My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12-11-2017 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2017
>
12-11-2017 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2018 10:27:26 AM
Creation date
1/25/2018 2:40:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
12/11/2017
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
292
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
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION November 6, 2017 <br />DRAFT <br /> 6 <br />Mr. Hillesheim reported on the current status of the city’s equipment and the benefits of 225 <br />replacing units. On the question of funding, staff is recommending use of 2017 budget 226 <br />surplus for the units and funding of controls from the building maintenance fund. The 227 <br />NAC representative spoke to replacement/down time if the units were to fail. The 228 <br />council discussed replacement brand proposed as well as energy savings as a result of 229 <br />replacement. 230 <br /> 231 <br />8. Public Works Facility – Administrator Karlson explained that, as a result of 232 <br />questions that came up during a previous presentation by Quinn Hutson of CNH 233 <br />Architects, an addendum is being presented further outlining the option of remodeling 234 <br />and expanding the existing public works facility. He is asking if the council has further 235 <br />direction on the matter. 236 <br /> 237 <br />Mayor Reinert feels opinions on this project are subjective. To address that, he thinks 238 <br />that more information and different perspective is needed. Perhaps an opinion from 239 <br />someone who doesn’t specialize in government projects would be appropriate. 240 <br /> 241 <br />Council Member Manthey suggested that the council should give more detail on what is 242 <br />wanted in order to get additional information. He suggested he’d prefer more discussion 243 <br />for the whole council of possibilities and stages. 244 <br /> 245 <br />Mayor Reinert noted a Hugo facility that cost $2 million. His concern is that there’s no 246 <br />better level of services offered to the constituents with a more expensive building. He 247 <br />wants to get the best for the residents’ money. 248 <br /> 249 <br />Council Member Manthey warned against oversimplifying. It isn’t just putting trucks in 250 <br />a garage. He recommends the council review the whole situation and decide of what 251 <br />should be spent, including what the facility can provide in the future. Mayor Reinert said 252 <br />he is oversimplifying to make a point. 253 <br /> 254 <br />Council Member Rafferty remarked that the conversation should be held with the 255 <br />upcoming council. Council Member Maher added that she isn’t certain all the 256 <br />information has gotten to the architect that needs to and that can be solved by more 257 <br />discussion and direction. 258 <br /> 259 <br />9. 2018 West Shadow Lake Drive and LaMotte Drive – City Engineer Hankee 260 <br />explained that staff is continuing to work on the project design. They are still planning on 261 <br />holding a neighborhood meeting at the end of November. Communication is underway 262 <br />with the webside and phone calls being taken. Drainage, a critical component, is being 263 <br />worked on. Ms. Hankee was informed that residents have contacted the mayor with 264 <br />questions about lake level and she explained that she is working to address those 265 <br />questions with the DNR and watershed district. 266 <br /> 267
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.