My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-17-05 Council Special Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
10-17-05 Council Special Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:41:19 PM
Creation date
6/6/2008 2:16:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 17, 2005 <br />unrealistic. The City Administrator commented that there are a lot of <br />factors that work against project timing, and in this case it was a <br />combination of many factors that delayed the improvement. <br />Blesener indicated that he did not feel it would be fair to reduce the <br />assessmenC, but indicated that if the City receives liquidated damages from <br />the contractor, there could be consideration given to a rebate to the Carla <br />Lane and Noel Drive property owners. The City Administrator agreed that <br />the Noel Drive property owners also experienced frustrating delays and <br />inconvenience. The County Road B-2 East improvement went well, <br />however. <br />One property owner asked if the City would use the same contractor for <br />future projects. The City Administrator noted that MN Law requires thaC <br />the lowest responsible bidder be awarded a project. It is very difficulC to <br />disqualify a low bidder under State Law. The Administrator again noted <br />that the City will be reviewing its specs to require that prime contractors <br />perform a certain percentage of project work, thus ensuring their presence <br />on the job. <br />One property owner pointed out that the streeC appears to be higher than <br />most of the yards. The City Engineer explained the street grades and the <br />workings of the rain water gardens and storm sewer. This property owner <br />noted that there is a very low point in her yard around the yard drain. The <br />City Engineer indicated that he would check this out. It was noted that the <br />4" to 5" inch rain of a couple weeks ago was a good test, and drainage <br />appeared to work well. The residents present agreed. <br />Skibsted stated that he objected to the assessment being levied prior to <br />completion of the work. The City Administrator again explained the <br />carrying costs and potential for increased interest rate if the assessmenC is <br />held off until next year. <br />LaValle agreed with previous statements that if liquidated damages are <br />received by the City, the Council should look at a rebate to the Carla Lane <br />and Noel Drive property owners. Keis agreed. <br />Blesener again apologized for the frustrations and inconveniences. <br />There was no one else present wishing to comment on this matter. There <br />were no written objections submitted Co the proposed assessment. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Montour, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.