My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1987-09-08
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Minutes - City Council
>
Minutes 1987
>
1987-09-08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2005 6:11:57 AM
Creation date
8/10/2005 2:32:37 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />September 8, 1987 <br /> <br />Public Hearings, continued <br /> <br />Proper demonstrated the difference between rigid and flexible cop- <br />per, noting rigid is used for interior piping rather than exterior <br />and is not something anyone would want under the new street. <br /> <br />Blomquist noted copper was installed in 1955 and approved by the <br />City of New Brighton; Proper noted there is nothing in the city.s <br />records regarding service connections. <br /> <br />Blomquist felt if the city was negligent, the city should replace <br />it; Proper reported he called the State to see about prior plumb- <br />ing codes and found that between 1934 and 1969 no reference is <br />made to the type of copper tubing but it did not allow lead sol- <br />dering, and. that galvanized pipe was an approved material at that <br />time. <br /> <br />Benke asked if the city was in the plumbing inspection business in <br />1955. <br /> <br />LeFevere stated he did not know what the city was doing 32 years <br />ago for plumbing inspections, but, in general, by performing a <br />building code inspection, the city does not become a guarantor to <br />the property owner that the work has been done properly. The city <br />is protecting the public health, safety, and welfare; the city <br />officials are trying to do the best job they can but they do not <br />incur a legal obligation of any kind by a failure to pick up any <br />deficiencies in a failure upon the code. <br /> <br />Proper felt the lack of accurate records back then would indicate <br />there was no inspection; Loscheider said his electrical was red- <br />tagged by the inspector and that the plumbing was inspected, and <br />thought Ed Gunderson was the inspector at that time. <br /> <br />Gunderman felt this was an appropriate dispute for the Ramsey <br />County Dispute Resolution Center. <br /> <br />Loscheider always felt had the public works director or whoever <br />was in charge of the program told the residents if at any point in <br />time they would find substandard plumbing other than strictly gal- <br />vanized, or whatever, and they addressed that issue, he could have <br />accepted their reasoning. <br /> <br />Benke stated the discovery of two rigid copper services a <br />surprise; Loscheider felt if someone had taken proper notes at the <br />public hearing, his pipes would not have been inspected because, <br />at that hearing he stated, although he had no frost problems, he <br />was merely advising staff that his neighbor did. <br /> <br />Proper stated other services were excavated because the city could <br />not verify the type of service; and did find several residents had <br />galvanized when they thought they had copper. <br /> <br />Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.