12-15-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 December 15, 1997 Mounds View City Council APPROVED MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried E RESIDENTS REOUESTSAND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR: Mayor McCarty explained that this is the time for residents to address the council with concerns on items that are not on the Agenda. Mr. Chad Harris, 2085 Terrace Drive, explained that he has been experiencing moisture build-up in his attic. It is his understanding that the problem stems from the fact that the under-attic bypasses were not sealed. The home was remodeled in 1996 and inspected by Mr. Rick Jerson, City Building Inspector. He has requested Mr. Jarson's interpretation of the Minnesota Energy Code 7670 which has exclusive language regarding attic bypasses and vapor seals, and/or a re-inspection of the property. The purpose of this request was to make sure that the work was done in accordance with building codes. Mr. Jerson responded in a letter dated December 1, 1997 and indicated that a re-inspection of the properly or an explanation of the building code was • being denied. A discussion followed in regard to the City's role in this matter. Mr. Long, City Attorney, had advised Mr. Jerson that it would not be the city's responsibility to perform a second inspection. The inspection completed by a City Inspector prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is simply a general inspection and does not involve in-depth examination of the attic, etc. If there is a contractor problem, there is a liability against the contractor or the private inspector who was hired to do a thorough inspection of the house. Mr. Harris explained that he would like to get an interpretation of the building code to see if the contractor can beheld liable for necessary repairs. Mayor McCarty asked Mr. Harris to give the City two more weeks to look into the matter and respond to Mr. Hams' request. Mayor McCarty asked that the Council consider Item F(5) at this time. 5. Consideration of Resolution No. 5199, a Resolution Re-approving a Wetland Alteration Permit for Lot 2, Block 1, Downing Addition, (2760 Woodale Drive). Mr. Ericson, Planning Associate, explained that this request is to re-approve a wetland alteration permit to allow for the construction of a home at 2760 Woodale Drive. In order to allow for the construction, soil corrections and modifications to the lot will need to be completed, including filling a portion of the wetland area. Rice Creek Watershed has reviewed the application and has approved the plan, subject to their mitigation requirements. This case came before the Council in 1995, at which time they approved the Wetland Alteration Permit, per Resolution No. 4852. He noted that the requirements have changed since that time, and the property owner is no longer required to go in and disturb the wetlands in order to create more • wetlands. Mr. Ericson noted that Resolution No. 5199 would re-approve the Wetland Alteration Permit subject to a few contingencies. (The legal description in Resolution 5199 will be changed to Lot 2, Bock 1, Downmg Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota.) Mr. Ericson briefly went through the contingencies. It