Laserfiche WebLink
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br />MOTION/SECOND: Trade/Stigney to Table this item until staff determines whether they have followed the <br />policy procedures. <br />VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br />Ms. Sheldon asked that Item 8 (F) be removed for discussion. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Trade/Quick to approve the Consent Agenda, except for Item (I~. <br />VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carned <br />Discussion of Item 8 (Fl: Ms. Sheldon explained that originally staff was recommending denial of the license <br />for Asphalt Driveway Co., however representatives of the company were present and wished to discuss the <br />situation with the Council prior to them making a decision. Ms. Sheldon provided the Council with a brief <br />summary of the situation noting that staff is particularly concerned with the fact that the contractor does not <br />have a license and that driveways are being installed without one. <br />• Steve Hanon, 2458 Sheldon Street, General Manager with Asphalt Driveway Co., explained that they are <br />presently licensed in 37 communities in the Twin Cities area and install over 2,000 driveways each year. <br />Their company posts a sign on the properties of all of then jobs and they did not intend to hide anything. He <br />stated their company is at fault and they will do whatever is necessary to correct anything that is wrong with the <br />driveways that were installed in the past few years without a permit. He noted that permits are not required for <br />driveways in all communities and he believes this is how the mistake occurred. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Trade/Stigney to approve the License for Asphalt Driveway Co., on the condition that <br />they are willing to correct any problems (code violations) with the driveways that have been put in since 1995 <br />and take care of any fines for failing to obtain permits. <br />VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br />~_ L 1 _ ~ . 1 ~ _ z_ ~l_I 1 ~~ ~ _ ,M _ ~ ~ 1 U M : I ~ ~ ail ~ i <br />Lawrence Syverud, 5059 Rainbow Lane, stated it is his understanding that the city requires an Orsat test on <br />newly installed furnaces. He has been trying for two years to get the Building Inspector to do this. A test was <br />supposed to have been done on Apri129, 1997 by Anderson Heating & Air Conditioning, however he does not <br />understand how this test could have been properly completed as the person who came out did not have any of <br />the necessary equipment with him. Anderson Heating & Air Conditioning charged him for a permit as a part <br />of the overall cost, however he does not believe one was ever obtained. Mr. Syverud explained that it is the <br />responsibility of the Building Inspector to see that this test is completed. <br />Council member Koopmeiners stated he contacted Elroy Burdahl at the Department of Administration for the <br />State Building Code who suggested that the manufacturer of the furnace company be contacted and ask that a <br />representative come out and perform an Appliance Performance Test on the fiunace. <br />• <br />