Re: Hse issues - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Au 1998 Mr.Lyle Oman '. CITY OF ORONO (Hand Delivered) I Dear Mr. Oman: Thank you for your letter of August 4, 1998,regarding our concerns with our new home. We would like to respond to your letter by adding the following: *We disagree with the method of measurement being open for interpretation as the step up to the foyer room is over 8". However,we will not pursue this code irregularity at this time as the stoop is now a structural problem. *Your letter does not address the front stoop not allowing water to run away from the house as it has a negative slope toward the house. We will not pursue this code irregularity at this time as the stoop is now a structural problem and will be repoured. *The stoop is apparently structural and must be replaced. It is possible to repair the foundation but will not be known until the stoop is removed. A structural engineer will have to make this determination at that time. Also,at that time,it will be necessary for the builder to make it possible for another step to be added by adding another foundation for the step as the approved plan indicates. The temporary board will be removed at the time of stoop replacement and two full steps between the brick should be poured As the city has indicated,code requires 6"between the final grade and the material on the house. This would be impossible to establish without a permanent step. The homeowner should not be required to pour a floating step after the final grade has been established. *As respects the seal around patio doors,some windows and service doors,we would like your statement to the builder to read as follows: Lack of seal around patio doors: Patio doors must be installed per manufacturer's requirements(removed and re- installed per attached letter). Contractor to receive manufacturer's approval on repairs. The windows are installed per manufacturer's specs,however,the required seal(caulk)is not present around some of the windows. �Q *Your statement regarding Mound septic not meeting code is adequate. However,please note that we expect the mound to be rebuilt according to the design on record The system should be repaired according to the design on file with the �7 city,including size of rock bed,sand absorption area,and slope of mound. Enclosed is a copy of the letter from Bob Koch that indicates the areas that do not meet the requirements. If the system cannot be repaired to meet all of the design requirements,we shall wish to discuss this matter further. Also,it is our understanding that the original septic subcontractor is no longer in business. We would like the opportunity to approve of the contractor making the repairs. Without an adequate comfort level of repairs,we may wish to move the mound. *Regarding resealing the manhole risers, Steve Weckman has addressed this issue with the builder and original subcontractor. As the risers have stopped taking on ground water to date,no action to be required at this time. *We agree with your statement regarding class B flue noises. *We agree with your statement regarding the air conditioning unit *We agree with your statement regarding the roof vents. *Lack of seal around plumbing vents: Being that installation was stated as being done per code,the builder will not be required to rectify this situation. *Ability of duct work to move air. Heating system must be blanced by heating contractor on a per room basis. A report should be given to the City of Orono for analysis. We are certain that the Uniform mechanical code addresses air flow requirements,etc. We would like verification that the heating system is capable of 1571 CFM with the ductwork that it currently has. If the contractor does not have adequate testing devices,please let us know.