05/11/1987 Council Minutes (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

1 1 1 109 COUNCIL MEETING MAY 11, 1987 offer to the City with the appraisals that were made on 4th Avenue. They are comparable. Mr. Reinert moved to approve the offer and approve signatures on the documents. Mr. Marier seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. ENGINEER'S REPORT - RON STAHLBERG Outlot "F" - Mr. Stahlberg told the Council that the survey and fieldwork has been completed for the replatting of this outlot. The surveyer was told to hold off on finishing the plat until the Council could make a decision regarding the grading for drainage of the outlot. He also noted that there are several other tax forfeit lots in the area that require fill to make them buildable. Mr. Stahlberg and the surveyer are currently trying to determine how much fill these lots would require and determine how much dirt would have to be removed from the outlot to make it drain properly to the lake. If there is fill available from developing the drainage, the fill could be used to develope the lots. Mr. Reinert noted that if the City is going to move a lot of dirt and make the area barren, the adjacent landowners may not be interested in obtaining parts of the outlot as planned. Warren Schlichting, 1017 Lantern Circle told the Council that it appeared to him that the drainage of Outlot F is not the first issue, fill for the tax forfeit lots is the main issue. Mr. Schumacher explained that this became more of a project than originally anticipated. Originally it was felt just putting in a swale and deeding the parcels to the adjoining landowners was all that would be needed. Now there is the related issue of the tax forfeit lots and the City is looking at that outlot for some fill. Mr. Stahlberg noted that just putting in the swale could mean regrading and taking down trees. Mrs. Imholte asked why the outlot could not be left as it is. Mayor Benson said this would be a possibility. Ash Street Sewer and Water, Resolution No. 20 -87. - Mr. Stahlberg told the Council that the bids for this project came in well over estimate. In addition there was a big gap between the low bid and the next bidder. A third problem arose when it was determined that the low bid contained an error. Now the low bidder does not want the job. The Council cannot accept the next bidder because he is more than 10% over. the estimate. He did try to negotiate to keep the project going forward. The negotiation failed. Mr. Stahlberg recommended that the Council reject all bids.