HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/31/1974
MINUTES
October 31, 1974
The two hundred and siAty-second regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge
City Council was called to order at 7 30 p.m. by Mayor pro tern Joseph
Donaldson at 4355 Field.
Aldermen attending were Mary Jo Cavarra, Joseph Donaldson, Calvin
Hulsey, Larry Merkl and Louise Turner. Alderman Robert Howard
arrived shortly after the meeting had convened.
Also attending were City Administrator John Jerman, City Attorney
William McCarthy, City Clerk Elise Brougham, staff and interested
citizens. Mayor Homer Roesener was absent.
Motion by Alderman Turner "I move that the Minutes of October 24, 1974
not be read and that they be approved as written." Motion was seconded
by Alderman Cavarra and passed 5-0. Alderman Howard was absent.
Public Comment was made by
Mr. Norman H. Andersen of 12495 West 32 Avenue stated he had dis-
tributed a letter he had written regarding the alleged building viola~
tions on his house and the inspection made by A.E. Stevenson, Chief
Building Inspector of El Paso County. He stated he was disappointed
that the man reviewing the Ouilding Dept. from California had not been
shown his house, and that the main issue is whether his roof is a wall,
and he cited sections of the building code indicating the most restrictive
of material, construction etc. shall govern and that the plans shall
not be changed after approval by the Building Dept. He stated changes
had been made and that the [llans indicate "shake roof" and not "wallo"
He said his roof leaks and birds and insects can get in. He claimed
some violations have been made. The letter is attached to the Minutes.
Alderman Cavarra stated she regretted that the independent inspector didn't
resolve the problem, but that the City Administrator and Mayor will
"try to work this out next week."
Mr. Andersen requested backup from the City in ordering the contractor
who built the house to correct the violations.
Resolution No. 348 authorizing the doy after Thanksgiving as a holiday
was scheduled for action and had been tabled from last week's meeting.
Additional data had been distributed stat~g that 73 city employees had
responded to a su~vey and 55~~ had selected the day after Thanksgiving
as their choice as an additional Holiday. Also a survey of other cities'
holidays was distributed and a list of 4 firms which give this holiday.
Mr. Jerman stated in answer to a question, thatthe Public Works Assoc.
had initiated this survey. He stated he was not sure if all of the
Personnel Committee had been polled, but one member Mrs. Piccol~ wa,; in favor.
Alderman Turner recommended that a ninth holiday be a floating, and
Alderman Hulsey recommended that it be the employees' birthday.
NO ACTI ON WAS TAKEN O!\: RESOLUTION ~JD. 348.
Resolution No. 349 was introduced by Alderman Hulsey and was read.
The Resolution reaffirms the City's position of supplying, equipping
and maintaining one ambulance and station wagon to the Fire Department
rescue service.
Mr. Ken Alley of the fire department was present.
if it would be possible if the police radio in the
be returned to the Police Department as they short
Mr. Jerman Qokeu him
stationwagon could
of radios.
MINUTES - Dc+ober 31, 1974 - Continued
-2-
Chief Pinson of the Police Department recommended turning in the
radio in the Fire Chief's car, and stated the Animal Warden is without
a radio which is being repaired.
Alderman Hulsey st-ated he felt' the Fire Department needs both radios.
Alderman Turner requested 5 complete inventory of the number of radios,
walkie talkies and who has possession of them.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that Resolution No. 349 be ~dopted."
Motion was seconded by Alderman Turner and passed 5-0.
A Concession Stand Agreement was scheduled for consideration. Mr. Je~~
stated there was a clause eliminating the licensee to carry insurance,
and the umbrella policy of the R-1 School District will cover the licensee
and I'he City is relieved from any and all claims. In answer to questions,
he s+ated the two organizations had worked it out between themselves
as to the period of time they will run the concession, and that the
Parks Director had given his approval.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move we approve this concession agreement
form" Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey. Discussion followed.
Alderman Howard asked who determined which group receives the license.
Mr. Jerman stated the Parks Commission and Parks Department would review
the applicants. Alderman Hulsey expressed fear that this operation may
get away from the citizen groups and stated he wanted the Parks and
Recreation Commission's Chairman to sign the agreement.
City Attorney McCarthy stated the law requires that all agreements must
come before City Council for approval.
Alderman Turner stated this duty of the Parks and Recreation Commission
should be written into the Parks Ordinance, and in the meantime it
should be specified in the agreement form.
Alderman Hulsey questioned the status of the revised park ordinances.
City Attorney McCarthy stated the staff prepared a revised ordinance
and regulations and submitted it to the commission, and then several
months later the Commission submitted their own version. Mr. Jerman
stated a sub-committee had been appointed to go over the ordinance
submitted by the staff, but no meeting was ever called, and in the
meantime the Commission prepared their own version, and that this
sub-committee should meet to go over the differences. He stated it
was his feeling that the Commission should be advisory, and not directive
or administrative.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that agreement be tabled until the
Parks and Recreation Ordinance is revised." Motion was seconded by
Alderman Merkl and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Merkl "I move
Thanksgiving week be cancelled as
and Procedure for City Council."
Howard and passed 6-0.
that the Council Meeting during
provided for in +he Rules of Order
Motion was seconded by Alderman
Alderman Cavarra asked if there would be a meetinq on uecember 5th
since there was a National League of Cities Convention that week.
It was determined only 2 were attending so a quorum would be present.
Alderman Turner requested reports from those who were attending.
Motion by Alderman Merkl "I move that the application for renewal of
the Class J1 package beer license for 50uthalnd Corporation dba 5even-
Eleven Store #49, 6595 West 44 Avenue be approved." Motion was seconded
by Alderman Cavarra and passed b-O.
MINUTES - October 31, 1974 - Coniinued
-3-
Motion b~ Alderman Turner "1 move that the application for a Class
F, beer and wine license for Ralph A. Acierno dba Cugino's Italian
Reslaurant at- 5807 WesL 38 Avenue be renewed." Motion was seconded
by Alderman Cavarra and passed 6-0.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "1 move that the application far renewal
of the Class G 3-way liquor license for the Gasthaus Ridgeview, Inc.
at 4465 Garrison Street be approved." Motion was seconded by Alderman
Turner and passed 6-0.
Proposed plan for remodelinq the Public Works Maintenance Building
was presented. Mr. Jerman recommended that gas heaters be installed
making a total cost estimate of $5,451.00. In answer to a question,
he stated some existing walls would be moved.
Alderman Cavarra stated that the Mayor had requested an inventory of
available space and recommended this should be analyzed first.
Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that no action be taken on this
proposal until the Mayor and City Administrator have a chance to analyze
the overall space of the City." Motion was seconded by Alderman
Howard and passed 6-0.
Mr. Jerman announced a clerical error had been made in the 1975 3udget
and that the correction had been distributed, and the Budgets should
be corrected.
Mr. Je~man presented to Council a new business card with the multi-
colored seal which the Mayor had ordered for his use, and asked Council
if they wanted new cards also. He stated that the emblem that had
been previously ordered was being phased out. It was agreed that
the new style would be ordered on an individual basis for any Councilman
who wanted some, or who had run out of the old ones.
Mr. Jerman questioned Council whether they would have Council meetings
the day after Christmas and New Years and they agreed there should be
the regular meetings scheduled.
Mr. Jerman stated DRCOG is proposing an energy conservation study
which will involve the landfill problem. The cost is $100,000.00 and
the present participating members are Denver, Littleton and Aurora,
but that other cities have been asked to participate for a total con-
tribution of $80,000.00. He stated he felt Wheat R~e should work with
the County on this problem, and that no action is required now, but
Council should be aware that this is coming up.
Alderman Howard Sated it had been his understanding that 4 years ago
when this study had been discussed, that it would be funded through DRCOG.
Alderman Cavarra reported she had attended an Urban Systems Meeting
and that Wheat Ridge's project for signalization on West 44 Avenue had
been given first priority, and that now formal approval from the DRCOG
council and the highway department is needed. She stated that Karl
Williams, Jefferson Co. Manager wants the cities in Jefferson County
to work together with their proposals and submit it as a county-wide program.
It was noted there is now a vacancy on the Mass Transit Task Force due
to the resignation of Gary Lewman.
Meeting was adjourned at 9 15 p.m.
E
APPROVED
'~G-"
/ j0'JJ
11/7/?:j
., I.
! '
2.
MINUTES - Page 5. - October 31, 1974
In regard to the dispute as to whether my roof should
be finished as either a roof or as a wall, I would like to refpr to
the following sections of the Uniform Buildini: Code
Sec. 103 Para. 3
"'"here in any specific cRse, different sections of
this code specify different materials, methods of
construction or other requirenents, the most restric-
tive shall govern"
See 302,(a) Fara. 2
"hen the Building Official issues the permit, he shall
endorse in writinr or stamp on both sets of plans and
specifications "Aprroved" Such apnroved plans and
specifications shall not be chanred, modified, or
altered without authorization frop.] thp building Cfficial,
and all work s~all be done in accordancg with the approved
plans
ether changes in the roof that were made from the original
plans include
Substitution of 1/2" of 5/2" plywood for the 3/4" plywood
specified in the plans for the built-up (flat) portion of the roof.
Elimination of blocking between roof rafters. This is also
covered under See 2506 g (2) "If the ratio is j to 1, the ends
shall be held in position." Roof joists are 2 X 6.
Change of design of soffit which allows insect and animals
to enter area above ceiling.
In regard to those portions of the report which were not
code violations, according to ~r Stevenson
1) He did not ask to see the crack in the foundation. It
is visible.
2) What was not stated in the report was the reason for
concern about the cracks was that first a crack about
3/2" appeared above the master bedroom I-iindows. hfter
a period of time, it closed again, but was replaced
by a problem in one window wherebY, when one side of
the window is completely closed, the other side is
open 3/11".
MINUTES - Page 4. - October 31, 1974
12495 dest 32nd hvenue
',ihea t Ridge, Colorado 2.0033
Cctober 30, 1974
Mayor Homer L Roesener
7470 West 52th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado
Dear Lr. }~yor
I am writing you at this time concerning the report of
A. E. Stevenson, Chief Building Inspector of El Paso ~ounty and
our telephone conversation early the followinb week. In regard to
Mr Stevenson's letter, I would iike to add the following comments
Basement area
2. Inspection on north and south walls was made upon
opening portions of the ceiling. I installed the
nuts myself on the east wall and other areas that
were open to my access
Exterior wall covering
This is probably one of our chief concerns and
one which probably would affect building in general
in this area if accepted Lr. Stevenson's report
backs Mr. Frose's final decision that our roof is,
in reality, a wal: Mr Prose's initial feeling
(at nis first visit to inspect our home) was that it
was a roof and was improperly covered. He later changed
his opinion to conform wi th tha t of Hr. Reeves' (the
contractor) Attorney This was that any surf ce that
is dry-walled on the inside is a wall and not a roof.
This determina Eon would affect all l',ansard and
Gambrell roofs in t:1is area
While ~,r Stevenson was here, he was shown the set
of plans ap roved by the city which contains a side
vie\'J of the building that has Ilri tten across the roof
the words "shake roof" (Sheet 1/2), and made aware of
the fact that the fact thc,t the roof had been deter-
mined a roof by a consulting engineer
I might aod at this time, on ~heet ff7, showing a
cross-section of roof and its construction is speci-
fied "hand-split, re-sawn shakes", 10" T vi "
2.
MINUTES - Page 5. - October 31, 1974
In regard to tile dispute as to whether my roof should
be finished as either a roof or as a wall, I would like to refer to
the following sections of the Uniform Building Code
See 103 PaTa 3
",';here in any specific case, different sections of
this code specify different materials, methods of
construction or other requirements, the most restric-
tive shall govern."
See 302,(a) Fara 2
-'---"
3.
MINUTES - Page 5. - October 31, 1974
4) Cf sowe concern was the fact that ~r. Frase used the
original list of suspected code violations in our
meeting wi th }.r Stevenson and not the more complete
list which was bro~ght to the hearing by the city.
I believe that my over-all concern with this problem has been the
element of time. ever a year has passed, and 1 have talked to
three different mayors during this time, all of whom felt something
should be done if code violations do exist Some violations have
been affirmed by Mr l'rose, Vlheat Ridge Chief Building 1nspec tor,
}.r Lolesar, Consul ting E~:l':ineer, and )-,r. Stevenson, consulting
building inspector During this time, I have waited weeks, and
in some cases, months between communications (I waited the entire
summer for the contractor to comply with hr frose's instructions
to repair those code violations which he acknowledged, and which
the contractor, to date, lws refused to do. During this time,
my roof continue to leak (Violation of Sec. 23C5 (f) and Sec 3207 (b),
parts of the roofing mate'iClI has been 5tripped away to facilitate
inspection and portions of the dry-wall have remained open. I have
had to spend several hundreds of dollars for attorneys' fees and
for consulting en~ineers' reports. I have had to take time off
work to meet with these people, and spent many hours of my own time
contacting those persons wi trl whom I had to communicate.
I feel that it has
for a task that should have
place. At this time, I see
and where I was a year ago
been a considerable imposition upon me,
been attended to by the city in the first
no difference between where I am now
I would aprreciate some concrete action.
Thank You,
Norman H Andersen
IZ4g5 \1est 32nd j\ venue
wneat R~dge, Colorado 00033