Jimmy and Deb Matheos Claim
BARRY A. LINDAHL, E
CORPORATION COUNSEL
------ / . /
/ cf rf'-<za'4A'A
.:::o/~ 7~f'
.
.
MEMO
To:
Mayor Terrance M. Duggan
and members of the City Council
Date:
May 1, 2000
Re:
Jimmy and Deb Matheos
This is a claim for damage by property owners Jimmy and Deb
Matheos relating to the construction of a deck on their property at
420 West Locust. A copy of Building Services Manager Rich
Russell's memorandum is attached.
After discussions with the City Manager and the Building
Services Manager, it is the recommendation that the City pay the
sum of $397, one-half of the amount claimed, for a Release and
Settlement Agreement.
BAL/cg
cc - Mr.
cc - Mr.
Rich Russell
and Mrs. Jimmy Matheos
. "-"''-'''''1'-'''\'0'.
\-!\ ....._\.,. _".,no
V v', .~-" .., .
, ,\11']
"111'-" " . .'\'
8-...1,,;\_' -, ) '
... "".\ 0[\
61:\\\ol~ t,-,',JI' ~
1\\3838
1 9 6 eve ARE P L A Z A D U f\ U Q U F low A Gila 0 1
TELE 319 583-4113 I'AX 319 583-1040
e-mail balesq@mwci.net
,
/1.1 /Kc
,
CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA
MEMORANDUM
"--.
TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
FROM: Rich Russell, Building Services Manager ~
RE: 423 W. Locust/Jimmy Matheos
INTRODUCTION: This memo is intended to respond to Mr. Matheos' concerns stated in his
letter to you dated April S, 2000.
BACKGROUND: My memo to you dated March 29, 2000 (copy attached) advised that Mr.
Matheos and the Building Services have a disagreement stemming from the department issuing a
permit for replacing a deck at 423 W. Locust.
DISCUSSION: There are several areas ofMr. Matheos' letter that I disagree with. The second
paragraph 01'1\11'. Matheos' letter indicates that drawings were presented. I am not aware of
dra\\;ngs being submitted to the Building Services Department. I contacted the Housing Services
DeparUllent to see if they had any drawings. They stated that Mr. Matheos told them we had
approved the plans. In retrospect, we should have required plans and reviewed them to determine
the location oftlle easement/property line.
In the same p:U~lgraph.1\Ir. Matheos stated that Jerry said he would leave a note if there a
pronlem existed \\;th the footings. Jerry stated he leaves a note whether there's a problem or not.
Ilow clse would a contractor know ifhe'd been there?
The third pamgmph stales that the contractor poured the footings as instructed by the Building
Services Department. Clearly. no instruction was given.
The llHmh paragraph indicates that I gave verbal, then written authorization, for the project to
continue. That is correct. The verbal authorization was based on Mr. Matheos' description of a
six-flll)t casement on th<' neighboring property.
The sevenlh pamgraph of the lelter slales that Mr. Matheos followed Building Services
Depmtment pl\leedurcs. lie did purchase a permit and request an inspection. These steps follow
the pl\)eedurc. l\lUring the Il.lotings without an inspection is not a step in the correct procedures.
I'<'rlmps we could hm'e done a belleI' job in explaining those procedures to Mr. Matheos and/or
his Cllntl1letllr.
CONCLUSION: NeitlK'r /111'. /llatheos nor the Building Services Department is entirely to
!llmne Illl' the currcnt situalion.
/ l