Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 09-15 HCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 COUNCIL COMMISSION ROOM CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Landis at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Steve Landis, Commissioners Gretchen Knutson, Kris Lawrence Anderson, Judy Thorbus and Joshua Xiong. Also present were Assistant City Manager, Vickie Schleuning, Building Official, Gary Gilpin and Staff Liaison Tom Bublitz. Commissioners Kathie Amdahl and James Richards were absent and excused. Councilmember Tim Roche was absent. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was amended by moving approval of the July 12, 2009 minutes to No. 8 on the agenda. There was a motion by Commissioner Thorbus and seconded by Commissioner Lawrence Anderson to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MAY 19, 2009 There was a motion by Commissioner Lawrence Anderson and seconded by Commissioner Knutson to approve the May 19, 2009 minutes of the Housing Commission meeting. The motion passed. CHAIRPERSONS REPORT Chairperson Landis noted that he would like to report that the National Night Out was a great success and explained that because of tonight's appeal he would defer any additional comments. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT The report was deferred to the next meeting. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL REGARDING CERTAIN COMPLIANCE ORDERS RELATIVE TO CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY CODE Chairperson Landis reviewed and read the Building Official's September 9, 2009 memorandum reviewing each item and the corresponding ordinance provision for each item. Ms. Janine Atchison, owner of 5907 and 5909 June Avenue North and the appellant in this evening's appeal asked if the Commission would like to hear why she was appealing. She explained that her main point of appeal is Item No. 4 on the Compliance Order regarding installation of hard wired smoke detectors. She explained that she was a district manager for the City of Minneapolis Housing Page 1 9 -15 -09 Inspections and was also a former Housing Inspector for the City of Brooklyn Center. She also noted she teaches codes at the college level. Ms. Atchison explained that cities cannot make rules, with regard to housing codes, that are more stringent than the State Building Code. Ms. Atchison proceeded to provide several handouts to Commission members and explained that the City cannot enforce a code more stringent than the Building Code pursuant to Minnesota Statute 326.B121 Subdivision 2 which she reviewed. She then explained, the Minnesota Building Code provides an exception for local governments regarding smoke detectors but they can only be made for single family homes not duplexes. Ms. Atchison then reviewed Section 299F.011 of the Fire Code, pointing out that Subdivision 4 states that cities may not exceed Fire Code requirements. Ms. Atchison then reviewed Minnesota Building Code 313.2.1 which addressed exceptions to the Building Code requirement for smoke detectors. In summary, she objected to the city requiring hard wired smoke detectors in sleeping rooms in her property. I Additionally, Ms. Atchison pointed out that she made her original appeal in June 2009 and explained she was given only five days notice of this meeting and did not receive the written information sent to the Housing Commission. Ms. Atchison pointed out that one and two family dwellings are covered under the Minnesota Residential Codes Building Official Gary Gilpin commented that the Minnesota Building Code has reference codes. He explained, the Fire Code and Plumbing Code are examples. He also explained that the State Statute, with regard to hardwired smoke detectors, is very confusing. He noted the International Residential Code covers one and two unit homes and townhomes and pointed out that each townhome is considered a single family residence. He further explained that under the Building Code, single family homes have certain requirements and multi family properties have certain requirements. Duplexes and townhomes, he pointed out, are not meant to be left out of the code but it is a part of the code that is not clear. He explained the Minnesota State Fire Code has requirements for cities and the city's fire prevention ordinance addresses this. The Assistant City Manager acknowledged Ms. Atchison's appeal was received in June and explained that an internal review of the appeal was first undertaken. Upon the referral to the Housing Commission, she noted the Housing Commission did not meet in August and that this was the first opportunity staff had to refer this to the Commission. Discussion continued with regard to various code issues relative to smoke detectors between Ms. Atchison and the City Building Official. Chairperson Landis pointed out that he believes the question at hand is whether the fire code gives the city authority to require hardwired smoke detectors. Ms. Atchison was emphatic in her objection to the city's ability to require hard wired smoke detectors in bedrooms and pointed out she has no intention of tearing down walls to put them in. Page 2 9 -15 -09 The City Building Official noted that the he had contacted the State Fire Marshall and it was his opinion that the City could require hard wired smoke detectors in bedrooms. Chairperson Landis stated the Housing Commission needs to assure we have done our due diligence on the city's ordinance and added, he cannot see the Housing Commission is in a position to make a decision this evening and that we need to examine the ordinance in light of the ultimate goal of community safety. Commissioner Lawrence Anderson inquired how du duplexes are defined are the merely a P Y Y air or P single family homes? Ms. Atchison stated that she believes it is more important to address the provisions in 299F.011 and 326B which she believes are more important than the definition of a duplex. Building Official Gary Gilpin disagreed with Ms. Atchison's comments and stated that he believes the fire code does allow the City to require hard wired smoke detectors. Ms. Atchison then distributed a copy of the Supreme Court ruling in the City of Morris vs. Sax Investments Inc. which addresses the scope of permissible municipal regulations and pointed out that the Morris vs. Sax decision supports her position. The Building Official pointed out that on Page 13 of the Supreme Court ruling, the Supreme Court stated it would not address smoke detectors. Chairperson Landis again emphasized the need to clarify the apparent confusion between various State Codes and requirements and inquired of Ms. Atchison if there were any other items she would like to address in her appeal. Ms. Atchison addressed the issue of the overall enforcement of its Housing Maintenance Code by the City and characterized the city's past enforcement of its code as addressing `nitpicky' items which she thought was not appropriate. Chairperson Landis pointed out the Housing Commission is the body to address housing concerns and added he wanted to make sure the codes are enforced evenly and emphasized the need to review the issues of smoke detectors further. Ms. Atchison pointed out the other issue she was concerned about is the refrigerator door gasket and noted that this was noted as 12 -402, No. 5 on the Compliance Order. Chairperson Landis noted that if the refrigerator is maintained at 40 degrees, then it appears that the ordinance requirement is met if the owner can prove this. The Building Official commented that there is also an issue of efficiency with regard to appliances. Page 3 9 -15 -09 A discussion ensued regarding how the ordinance requirement relative to refrigerator gaskets is enforced in the City of Brooklyn Center. The Assistant City Manager pointed out that the issue of m i n ambient air temperature pointing out that hi efficiency co es nto la when there is a different amb e play P P g her g outside air temperatures may affect the temperature inside the refrigerator and how often it runs. Commissioner Lawrence Anderson suggested that the Housing Commission review Chapter 12 issues and any inconsistencies in the ordinance at a future meeting. Chairperson Landis commented, it does seem appropriate that if the owner can prove the refrigerator temperature is 40 degrees, that this is sufficient for now. In summary Chairperson Landis stated that the Commission should look at Item No. 5 in more detail. Chairperson Landis stated that the Housing Commission needs to do more review of smoke detectors in light of state statutes and the city ordinance. Ms. Atchison stated she wanted to clarify that there has been a drop in the number of "nitpicky "enforcement items since the current Building Official has come on board with the city. She emphasized that her experience with the codes has been roughly in the past ten years. The Housing Commission members continued their discussion of Ms. Atchison's appeal both with regard to smoke detectors and the refrigerator gasket. The Assistant City Manager stated that she would like the Housing Commission to make some recommendation this evening regarding both points of the appeal including smoke detectors and the refrigerator gasket issue. With regard to the issues before the Housing Commission relative to the appeal from Chapter 12, submitted by Ms. Janine Atchison, the Housing Commission made the following recommendations: Com liance Item p to No.9 Install hardwired smoke detectors on every level and in every bedroom. (Section 5 -203f- attached Provide hardwired detectors in both bedrooms. With regard to requiring hardwired smoke detectors as per the June 3 2009 violation ed s g q g P notice and after hearing discussion on the various State, National and Municipal codes affecting this compliance order, the Housing Commission believed they were not in a position to enforce this compliance order where there were such significant inconsistencies in the various codes affectin g installation of hard wired or battery operated smoke detectors. The Housing Commission requested the Building Official to provide additional information to clarify the apparent inconsistencies with regard to the City's ability to require hardwired smoke detectors as per the compliance order. Housing Commission Members believed it is the goal of the City to make city ordinance enforceable and the Commission believed, in this situation, the ordinance needs to be revised and made consistent with the appropriate State and/or National laws and codes. Page 4 9 -15 -09 Compliance Item No. 5 Repair or replace refrigerator door gasket. (Section 12 -402 attached) With regard to the compliance ordering requiring the repair or replacement of the refrigerator door gasket, the Housing Commission believes that the language in the ordinance as written is not clear and that the term "efficient operation" is not clearly defined and needs to be rewritten. The Commission emphasized the need to revise this section of the ordinance and believed that this section of the ordinance as written is not enforceable. Remainder of Compliance Order Items The Housing Commission upheld the staff's recommendations on the remainder of the compliance orders in the June 3, 2009 violation notice for 5907 June Avenue North and as agreed by the appellant at the September 15, 2009 Housing Commission meeting. DISCUSSION OF JULY 12, 2009 HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES AND NEXT STEPS Chairperson Landis stated that discussion of the Jul 12'' minutes will be deferred to the October 1 P Y meeting. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Thorbus informed Commission members of a bus tour of affordable housing in Maple Grove and Plymouth and encouraged Commissioners to sign up for the tour. She noted she would be attending the tour. There was no other business addressed by the Commission. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Lawrence Anderson and seconded by Commissioner Thorbus to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 9:00 p.m. L A Chairman Page 5 9 -15 -09