended findings as indicated above were in order and appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, that the appeal submitted on behalf of the owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments be denied and that the contested Compliance Order dated April 24, 1984, as modified with the inclusion of the applicable ordinance section numbers, be affirmed in its entirety. i Da e Chairman ATTEST ✓�f?` rl�l.�� P Secr� The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dolores Hastings, and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof; Chairman Phyllis Plummer, Commissioners Dolores Hastings, Ray Haroldson, Ron Turner, Phil Cohen, Don Lawrence, and Barbara Sorenson and the following voted against the same: none. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed.ana adopted. Member Dolores Hastings introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 84 -2 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DISPOSITION OF AN APPEAL OF A HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE ORDER GIVEN CHIPPEWA PARK APARTMENTS WHEREAS, on April 30, 1984 the Building Inspector conducted a Housing Quality inspection at the Chippewa Park Apartments, specifically 6325 Camden Avenue North, Apartment No. 111, at which time certain violations of the Housing Main- tenance and Occupancy Ordinance were discovered; and WHEREAS, on May 3, 1984 the Building Inspector issued a Compliance Order listing five violations of the Housing.Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance found at 6325 Camden Avenue North and directed such Compliance Order to Mr. Harold Liefschultz, one of the ownerskof the Chippewa Park Apartments, which was received on May 7, 7984 by United Realty; and WHEREAS, on May 1.0, 1984 pursuant to Section 12 -1202 of the City Ordin- ances the Planning and Inspection Department of the City of Brooklyn Center received an appeal filed by Paul C. Steffenson, an attorney representing Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz, owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments in Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, said appeal set forth in writing four specific grounds on which the appeal was being based; and WHEREAS, Section 12 -1203 of the City Ordinances requires the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, to hear the appeal within 30 days after said appeal is filed, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the Advisory Housing Commission; and WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the Compliance Order based on an erroneous interpretation of the ordinance and WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 77 -22 establishes the Housing Advisory Commission as the initial review and advisory body for the Board of Appeals regarding contested Compliance Orders; and WHEREAS, on May 29, 1984 the Housing Advisory Commission conducted a review of the contested Compliance Order and took comments from the City's Director of Planning and Inspection on behalf of the City and from a representative of Harold Liefschultz, owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments; and WHEREAS, the Housing Advisory Commission makes the following recommended findings: 1. The appeal received by the Planning and Inspection Department on May 10, 1984 was a properly submitted appeal. 2. That the 72 hours given the owner of Chippewa Park Apartments to correct three specific violations was reasonable in that these violations are life- safety concerns which were easily correctable within that time. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -2 3. The fact that the Fire Department had given the owner 30 days to correct some of the same violations does not negate the Building Inspector's 72 hour compliance notice in light of No. 2 above. 4. The fact that the Building Inspector was at the Chippewa Park Apartments on April 30, 1984 to conduct a Metro HRA Section 8 Rent. Assistance Quality Standards Inspection does not negate the Building Inspector's responsibility to enforce the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance and issue Compliance Orders for.v.iolati.ons found at that time. 5. Although the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance does not specifically define the term "facility," the common definition of the term used for purposes of the ordinance is "something that is built, installed, or established to serve a particular purpose." 6. Fire doors are facilities within the meaning of Section 12 -709 and as such are subject to being maintained in a safe, sound and working condition. 7. Section 12 -709 includes a variety of elements that go into the makeup of a building that are not specifically mentioned else- where in the ordinance_ but, nevertheless, are expected to be maintained. 8. Section 12 -709 is not void due to vagueness. 9. The violations listed on the Compliance Order issued on May 3, 1984 are supported by a review of the provisions of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing-Advisory Commission to recom- mend to the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, that the appeal submitted on behalf of the owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments be denied and that the contested Compliance Order dated May 3, 1984, be affirmed in its entirety. May 29, L9184,. D e r 1 Chairman ATTES Secretar"/ The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Don Lawrence and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Phyllis Plummer, Commissioners Dolores Hastings, Ray Haroldson, Phil Cohen, Don Lawrence, and Barbara Sorenson and the following voted against the same: none whereupon said resolution was declared duly ;gassed and _adopted.