2013-08-13_HRA_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes Tuesday, August 13, 2013 Page 9 1 Mr. Jones further advised that a required posting of their rental license would be problematic 2 as there was no common area for the townhome units. 3 4 Mr. Jones expressed his frustration that he had not been provided with a copy of the draft 5 ordinance for his more detailed review prior to this meeting. 6 7 Chair Maschka noted that the process was still relatively early, and any changes would 8 ultimately be made at the City Council level. Chair Maschka asked that staff provide a copy of 9 the draft ordinance to Mr. Jones. 10 11 Ms. Kelsey clarified that, if staff had been provided an e-mail address by the multi-family 12 13 meeting. Ms. Kelsey apologized for any oversight on the part of staff; and referenced the City 14 website as another source for the draft document. 15 16 Ms. Jones opined that it would be helpful to include numbers on the pages; with concurrence 17 by the HRA and duly noted by staff for future reference. 18 19 Regarding the requirement for participation of property owners in crime-free multi-housing 20 classes, Mr. Jones advised that while he had never attended those classes, as a Real Estate 21 professional, he was required to attend other continuing educations; and questioned if any 22 allowance would be made for those alternative classes if a property owner had not been the 23 subject of multiple complaints. 24 25 Mr. Jones further questioned who made the determination of how properties were classified; 26 and questioned why that was not included in the ordinance. 27 28 Ms. Kelsey advised that those classifications would not be included in ordinance language; and 29 noted that those details were still in process and would include various factors in determining 30 that criteria at the time of implementation, most likely related to an average developed on 31 property code violation criteria (e.g., number and type of violations) and broken out per 32 inspected unit compared with overall units inspected on average. Ms. Kelsey advised that as 33 the process was implemented, she anticipated adjustments in those criteria. 34 35 36 inspect properties, referencing his experience with that practice in the City of Columbia 37 Heights and the multi-family properties his firm owned in that community. Mr. Jones opined 38 that the Fire Department was already familiar with the buildings and any inspection issues; and 39 performed the inspections as time allowed and as their schedules were adjusted. 40 41 Ms. Kelsey stated that, from her initial research, it was her understanding that the City of 42 Columbia Heights did not base their inspections on the IBC Maintenance Code, only on the 43 Fire Code; with the IBC Code already in place and used by the City of Roseville for other 44 applications. 45 46 Mr. Jones disputed that finding, opining that they inspected for venting, leaky drains and 47 faucets, and other things that went beyond the Fire Code; and suggested further discussions 48 at. Mr. Jones opined that 49 since the Fire Department already provided training for their firefighters, it also proved 50 beneficial for them to be familiar with rental properties in case of an emergency, benefiting 51 both the City and the property owner. 52 53 Rich Schlueter, 794 Lovell Avenue