2004-09-22 CC Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

September 11, 2004 City Council Centerville, MN 55038 RECEIVED SEP 1 3 2004 Dear Council Members, 1 am a resident on Center and Dupre Streets. During this past Summer we have had to endure the installation of new sewer; water; curb and gutter; and road surfacing. Part of the process involved removing part of our 4 year old concrete driveway. On September 7, 2004 the removed piece of cement was replaced by a cement contractor hired by the city of Centerville. The replacement cement is comprised of inferior quality materials and poor workmanship. Some of the issues include: + Gouging our existing slab and not repairing the missing piece. When cutting out our original concrete driveway the Centerville contractor gouged out a sizable piece of concrete. When the new concrete was poured the Centerville contractor failed to repair the original driveway. + Excessive overrun of cement. When pouring the concrete the contractor did not install the forms all the way to ground level. This allowed concrete to pour out underneath the fonn. + Leaving closed seams and seams that are too narrow. Our original concrete slab has seanlS installed for drainage and to offset cracking. The Centerville contractor tried installing seams but they are too narrow making it easy for dirt to become trapped, also at least one seam is not finished. + Using unspecified aggregate to compose the cement. I spoke with the contractor we hired to do our driveway originally. He used granite rock to manufacture our concrete. This makes for a more stable, and longer lasting product. I questioned tile makeup of tl1e replacement cement and was told that it was "standard aggregate according to city standards." When I spoke with Ryan Goodman he tl10ught our original driveway was rated at 3900psi, the new section was 4200 psi. TIus was incorrect, tlle original slab is rated at 4500 psi. Tile original slab also has a 5 year guarantee; tl1e new one only has a 1 year guarantee (only because the project will still be open tl1en). + Leaving littered gap between the two slabs of concrete. After installing the cement tlle Centerville contractor left pieces of old cement in tile gap between the 2 slabs. Our yard is also littered with excess cement. TIlis is something that was not done by our contractor when he poured tl1e original driveway. + New slab is not adequately engineered for water damage. One of our biggest concems is that because this new concrete isn't sealed appropriately to our original driveway, and tllat it is located at tl1e steepest pitch of the drive where water will get under the new piece of concrete and wash out the soil undemeath. The Centerville contractor confimled that this is very likely to happen. In a sllort time tlle slab will begin to rock as we drive over it. The new slab will tl1en crack, break, and we will have to pay to replace it in a much earlier timeframe tl1an wllat is acceptable. + Not installing an expansion piece between the existing and new concrete slab. When I consulted witil our contractor he, and I agreed, tl,at there should be an expansion piece on both ends of the replacement slab. TIlis would help alleviate any damage to tlle origiual slab if tile new slab breaks loose or tllere is any other movement oftl1e slabs. I mentioned tius to tile Centerville contractor and Ryan Goodman. TIleir explanation for not installing an expansion piece is tilat tius would allow more water to seep under the new concrete tl1an tl1e existing gap between the two slabs. TillS would speed np tile process of washing out the dirt under tile new slab. Unfortunately tlllS argument is proven incorrect by tl,at fact tllat in tile middle of our original driveway (approximately 20 feet from the new concrete) has an expansion piece tllat was installed