Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 12, 2006 <br />RESOLUTION NO. 2006-4-92 -ADOPTING THE AMENDMENT TO <br />THE CITY'S RESERVE POLICYAS RECOMMENDED BY THE <br />FINANCE DIRECTOR AND TRANSFERRING THE <br />RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF FUND5 FROM THE RESERVE <br />FUND TO THE GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle. <br />Ayes (5). <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />2006 STREET The City Administrator reviewed the City Engineer's report dated <br />IMPROVE- April 7, 2006 recommending the award of the low bid for 2006 Street <br />MENTS Improvements to T. A. Schifsky and Sons in the amount of $1,154,217.47. <br />The Administrator reported that the initial date of the bid award was in <br />late March. At that time, no bids were received, and the bid award date <br />was extended to April 7, 2006. Six bids were received on the April 7`h <br />date, and the low bid is under the City Engineer's estimate. The <br />Administrator reported that the Engineer has analyzed the bids and <br />recommends T. A. Schifsky as the low bidder. <br />The Administrator reported that the cost of this work has been very <br />dynamic over the last few years given oil and materials pricing. He <br />further reported that the work includes a reconstruction of the City Center <br />parking lot at a cost of $109,000. Last year's estimate for an overlay of <br />the parking lot was approximately $60,000. The $109,000 includes new <br />base, drain the and resurfacing in order to resolve a perched water <br />problem at the City Center property as well as a rain water garden, catch <br />basin and small retaining wall. <br />Blesener asked why no bids were received at the initial bid opening date. <br />The City Administrator indicated that it appears Co be a unique situation <br />wherein various bidders did not submit thinking that other bidders were <br />going to. <br />The City Administrator suggested that the full cost of the City Center <br />parking lot improvemenC be authorized at this time, but suggested thaC he <br />and the City Engineer determine if there is a way to reduce the cost. He <br />suggested that perhaps the employee portion of the parking lot not be <br />improved at this time. LaValle suggested that the entire lot be improved <br />so that there is a seamless construction as well as an overall consistent <br />appearance. <br />Mr. Keis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />