04/04/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. - e . Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve staff's recom- mendation for a study of duplicate taxation. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Appeal by Paul Osborn, HCC, Re: Housing Code Board of Appeals Decision-- Memo Distributed Manager said it was hoped that an ordinance would be developed which would place such appeals before the Council Hearings Panel, rather than the full Council, in order to conserve Council's time. Paul Osborn, HCC, said the appeal was based on a decision of the Housing Code Board of Appeals regarding property located at 455 East 13th Avenue, owned by Connor, Connor & Colbert. He said the residence has a lodging house license. It was inspected in September because of a change of ownership. At that time it was discovered there were sleeping rooms in the basement. Because of an inadequate ceiling height, an air duct suspended from the ceiling, inadequate lighting and ventilation, Mr. Osborn felt the basement constituted a substandard condition based on City Code. Thus, he held an administrative hearing in November and determined that the sleeping rooms in the basement did constitute a substandard condition. Mr. Colbert appealed that decision to the Housing Code Board of Appeals, which granted the variance to the ceiling height. However, the variance carried no conditions for compensating alterations. Also, the Appeals Board made no findings of fact in support of the relief granted. Because of that, Mr. Osborn was appealing the decision to the City Council and requesting denial of the granting of the variance. Tone Colbert said the rooming house was licensed for ten years and he had purchased it on that basis. Mr. Haws wondered if the Housing Code Board of Appeals had to make findings of fact for a variance. Joyce Benjamin, City Attorney's office, did not have the Housing Code with her, but felt the Council had to make findings of fact in this instance. Mayor Keller wondered if Mr. Osborn was objecting to having living units in the basement totally, or because of the lack of proper ventilation and lighting. Mr. Osborn said his objection was based on the ceiling height. The owners were going to bring the ventilation and lighting conditions up to minimum code requirements. He found no compensating factors which would alleviate the ceiling height deficiency. He noted there was no record of any variance having been granted before this time. As the conditions exist now, they are very much below standards and he reiterated there were no compensating factors. Mr. Haws wondered why there was a ceiling height in the Code and why it was a concern. Mr. Osborn said, in general, it had to do with the amount of air that is in the room, in the event of fire, and safety for the occu- pants. He noted he was dealing with the Code as it exists now and what 4/4/79--5 I~o