Laserfiche WebLink
Building Code Board of Appeals <br />Meeting Minutes <br />(DATE) <br />Page 7 of 27 <br />demolition; the agreement was to repair decking and posts only. Ruppert continued <br />when he got home, the railings were ripped off and thrown to the ground. Ruppert <br />emailed Louden. <br />Gollin asked about an invoice regarding the decking material. Ruppert stated Severy <br />wanted Ruppert to sign for deck materials. Ruppert continued, that he called the deck <br />supplier asking about quantity of materials and was told Louden ordered 2x as much <br />material than was needed. Ruppert stated that at this point things were going <br />downhill. <br />Gollin referred to Severy's opening statement regarding waiting for the deck <br />engineering, Ruppert replied, you do not need engineering to replace decking. Gollin <br />asked, was a permit pulled for the deck or siding. Ruppert replied, no. Mr. Ruppert <br />stated, he did not think he had any active permits. <br />Gollin asked, when your complaint was filed with the city, what was condition of the <br />deck? Ruppert replied, half the deck was gone and steps were taken with sign <br />painted, "Do Not Use." Gollin stated, the demo of the deck and siding was done by <br />Louden's subcontractor. Gollin referred Ruppert to Exhibit 9A. Ruppert stated, this is <br />a picture of the siding that shows cut siding boards. Exhibit 9C showed extensive <br />caulking and Exhibits 10A and 10B showed deck stairs without a railing, explained <br />Ruppert. Gollin asked Ruppert, how long were the deck stairs in this state? Ruppert <br />replied from December 2019 to May 2020, 5-6 months; the deck was unusable. <br />Exhibit 10C is the "cruise ship" deck, very small, that was completely gone, said Mr. <br />Ruppert about the photo. Exhibit 1 OD demonstrated how the deck was pulled apart <br />and not unscrewed for reuse, Mr. Ruppert explained. Mr. Ruppert further explained <br />that Exhibit 10E shows the railing loaded on a trailer for repair, and Exhibit 1 OF is <br />another picture of screws ripped out. <br />Gollin asked if screens, outside lighting, or awning repairs were ever done. Ruppert <br />replied no. Gollin asked Ruppert to address the board as to his overall experience <br />with Severy Creek Roofing and Steve Louden. Ruppert stated, he felt strong enough <br />that he should stick up for others that have had similar problems. Ruppert wanted to <br />speak out and stop this from happening in Louisville. Gollin completed his questions <br />for Ruppert. <br />Gollin requested to enter Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8(all), 9(all) and 10(all) into the record. <br />Berry stated, as chairperson, he concluded the documents as reasonable and <br />reliable to aid in the Board's decision. Exhibits will be marked as stated. Berry asked <br />if there were objections to the exhibits. None heard. Exhibits admitted. <br />Cross-examination of Mr. Ruppert <br />Mr. Louden asked Ruppert-- going back to the contract stating work to be paid for <br />with insurance proceeds and delivered within 72 hours, was that adhered to? <br />Ruppert stated, the first check was paid. Louden stated he had won additional <br />monies and he had to call for the money he had fought for. It was just the initial <br />7 <br />