Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
04/08/1996 Council Packet
AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday, April 8, 1996 6:30 P.M. SCANNED Call to Order and Roll Call Setting the Agenda: Are there any items to be added or deleted from the Agenda? 1. Consent Agenda A. Consideration of Minutes: March 11, 1996 B. Consideration of Disbursements: March 29, 1996 April 8, 1996 Centennial Fire District Municipal Well No. 3 2. Open Mike A. Consideration of a Noise Ordinance (Continue the consideration of this ordinance until April 22,1996), Randy Schumacher (Verbal) 3. PUBLIC HEARING, Consideration of an Off -Sale Liquor License for Steve Arhip, 7860 Lake Drive, Marilyn Anderson A. Council Action on Request for Off Sale Liquor License for Steve Arhip 4. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 42 Accepting Donation from the VFW, Post #6583, Ladies Auxiliary, Chief Pecchia 5. Consideration of the Park Board Goals for 1996 and a Request to Spend Dedicated Park Dollars, Marty Asleson PAGE 1 AGENDA City Engineer's Report, David Ahrens A. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 38, Accept Feasibility Report, Pheasant Hills Preserve, 7th Addition B. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 02, Award Construction Contract, Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements C. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 26, Award Construction Contract, Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements D. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 41, Approve Plans and Specifications and Order Improvement and Advertisement for Bids, Birch Street Trunk Watermain 7. Consideration of a Motion to Rescind Council Appointments of March 25, 1996, Randy Schumacher 8. Old Business A. Senior Housing Update, Randy Schumacher (Verbal) New Business A. Consideration of Renewal of Gambling License for Centennial Fire Relief Association, Marilyn Anderson B. REMINDER, Board of Review, Monday, April 15, 1996 C. Set Special Economic Development Authority Meeting, Monday, April 29, 1996, 5:00 P.M. to Consider a Development Agreement for Taymark and for Northern Wholesale D. Set a Special Council Meeting, Monday, April 29, 1996, 5:30 P.M. 1. Consider an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Centennial Middle School 2. Site Plan Review for Taymark 3. Site Plan Review for Northern Wholesale 10. Adjourn PAGE 2 COUNCIL MEETING DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT MARCH 11, 1996 CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNCIL MINUTES : March 11, 1996 . 6:30 P.M. . 7:50 P.M. : Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers : None Staff Members present: City Attorney, Bill Hawkins; City Engineer, David Ahrens; Community Development Director, Brian Wessel; City Administrator, Randy Schumacher and Clerk -Treasurer Marilyn Anderson. SETTING THE AGENDA The agenda was approved as presented. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Kuether moved to approve the consent agenda as presented. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Minutes, February 12, 1996 - Approved as presented. Consideration of Disbursements: February 29, 1996 - Approved as presented. March 11, 1996 - Approved as presented Centennial Fire District - Approved as presented. OPEN MIKE No one appeared under open mike. 6:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING, CENTENNIAL MIDDLE SCHOOL STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT, DAVID AHRENS Mr. Ahrens explained that the Centennial School District officials have requested that the public hearing for the proposed improvements to serve the Centennial Middle School be continued to March 25, 1996 so that they can look at the financial impact of these improvements. Staff, consultants and Centennial School District officials have held PAGE 1 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 several neighborhood meetings. However, since Centennial School District has made the request to continue the hearing, no presentation will be made at this time. Council Member Kuether noted that there are several options regarding Elm Street and asked that this matter be discussed at the next Council work session. Mr. Ahrens noted that residents will have an opportunity to voice their concerns and suggestions at the public hearing. Mr. Schumacher noted that although Centennial School District requested that the hearing be continued, they are still under certain time limits and do want to keep on track. Council Member Neal moved to continue the public hearing to March 25, 1996 at 6:30 P.M. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT OF 12TH AVENUE/HOLLY DRIVE, DAVID AHRENS Mr. Ahrens explained that the public hearing for the proposed improvements to 12th Avenue/Holly Drive was continued from February 12, 1996. Staff met with the Trapper's Crossing developer and the developer's attorney to discuss road improvements, estimated construction costs and the $250,000.00 street assessment. Another meeting is scheduled for Friday, March 15, 1996. Staff will bring information from this meeting to the next Council work session. Staff is asking that the public hearing be continued to March 25, 1996. Council Member Bergeson moved to continue the public hearing to March 25, 1996, 6:30 P.M. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, DAVID AHRENS Consider Resolution No. 96 - 29, Adopt Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for the Trunk Highway 49 Turnback (Fourth Avenue to Lilac Street) - Mr. Ahrens used the overhead projector to show the location of this portion of Trunk Highway 49 and explained that MnDOT has identified Trunk Highway 49 as a highway to be under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County, Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes. Currently, Ramsey County has jurisdiction of Highway 49 from Highway 694 to County Road J in Shoreview. Anoka County has adopted a MOU for the portion of Highway 49 from County Road J north to Fourth Avenue. The portion of Highway 49 proposed to be under the jurisdiction of Lino Lakes is from Lilac Street to Fourth Avenue. This segment is approximately 0.2 miles in length. The MOU is a nonbinding statement of intent for the turnback of Highway 49. A formal agreement between the City and State will need to be executed to identify the terms of the turnback. The MOU states that the City can utilize Municipal State Aid Turnback Account funds for improvements to the roadway. Turnback routes placed on the PAGE 2 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Municipal State Aid System are designated mileage above the 20% limit on mileage available to be on the Municipal State Aid System The ability for the City to have more than the normal 20% limit designated as MSA does provide for some compensation to the City for receiving this roadway. Issues regarding the turnback proposal include the appropriateness of this segment of Highway 49 as a State roadway. Fourth Avenue, both north and south of the turnback segment, are City MSA roads. If the County and the State execute the turnback of the remaining portion of Highway 49, the segment that is proposed to be a City turnback would be an "orphaned" segment of State Highway. Staff is recommending that the MOU be adopted by the City Council. Mr. Ahrens introduced Mr. Robert Brown, Metro Division State Aid Engineer and explained that he would answer questions from the City Council. Council Member Kuether asked why MnDOT wants the County and the City to take over Highway 49 and what would the benefits be. Mr. Brown explained that MnDOT is in the process of a statewide venture to turnback roads that are not part of the interstate roadway system. It has always been the intent for MnDOT to keep jurisdiction of roadways of major significance statewide. Prior to the construction of the interstate systems, roadways that are now being turned back were important roadways of the region. As the interstate systems became operational, these roadways became secondary roadways or even city streets. Mr. Brown explained that MnDOT developed funding, standards and a way of doing business that was appropriate for interstate and large highways dealing with large amounts of traffic. During the past 10 to 15 years, it has become apparent that the MnDOT program does not always fit very well in many county or community settings. The turnback program was established by MnDOT which identified the roadways to be turned back and what needs to be done to the roadway in the form of preservation or overlay before the roadway was actually turned back to the county or municipality. Mr. Brown noted that sometimes the need for capital improvements to a roadway becomes an issue for secondary and smaller roadways. He explained that the improvement that is required by MnDOT standards is not always the right thing to do for smaller roadways. The focus is to get roadways of particular functional classifications or particular usage into the proper level of government. MnDOT intends to stand behind interstate highways, interchanges and freeways and at the same time does not plan to dump older, smaller highways on other agencies. According to state statute, MnDOT does have the authority to "dump" roadways onto lower jurisdictions. However, from a practical standpoint, MnDOT will not do that. MnDOT will seek to find situations that are "win,win" for everybody. Mr. Brown explained that MnDOT and Ramsey County entered into a MOU whereby Ramsey County determined that it was the best solution for about 71 miles of roadway to become part of the Ramsey County road system. Highway 96 was part of that MOU. Ramsey County felt that these roadways were not getting the level of attention that they PAGE 3 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 needed as part of the MnDOT system. The northern part of Ramsey County was experiencing heavy development. As Ramsey County acquired jurisdiction over these roadways, they began establishing capital improvement programs for each roadway. Mr. Brown used the overhead projector to show the location of the portion of Highway 49 that is proposed to be turned back to Lino Lakes. He explained that if the City agrees to the turnback proposal, MnDOT will pay the City a considerable amount of turnback dollars that could possibly pay almost all of the construction on the new intersection, Lilac Street/Lake Drive. Mr. Brown said that Article 3 of the MOU which is the basis for determining the amount of compensation that the City will receive if the City agrees to accept the 0.2 miles of Highway 49. This Article also explains that the turnback money may be utilized for other improvements. Mr. Brown also explained money for the turnback fund comes from a portion of the gas tax. He outlined how gas tax is divided between all of the affected jurisdictions. Mr. Brown said that the City should pass a resolution designating the 0.2 miles of roadway as a MSA street. Upon receipt of the resolution, MnDOT will add the additional roadway to the Lino Lakes MSA system. There are two (2) reasons for the City to accept the turnback proposal. The first reason is that the 0.2 miles will be placed on the Lino Lakes MSA list of MSA streets. The second reason is that the City will have access to turnback funds which could be used to move the access from Lilac Street to Lake Drive further north. If the City decides not to use turnback funds to build a new Lilac Street entrance to Lake Drive, the City could access turnback funds for maintenance. Council Member Kuether asked what is the benefit to Lino Lakes. Mr. Brown said the immediate benefit is that the City would have a way to move ahead with the relocation of the access to Lilac Street. There would be money to do the project. He explained that some of the counties and municipalities look at this as an empowerment move. Council Member Bergeson asked Mr. Brown if he is saying that if the City moved ahead with rebuilding the access to Lake Drive, MnDOT would pay for the entire project? Mr. Brown explained that MnDOT would not be a part of the reconstruction. Council Member Bergeson asked if the City goes ahead and approves the turnback, how much money would be available through the turnback fund. Mr. Brown said that it depends on how the project looks when the project is presented to MnDOT. There are some things that MnDOT will not pay for such as sprinkler system or exotic landscaping. Council Member Bergeson asked if MnDOT has completed the turnback of Highway #49 to Ramsey County. Mr. Brown explained that the MOU with Ramsey County was completed and signed about three (3) years ago. He said that MnDOT has been working under that MOU since then. Ramsey County decided that Highway #49 was their next desired roadway. Therefore, MnDOT started working with Ramsey County, Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes to put together a plan to turnback Highway #49 to PAGE 4 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Ramsey County, Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes. Council Member Bergeson said that there is a rumor that Ramsey County will not accept the south end of Highway #49 until the road is brought up to County street standards. Mr. Brown said that is not true. About a year ago MnDOT invited Ramsey County to a meeting and showed Ramsey County what is being planned. Several other meetings with neighborhood groups were held. After a couple of meetings, Ramsey County said that the process was not going as planned. Ramsey County told MnDOT that they could work with the community better than MnDOT and decided to prepare a plan to turnback the portion of Highway #49 in Ramsey County. MnDOT said go ahead and when the roadway gets turned back to Ramsey County, MnDOT will "fix" the road. Mr. Brown again said that some of the MnDOT road standards do not fit well in neighborhoods. Therefore, Ramsey County will prepare a plan for the turnback of Highway #49 and then the road will be upgraded according to the Ramsey County plan. Mr. Brown said that similar action will be taken with Anoka County. When MOU's have been completed with Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes, the task of preparing the paper trail will begin. Council Member Lyden explained that if the City of Lino Lakes is interested in allowing the turnback of this 0.2 tenths of a mile, is it possible for the City to go forward and with a specific proposal for extending Apollo Drive and MnDOT would fund the extension from their capital program? Mr. Brown said that MnDOT would not need final plans, only a concept plan. He said that moving the entrance to Lilac Street up to a quarter of a mile from the bridge ramp is clearly in the interest of MnDOT. Council Member Kuether asked if the City would have a final written agreement with MnDOT. Mr. Brown said that everything that is contained in the MOU is the basis for a final agreement. He also noted that unless there is funding under Article 3.1, a formal agreement does not need to be developed. The turnback and the agreement for funding the extension of Apollo Drive can be completed according to State Statutes. Mr. Brown restated that MnDOT has authority under State Statute to "dump" that portion of Highway #49 on the City. However, MnDOT will not do this and will make every effort to come to an agreement regarding the turnback. Council Member Kuether referred to page 6 of the MOU noting that there are 14 items that need to be addressed before this portion of Highway #49 is turned over to the City. She asked Mr. Ahrens if all these items should be completed prior to approving the MOU. Mr. Ahrens said that he understood that the MOU would lead into a formal agreement. The formal agreement would define the 14 items on page 6 as well as the percentage of participation by MnDOT. Council Member Kuether said that the Council needs some kind of idea of how many years are left on this portion of Highway #49 before the City would agree to the turnback. She explained that if the City is given money for the extension of Apollo Drive in return for accepting this portion Highway #49, and this portion of Highway #49 requires substantial rebuilding in four (6) to six (6) years, where will the money come from to rebuild the road? Mayor Landers asked if the City was looking at extending Apollo Drive approximately 600 feet? Mr. Ahrens said that the extension would be approximately 400 to 600 feet. He explained that these PAGE 5 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 figures came out of the Apollo Drive project and realizing that there is a concern about the current Lilac Street, Lake Drive intersection and the close proximity of the freeway ramps. Mr. Ahrens further noted that proposed commercial/industrial development also was considered. Mayor Landers said that he had a hard time comprehending the need for more than a 600 foot extension of Apollo Drive. Mr. Ahrens said that the City has not identified an exact number of feet that Apollo Drive would be extended. He said that the development on the east side of Lake Drive would have an impact on how Apollo Drive is extended. Council Member Neal asked if the residents along Lake Drive are aware that Apollo Drive may be extended north and that their houses may be in the path of the extension. Mr. Ahrens said that it is his understanding that they are all aware of these future plans. Council Member Neal noted that the VFW owns property on the north side of Lilac Street that would be impacted by the extension of Apollo Drive. He explained that the VFW is in the processing of selling this parcel and asked what impact will the extension of Apollo Drive have on this parcel and the sale of the land. Mr. Ahrens said that he was not sure if the VFW was aware of the possible extension of Apollo Drive. However, if Apollo Drive is extended, more of the parcel could be open for development. Mr. Wessel said that the Community Development Department has kept the VFW update about the possible extension of Apollo Drive. He noted that he had talked to the VFW realtor this morning. Mr. Wessel explained that the time frame for extending Apollo Drive has not been determined. He said that this is still just a concept which was developed prior to his being employed by the City. Council Member Bergeson said he felt that the only advantage for this City to accept the turnback from the State is to get funding for the extension of Apollo Drive. He said he felt that the City Council does not have enough information at this time to know how feasible the Apollo Drive extension would be. He asked that Mr. Wessel and Mr. Ahrens prepare a sketch of how the Apollo Drive extension might look and the approximately footage. Council Member Bergeson said that although the MOU has been presented as a non-binding resolution, it is his opinion that the City may be in a better position to negotiate before the City signs the MOU than after the City signs the MOU. He asked that action on the MOU be delayed until a little sketch is prepared by staff and how the City could prepare a project extending Apollo Drive. Mayor Landers noted that Apollo Drive is an Anoka County road and asked if Anoka County would contribute towards the construction of the Apollo Drive extension. Mr. Ahrens said that he expected that Anoka County would pay a substantial amount of the cost just as they have with the original Apollo Drive and the Otter Lake Road realignment. Mayor Landers said that he would like additional information on a cost sharing plan so that the City Council would have an idea of the exact cost to the City. Mr. Ahrens said that the cost sharing plan would be easy to determine. Mr. Ahrens said that he could have this information for the first meeting in April. PAGE 6 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Council Member Lyden asked that, presuming there will be an agreement, is there a time constraint on when the money is available for the capital improvement. Mr. Brown explained that MnDOT would need to receive a set of plans for the extension of Apollo Drive within five (5) years of the agreement. Once the plans are received, the City may have to wait a year or two before funding is available. Mr. Brown said that MnDOT may be in a position to turnback that portion of Highway #49 by November 1, 1996. If the turnback agreement is approved for that date, the City will have five (5) years to apply for turnback funding. Mr. Brown was asked about the life of this particular portion of Highway #49. He said that it was overlaid about two (2) years ago and the life expectancy is about seven (7) years. Mr. Schumacher asked what are the future plans for the I -35W interchange at Lake Drive. Mr. Brown said that MnDOT does not have any plans for the interchange. The condition of the bridge is monitored annually, a traffic count traffic is done every other year and accidents are reviewed annually. None of the indicators that cause MnDOT to start doing something have not yet happened. The interchange is adequate. Mayor Landers thanked Mr. Brown for coming this evening. Council Member Bergeson moved to return the matter to staff and requested a report containing the information previously requested be brought back to the City Council on April 8, 1996. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 02 Awarding Construction Contract, Marshan Lake Condominiums Street and Utility Improvements - Mr. Ahrens explained that on January 18, 1996, 13 sealed bids were received and read aloud. The low bid was from C. W. Houle, Inc. for a total of $564,368.40. The high bid was $707,345.81. The engineers estimate was $648,897.00. A bid alternate was included in the bid specification. The alternate is for an extension of sewer service to a couple of residences south of Aqua Lane. If these residents do wish to connect, separate agreements with each homeowner will be required. Mr. Ahrens explained that C. W. Houle, Inc. has completed a number of other projects in Lino Lakes and is capable of performing the work required for this improvement. Mr. Ahrens explained that a major portion of the project will be funded by the developer of the Marshan Lake Condominium improvement and the petitioning properties. The work should begin in April and should be completed in July. Mr. Ahrens recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 96 - 02 awarding the bid to C. W. Houle, Inc. Mr. Hawkins recommended that the bid not be awarded until a completed and signed development contract from the developer Roger Hokanson has been accepted by the City. A draft of the development contract was received in his office this past Thursday or PAGE 7 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Friday and he has not had a chance to review the document with Ms. Wyland. Mr. Hawkins said that a letter of credit supporting the proposed assessments has not been received. He said he did not want the City to enter into a construction contract before the developer provided guarantees to support the assessments. Since award of the bid must occur within 60 days of the bid opening, Mr. Ahrens said that he would ask the low bidder to approve delaying award of the bid beyond the 60 day period. Council Member Kuether asked why only sewer is being extended to the properties south of Aqua Lane. Mr. Ahrens explained that municipal water will be stubbed for future extension. Although it is most cost effective to extend both sewer and water at the same time, the residents have only petitioned for sewer service. Council Member Kuether moved to table Resolution No. 96 - 02 and ask C. W. Houle for an extension of time for awarding the bid. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 26 Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements - Mr. Ahrens explained that bids for this project were opened and read aloud on Wednesday, February 21, 1996 and S. R. Weidema, Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder. He explained that he did not know if the development contract had been executed and if financial guarantees had been received. Therefore, he a recommended that this matter be tabled until these concerns have been addressed. Council Member Kuether moved to table Resolution No. 96 - 26 until the March 25, 1996 Council meeting. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 28 Approving Final Payment for Country Lakes Estates, Plat 1- Mr. Ahrens explained that construction activity on this project has been completed. The final payment by the City will initiate the contractor's one-year warranty period. Final payment will not be released to the contractor until he has completed his final submittals as per contract requirements. The warranty protects the City if there is any defective work on the project. Council Member Bergeson asked if the final payment includes the street and if it does, does the street have the final wear course on it. Mr. Ahrens said it does include the street and the final wear course has not been installed. He noted that the final wear course is not normally installed until at least 80% of the lots have had new homes constructed on them. Mr. Ahrens explained that since there is a phase II, it would make sense to install the wear course after at least 80% of the entire project has been completed. He also explained that the developer has been assessed for the wear course so the funds are available to do the wear course work. PAGE 8 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Council Member Kuether asked about the second paragraph on the "green sheet". Mr. Ahrens explained that the contractor is required to present lien waivers from his subcontractors and suppliers or certification that all subcontractors and suppliers have been paid, a State of Minnesota Certificate of Withholding State Income Tax and a Consent of Surety to Final Payment from the bonding company which acknowledges that they are aware that the project has been completed and the one-year warranty period has begun. All of this information must be presented to the City prior to release of the final payment. Council Member Kuether moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 28. Council Member Bergeson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 96 - 28 can be found at the end of these minutes. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS Consideration of Minutes, November 13, 1995 (Mayor Landers and Council Member Lyden were not Council Members) Council Member Neal moved to accept these minutes as presented. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried with Council Member Lyden and Mayor Landers abstaining. Consideration of Minutes, February 26, 1996 - Council Member Neal moved to accept these minutes as presented. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried with Council Member Bergeson and Council Member Kuether abstaining. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 27 Correcting the 1995 Assessment, Living Waters Lutheran Church - Mrs. Anderson explained that an error has been discovered in the 1995 assessment involving the Living Waters Lutheran Church, 875 Birch Street. The church paid their assessment in full on November 9, 1995. The record of payment did not reach the City Clerks office and consequently the payment was not reported to Anoka County. As a result, the assessment does appear on the Living Waters Lutheran Church 1996 property tax statements. Passage of Resolution No. 96 - 27 will correct the assessment and allow the City Clerk to report the payment and request that Anoka County prepare and mail a corrected tax statement to the church. Mrs. Anderson explained that this error and the error that will be described in the next agenda item were due to some problems with reporting payments. She and the Finance Director have discussed the matter and feel that the problems have been corrected. Mrs. Anderson recommend that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 96 - 27. PAGE 9 COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 11, 1996 Council Member Bergeson asked if the church will be assessed any late charges. Mrs. Anderson said no and explained that the assessment is paid in full and should not have appeared on their property tax statement. An amended property tax statement should be mailed to the church before the first property tax installment is due. Council Member Neal moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 27. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 96 - 27 can be found at the end of these minutes. Consideration of Resolution No. 96 - 30 Correcting the 1995 Assessment, 7064 Sunset Road - Mrs. Anderson explained that this agenda item is similar to the previous item. An error has been discovered in the 1995 assessment for 7064 Sunset Road. The owner of the property paid their assessment in full on August 8, 1995. The record of the payment did not reach the Clerks office and consequently was not reported to Anoka County. As a result, the assessment does appear on the property tax statement for this address. Passage of Resolution No. 96 - 30 will allow the Clerk to report the payment and request that a correct tax statement be prepared and mailed to the property owner. Mrs. Anderson recommended that Resolution No. 96 - 30 be adopted. Council Member Neal moved to adopt Resolution No. 96 - 30. Council Member Lyden seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 96 - 30 can be found at the end of these minutes. Council Member Kuether moved to adjourn at 7:50 P.M. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Aye. These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at a regular Council meeting held on April 8, 1996. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer John L. Landers, Mayor PAGE 10 Council Member Neal introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 27 RESOLUTION ABATING 1996 INSTALLMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON PIN. 28-31-22-32-0019 WHEREAS, an assessment was certified to the above listed parcel for 1996, and WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of staff that the assessment was applied in error, and WHEREAS, the City Council has met and has considered the request to abate the 1996 installment of special assessment on the above listed parcel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The 1996 installment and all future years installments for Special Assessment Fund No. 82363 and 82364 on PIN. 28-31-22-32-0019, Living Waters Lutheran Church, are hereby abated. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this llth day of March, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Lyden and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: none. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Council Member Kuether resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-28 introduced the following RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR THE COUNTRY LAKES ESTATES - PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, construction of the Country Lakes Estates - Phase I Improvements have been completed by Richard Knutson, Inc. AND WHEREAS, the one-year warranty period for this project will begin with the final payment, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: Final Payment is hereby approved for the Country Lakes Estates - Phase I Improvements. Adopted by the City Council this 11th day of March, 1996. yn G. Anderson Clerk -Treasurer n L. Landers, Mayor The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Bergeson and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: None. Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly and approved by the City Council on March 11 , 1996. �� Marilyn . Anderson, passed, adopted Clerk -Treasurer Council Member Neal introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 30 RESOLUTION ABATING 1996 INSTALLMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON PIN. 19-31-22-23-0003 WHEREAS, an assessment was certified to the above listed parcel for 1996, and WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of staff that the assessment was applied in error., and WHEREAS, the City Council has met and has considered the request to abate the 1996 installment of special assessment on the above listed parcel, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Lino Lakes, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The 1996 installment and all future years installments for Special Assessment Fund No. 1330 and 1344 on PIN. 19- 31-22-23-0003, 7064 Sunset Road, are hereby abated. Adot ed by the Lino Lakes City Council this llth day of March, 1996. 104744 John L. Landers, Mayor ri y Clerk -Treasurer n G. Anderson The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Lyden and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bergeson, Kuether, Lyden, Neal, Landers. The following voted against same: none. Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MONTH END March -1996 ADMINISTRATION KAHLER HOTEL (LMC ANNUAL CONFERENCE HOUSING) $ 227.70 MAYOR AND COUNCIL KAHLER HOTEL (LMC ANNUAL CONFERENCE HOUSING) $ 683.10 SEWER DEPARTMENT CIRCLE PINES POSTMASTER (QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLS) $ 286.45 WATER DEPARTMENT CIRCLE PINES POSTMASTER (QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLS) $ 286.46 TOTAL MARCH MANUAL DISBURSEMENT $ 1,483.71 Page 1 1 DISBURSEMENTS 1 APRIL 8, 1996 Page: 1 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) Amount 1994 CONSTRUCTION FUND * SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INC(MUNICIPAL ENGINEER/49 & 23) 1,187.4 Total for Department 1,187.4' Total for Fund 1,187.4 1996 CONSTRUCTION FUND SCHIELD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY(CONTRACTOR/TRAPPERS CROSSING) 69,907.0( Total for Department 69,907.0( Total for Fund 69,907.0( AREA AND UNIT CHARGE * ECM PUBLISHERS, INC(ADVERTISING/BIRCH ST WATER) * NORTHERN WATER WKS SUP, INC.(2 PUMPS/BLACK DUCK LIFT ST) CONTRACTORS DEPOSITS 128.0( 13,073.5' Total for Department 13,201.5' Total for Fund 13,201.5! ANOKA COUNTY(REAL ESTATE TAX 1996/C W CRK) OSM, INC.(ENGINEERING SERV/C SCHOOL) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING/SOUTH GLEN) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING/BIRCHWOOD ACRES) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING/PARK GROVE) G.O. TEMPORARY BONDS 1994A DEBT SERVICE NORWEST BANK(INTEREST/IMP BOND 1994A) NORWEST BANK(IMPROVEMENT BOND 1994A) 31.4( 11,941_3( 17.11 10.4: 10.4: Total for Department 12,010.8( Total for Fund 12,010.8( 150.0( 51,327.5( Page: 2 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) Amount Total for Department 51,477.5 Total for Fund 51,477.5 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CITIZENS LEAGUE(MEETING) 15.0 * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 21.2 LABOR RELATIONS, INC.(CONSULTANT) 180.0 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES(ANNUAL CONFERENCE) 245.0 * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) 14.7 Total for Department 475.9 • BUILDING INSPECTIONS * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 10.6 SUBURBAN INSPECTIONS(ELECTRICAL INSP SERVICE) 194.4 Total for Department 205.0 CHARTER COMMISSION * ECM PUBLISHERS, INC(ADVERTISING) 12.8 * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) 8.5 Total for Department 21.3 Default Department * BLAINE, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLING) * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * MEDICA(INSURANCE) ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMENT 110.0 0.7' 613.1, Total for Department 723.8' EXPRESS MESSENGER, INC.(DELIVERY SERVICE) 21.6( * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 10.6( WESSEL, BRIAN(PARKING/MEALS) 361.5 * WILLIAM J ADVERTISING ASSOC, (SUPPLIES/SHIRTS) 150.0( ENGINEERING/PLANNING DEPARTMENT * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * MEDICA(INSURANCE) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) Total for Department 543.7( 21.2( 556.21 55.1_ Page: 3 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) Amount * SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INC(MUNICIPAL ENGINEER) 362.85 Total for Department 995.43 Total for Department 15.90 * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC. (INSURANCE) Total for Department 5.30 FINANCE * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 15.90 FIRE DEPARTMENT FLEET MANAGEMENT 5.30 AMERICAN FASTENERS OF MINNESOT(PARTS) 50.00 AUTO -MEDICS, INC.(TOWING SERVICE) 133.13 • BOYER TRUCKS, INC.(PARTS) 124.79 BUMPER TO BUMPER, INC.(PARTS) 427.27 CAPITOL CITY WELDING, INC.(OXYGEN) 34.91 FOREST LAKE FORD, INC.(ASSEMBLY LIGHT) 43.59 * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 5.30 KEN'S RADIATOR SERVICE(REPAIR TUBES/CLEAN RADIATOR) 35.00 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC.(PARTS) 59.37 POWER BRAKE ENTERPRISE COMPANY(PARTS) 141.92 SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION, INC.(HAZARDOUS WASTE REMOVAL) 219.92 STREICHER'S, INC.(ARROWSTIK) 307.65 SUBURBAN TENT & AWNING, INC.(CHEV SEAT/GRADER SEAT) 337.11 THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEVROLET,(PARTS) 20.97 TRACY FUELS, INC.(FUEL) 1,708.04 Total for Department 3,648.97 FORESTRY DEPARTMENT * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 5.30 * GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS COMPAN(SUPPLIES) 6.11 Total for Department 11.41 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS * ANOKA ELECTRIC, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) 947.99 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) 40.09 INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS, INC.(MAINTENANCE ON COPIER) 307.50 * LIGHTNING PRINTING, INC.(PRINTING SERVICE) 1,598.98 * MINNEGASCO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, I(MONTHLY SERVICE) 895.66 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC.(SUPPLIES) 293.52 UPPER MIDWEST SALES COMPANY(SUPPLIES) 219.33 * UPPER MIDWEST SALES COMPANY(SUPPLIES) 155.76 Total for Department 4,458.83 'Page: 4 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) Amount MAYOR AND COUNCIL LANDERS, JOHN(MILEAGE) 7.80 NELSON'S CHEESE AND DELI(GOAL SETTING/TEAM BUILDING) 108.68 * WILLIAM J ADVERTISING ASSOC, (SUPPLIES/SHIRTS) 1,436.96 Total for Department 1,553.44 PARKS DEPARTMENT * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) 21.20 * GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS COMPAN(SUPPLIES) 6.10 * MINNEGASCO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, (MONTHLY SERVICE) 86.34 * MN. WANNER COMPANY, INC.(SUPPLIES) 72.20 • TOM THUMB, INC.(SUPPLIES) 5.31 * US WEST COMMUNICATIONS(MONTHLY SERVICE) 58.10 Total for Department 249.25 POLICE DEPARTMENT A T & T WIRELESS SERVICE(MONTHLY SERVICE) * ANOKA ELECTRIC, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * LIGHTNING PRINTING, INC.(PRINTING SERVICE) * MEDICA(INSURANCE) * MINNEGASCO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, (MONTHLY SERVICE) MISSING CHILDREN MINNESOTA(VIDEO) PERSONNEL DECISIONS, INC.(ARI & ORAL DESIGN/TRAINING) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) ST. PAUL STAMP WORKS, INC.(ANIMAL LICENSE TAGS) RECREATION DEPARTMENT 21.30 10.65 74.20 575.48 2,275.00 148.05 26.00 4,150.98 46.30 131.87 Total for Department 7,459.83 * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS COMPAN(SUPPLIES) * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) * SKILLPATH, INC.(REGISTRATION) SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION, INC.(DRUMS) * SKILLPATH, INC.(REGISTRATION) 5.30 0.30 46.30 149.00 Total for Department 200.90 21.20 297.00 149.00 Total for Department 467.20 Page: 5 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) STREETS ANOKA ELECTRIC, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) H & L MESABI, INC.(GRADER BLADE) MEDICA(INSURANCE) MN. WANNER COMPANY, INC.(SUPPLIES) NORTHERN STATES POWER, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) TOWER ASPHALT, INC.(OPTIMIX) TOWER ASPHALT, INC.(COLD MIX) UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA(REGISTRATION) UPPER MIDWEST SALES COMPANY(SUPPLIES) PROGRAM RECREATION KRUSE, NEIL(REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM REC) SHIRLEY KAY'S(PROGRAM REC/BASKETBALL) SHIRLEY KAY'S(PROGRAM REC/VOLLEYBALL) SHIRLEY KAY'S(PROGRAM REC/SOCCER) RECREATION DEPARTMENT ALL STAR SPORTS, ALL STAR SPORTS, ALL STAR SPORTS, ALL STAR SPORTS, ALL STAR SPORTS, BLAINE OFFICIALS SEWER OPERATING SEWER DEPARTMENT Total for Department Total for Fund Total for Department INC.(SUPPLIES) INC.(SUPPLIES) INC.(SUPPLIES) INC.(SUPPLIES) INC.(SUPPLIES) ASSOCIATION(BASKETBALL OFFICIALS) Total for Department Total for Fund * BLAINE, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLING) C. W. HOULE, INC.(MATERIAL FOR 6666 E SHAD LK) * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) * INFRATECH, INC. (INSPECTION MIRRORS) Amount 218.81 26.50 257.94 432.50 72.20 2,087.00 399.25 194.96 20.00 83.39 3,792.55 24,828.84 50.00 35.00 70.00 105.00 260.00 82.57 82.57 34.57 34.57 79.64 238.00 551.92 811.92 983.40 304.14 7.95 15.75 30.21 Page: 6 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Claims Roster sorted by Department, Grouped by Invoice Vendor Company (Entry Description) * MARUDAS, INC.(UTILITY BILL MAILERS) * NORTHERN WATER WKS SUP, INC.(IMPELLER/LIFT STATION #3) * SHOREVIEW, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL) Total SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT for Department Total for Fund * SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INC(MUNICIPAL ENGINEER) Total for Department Total for Fund TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT 1-4 * PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC.(ADVERTISING) Total for Department Total for Fund WATER OPERATING MN. DEPT. OF PUBLIC HEALTH(QUARTERLY WATER CONN FEE) * SHOREVIEW, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL) Total for Department WATER DEPARTMENT * BLAINE, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLING) FEED RITE CONTROLS, INC.(CHEMICALS) * FORTIS BENEFITS, INC.(INSURANCE) * GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) * INFRATECH, INC. (INSPECTION MIRRORS) * MARUDAS, INC.(UTILITY BILL MAILERS) * MINNEGASCO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, (MONTHLY SERVICE) NORTHERN STATES POWER, INC.(MONTHLY SERVICE) * SHOREVIEW, CITY OF(QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL) * US WEST COMMUNICATIONS(MONTHLY SERVICE) WATERPRO SUPPLIES CORPORATION(SUPPLIES) Total for Department Total for Fund ** Total ** * - Invoice split to different Departments Amount 1,704.8( 814.0E 6,481.7' 10,342.0£ 10,342.0£ 108.8'. 108.8' 108.8' 50.2: 50.2_ 50.2: 2,131.0( 189.3! 2,320.35 226.5( 3,253.3' 7.9E 15.71 30.2] 1,704.8( 97.1: 558.7' 2,404.34 36.14 101.7S 8,436.74 10,757.1= $194,683.51 Page: 1 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Summary Claims Roster Vendor - Company Name Amount Checking Account 1010 000110 - A T & T WIRELESS SERVICE 000158 - ALL STAR SPORTS, INC. 000210 - AMERICAN FASTENERS OF MINNESOTA, IN 000350 - ANOKA COUNTY 000450 - ANOKA ELECTRIC, INC. 000540 - AUTO -MEDICS, INC. 000720 - BLAINE, CITY OF 000748 - BLAINE OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION 000770 - BOYER TRUCKS, INC. 000900 - BUMPER TO BUMPER, INC. 000931 - WILLIAM J ADVERTISING ASSOC, INC. 000950 - C. W. HOULE, INC. 000960 - CAPITOL CITY WELDING, INC. 001127 - CITIZENS LEAGUE 001390 - ECM PUBLISHERS, INC 001432 - ST. PAUL STAMP WORKS, INC. 001450 - EXPRESS MESSENGER, INC. 001480 - FEED RITE CONTROLS, INC. 001530 - FOREST LAKE FORD, INC. 001550 - FORTIS BENEFITS, INC. 001608 - GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS COMPANY/INC 001620 - GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD, INC. 001680 - GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, INC. 001768 - H & L MESABI, INC. 21.30 313.92 50.00 31.46 1,177.45 133.13 1,319.90 238.00 124.79 427.27 1,586.96 304.14 34.91 15.00 140.80 131.87 21.60 3,253.37 43.59 260.45 12.51 40.09 31.50 257.94 Page: 2 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Summary Claims Roster Vendor - Company Name Amount 001971 - INFRATECH, INC. SUITE 100 60.42 001980 - INTL OFFICE SYSTEMS, INC. 307.50 002130 - KEN'S RADIATOR SERVICE 35.00 002174 - KRUSE, NEIL 50.00 002220 - LABOR RELATIONS, INC. 180.00 002285 - LANDERS, JOHN 7.80 002310 - LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 245.00 002340 - LIGHTNING PRINTING, INC. 2,174.46 002440 - LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC. 59.37 002485 - MARUDAS, INC. 3,409.60 002540 - MEDICA 3,876.85 002700 - MINNEGASCO ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, INC. 1,227.17 002845 - MISSING CHILDREN MINNESOTA 26.00 002850 - MN. WANNER COMPANY, INC. 144.40 002920 - MN. DEPT. OF PUBLIC HEALTH 2,131.00 003161 - NELSON'S CHEESE AND DELI 108.68 003250 - NORTHERN STATES POWER, INC. 558.77 003260 - NORTHERN STATES POWER, INC. 2,087.00 003280 - NORTHERN WATER WKS SUP, INC. 13,887.65 003340 - NORWEST BANK 51,477.50 003430 - OSM, INC. 11,941.36 003483 - PERSONNEL DECISIONS, INC. 4,150.98 003562 - POWER BRAKE ENTERPRISE COMPANY 141.92 003600 - PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC. 259.22 003870 - S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. 293.52 003880 - SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INC. 1,659.21 Page: 3 Date: 04/05/96 City of Lino Lakes Summary Claims Roster Vendor - Company Name Amount 003900 - SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION, INC. 516.92 003921 - SCHIELD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY -69,907.06 003981 - SHIRLEY KAY'S 210.00 003990 - SHOREVIEW, CITY OF 9,075.50 004003 - SKILLPATH, INC. 298.00 004240 - STREICHER'S, INC. 307.65 004251 - SUBURBAN INSPECTIONS 194.40 ,. 004263 - SUBURBAN TENT & AWNING, INC. 337.11 004410 - THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEVROLET, INC. 20.97 004450 - TOM THUMB, INC. 5.31 004467 - TOWER ASPHALT, INC. 594.21 004470 - TRACY FUELS, INC. 1,708.04 004630 - UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 20.00 004654 - UPPER MIDWEST SALES COMPANY 458.48 004670 - US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 94.24 004790 - WATERPRO SUPPLIES CORPORATION 101.79 004800 - WESSEL, BRIAN 361.50 Total for Checking Account: 1010 194,683.51 ** Total ** $194,683.51 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 STAFF ORIGINATOR Marilyn Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer DATE April 4, 1996 TOPICPUBLIC HEARING; Consideration of an Off: Sale Liquor License for Steve Arhip, 7860 Lake Drive BACKGROUND: Mr. Steve Arhip has applied for an Off -Sale Liquor License for the Simonson's Garage building at 7860 Lake Drive. This property is zoned Central Business and an off sale liquor establishment is a permitted use. Mr. Arhip does have a lease agreement with the owners of the property. Mr. Arhip has presented a floor plan for the off sale business indicating where the liquor will be stored and displayed. There is adequate customer parking on the site. A background investigation has been completed by the Lino Lakes Police Department. A copy of the report is on file and will not be made public because of the Data Privacy requirements. The report is generally a positive report. Mr. Arhip does not have a criminal history. Dram Shop insurance and worker's compensation insurance certificates have been received. Mr. Arhip is planning to open his business June 1, 1996. The license fee for the remaining month of the license year is $8.33' for the month of June. All licenses must be renewed by July 1, 1996. If the City Council approves the request for an off -sale license, the application and insurance information will be forwarded to the Minnesota Liquor Control Commission for their review and approval. OPTIONS 1. Open the public hearing and take public comments. 2. Close the public hearing. 3. Adopt a motion approving the off -sale liquor license for Mr. Arhip. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 Page -2- 4. Return the matter to staff for further information. RECOMMENDATION Adopt options 1, 2 and 3 °' a 1 Minnesota Department of Public Safety LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION "'""�' 190 5th St. E., Suite 105, St. Paul, MN 55101 ,`r . , 612 296-6430 TTY(612)282-6555 ' OFF SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR No license will be approved or released until the 520 Retailer ID Card fee is received by MN Liquor ControL Workers compensation insurance company. LICENSEE'S SALES & USE TAX ID # 456.) Name 11)A L «S r4 (t Policy# 03 % b ✓ C)C) -- / a O,3 2 _ 01/ L/.9., To apply for sales tax #, call 296-06181 or 1-800-657-3777 a partner shall execute this application. If a corporation, an officer shall execute this application If a partnership, Licensee Name (Individual, Corporation, Partnership) S%£i)c', 3- Arh.f (_7'R. Trade Name or DBA License Location (Street Address & Block No.) 7( LAKE" n r; uee: License Period From To Applicant's Home Phone City L. i n;t-) / 4!f.S County ANo{{ A State C) /U; Zip Code 5.-0)(-/ Name of Store Manager I'(9R64e.ec nJfv •-a, e Business Phone Number DOB (Individual Applicant) If a corporation, state name, date of birth, address, title, and shares held by each officer. If a partnership, state names, address and date of birth of each partner. Partner Officer (First, middle, last) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code Partner Officer (First, middle, last) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code Partner Officer (First, middle, last) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code Partner Officer (First, middle, last) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code 1. If a corporation, date of incorporation capital . If a subsidiary , state incorporated incorporated No second Lei ;-.v`f so state in , amount paid in of any other corporation, . If and give purpose of is corporation building, so state. corporation under the laws of another state, floor, basement, etc.) or if entire authorized to do business in the state of Minnesota? 0 Yes ❑ 2. Describe premises to which license applies; such as (first floor, r57- f Curs . - P4INT 0-F Atli 3. Is establishment located near any state university, state hospital, training school, reformatory or prison? 0 Yes .2'No If yes state approximate distance. 1 4. Name and address of building owner: 'Fun's i LA k f fig D '5 ri 6 S : m D .) So 'v 9 ? R 5.5 C. An) rJ r' A TR, , Has owner ,i of building any connection, directly or indirectly, with applicant? 0 Yes !t No -�'� a member of the governing body of the municipality in which this license 5. Is applicant or any of the associates in this application, is to be issued? ❑ Yes tri' No If yes, in what capacity? 6. State whether any person other than applicants has license is applied and if so, give name and details. 7. Have applicants any interest whatsoever, directly 0 Yes EtNo If yes, give name and address of establishment. any right, title or interest in the furniture, fixtures or equipment for which il) 0 or indirectly, in any other liquor establishment in the state of Minnesota? J4-V3Jb 1b:e INSURANCE MARKETING CENTER 14500 BURNHAVEN DRIVE SUITE 135 BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55306-6199, PHONE 612/435-1606, FAX 6.2/435-1693 WATS B00/245-0023 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES LISTED BELOW. INSRD NAME: STEVE J. ARHIP, JR. DBA: ARHIP, STEVE J. JR. LIC HOLDER: STEVE J. ARHIP, JR. INSRD ADD : 786e LAK DRIVE INSRD CITY: LINO LAKES MN 55014 CONFERS NO INSURANCE COMPANY AFFORDING COVERAGE PARK GLEN NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY .10===4*4*4*4*4*22=4*22=========1.P1===.=4*4*====04*=1.4*= THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOT WITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE HAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED 9Y THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL TBE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. ==$4...1==========4*.4*4*=4*22===4*=4*4*=.A,S==============....”=======4*x===.===4*a TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUHBER: EFFECTIVE FROM: TO EXPIRATION DATE LIABILITY LIMITS: $ 50,000 BODILY INJURY EACH PERSON, $ 100,000 EACH COMMON CAUSE $ 10.000 PROPERTY DAMAGE EACH COMMON CAUSE $ 50,000 LOSS OF MEANS OF SUPPORT EACH PERSON,S 100,000 EACH COMMON CAUSE S 300,000 ANNUAL AGGREGATE LIQUOR LIABILITY MNLL960438 0-7/01/96 07/01/97 ---------CANCELLATION --------- SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED BELON. ====.21=ww======4*m.======,==========.22==4*1=====.===22==========.1tss=========s=== ERTIFICATE HOLDER: CITY OF LINO LAKES ATTN: MARILYN ANDERSON 1189 MAIN STREET LINO LAKES MN 55014 T.M.C, ami AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE TOTAL P.02 J� .o Shttvi5 C it E c K C .AT y8" Opo / n 9% 177 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 STAFF ORIGINATOR David J. Pecchia, Chief of Police DATE April 2, 1996 TOPIC Consideration of Resolution No 96-42 Accepting Donation from Ladies Auxiliary VFW Post 6583. BACKGROUND The goal of the Lino Lakes Police Department is to ensure that the D.A.R.E. Program will be totally funded through donations from the community. Ladies Auxiliary VFW Post 6583 is aware of this goal and has donated $1,500.00 toward the cost of administering the program in the local elementary schools. The purpose of Resolution No. 96 - 42 is to publicly thank the Ladies Auxiliary VFW Post X6583 for their generous donation. I OPTIONS 1. Adopt Resolution No. 96 - 42 accepting the donation. 2. Return the Resolution to staff for further information. Option No. 1 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 42 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION FROM THE LADIES AUXILIARY VFW POST 6583 WHEREAS, the Lino Lakes Police Department began teaching the D.A.R.E. program in local elementary schools in January of 1995; and WHEREAS, the curriculum, developed by educators, is an elementary school drug prevention curriculum taught by specially selected and trained uniformed police officers; and WHEREAS, the Ladies Auxiliary VFW Post 6583 was made aware of the desire for the Lino Lakes Police Department to teach this program in the elementary schools and has donated $1,500.00 to the City to defer the cost of this program, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Lino Lakes hereby accepts the donation of $1,500.00 toward the cost of the D.A.R.E. program and wishes to express its gratitude to the Ladies Auxiliary VFW Post 6583 for its donation. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 8th day of April, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson DATE: April 4, 1996 TOPIC: Approval of goals and request to spend dedicated park dollars for 1996. BACKGROUND Each the Park and Recreation Board has reviewed the goals and priorities set forth in Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan as they relate to priorities and fiscal realities. The end result of the planning work -sessions is a list of goals that involve for the most extent the expenditure of dollars from the dedicated park fund. Attached is a list of the Park Boards request for spending dedicated park dollars in 1996. The total costs associated with these project as they relate to the 1996 goals is $93,000. The audited balance of the dedicated park fundas of December 31st, 1995 was $249,000. As was indicated by George Lindy at the council work -session, there remains a commitment to previously authorized expenditures of $73,155 of which $40,000 is committed to Rice Lake Estates by development agreement. OPTIONS 1. Accept the request of the Park and Recreation Board to spend dedicated park dollars as per their 1996 Goals statement. 2. Refer back to staff and the Park and Recreation Board for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION Option 1 04/03/1996 16:43 6124261871 G H LINDY DDS PAGE 02 CITY OF JACIAKES PARK BOARD MEETTN( WEDNESDAY, APRII, 3,_1996 On an annual basis the Lino Lakes Park Board assesses trail development, park land acquisition, and park development in the city. integrating staffinput, citizen input, and our individual perceptions of park needs, we attempt to set and prioritize land acquisition and park development goals. The Park Board is acutely aware of the budgetary constraint imposed on our decisions, thus we are attempting to meet citizen demands as efficiently as possible and still maintain a comfortable reserve in our dedicated fund Following are the goals we have set for 1996 followed by the dollar amoun..t budgeted for each project. Also included are some general mission statements: 1.TtIAIL a. Completing dead end segments (i.e. Birch Street) b. Paving existing graded trails c. Trail connection to Regional Park d. Equitable trail dedication ordinance $60,000.00 2. BIRCH, PARK Purchase a piece of property (peninsula) and create a trail connection between Birch Park and the northern portion of Trappers Crossing. During discussion the Park Board decided they would acquire approx. 1 acre of land at present time. They estimated the boardwalk to cost approximately $6000.00. $15,000.00 3. CITY HALL PA$ a. Playground equipment b. Ball fields The Park Board decided to replace some of the playground equipment at this park. The old swing should be able to be put up again with a few minor repairs. The equipment will be age appropriate for 2-5 year olds. It was suggested the board look at a trail and lighting for this park in the future. $15,000.00 4. A-3 COMPLEX Open ended financial commitment for land acquisition. After lengthy discussion on the athletic complex it was decided to keep pursuing doing a joint venture with surrounding communities. This is the best way to acquire grant money for the acquisitionof land for the complex. However, members felt they did not want to put additional mouey in this project for the present time unless needed to pursue property acquisition. 5. QUAIL RIDGE Master plan, trail and boardwalk. Marty will see if Michael Krech can work on a base map for this park so the cost for Brauer to do the master plan. will he Touch. less. The board estimated the trail and boardwalk to cost approximately $21,200.00. This will not be done this year but in. the future. 6. COUNTRY LAKES PARK Trails and general grading. There has been a great deal of work. done in this park this year. is approximately $6,500.00 deft from the 1995 goal budget. The Par Board decided to spend the $6,500.00 budgeted, but to not budget anything for 1996. CL.EARWATER CREEK Trail development. The board decided to wait for development in this project. $o $3,000.00 $0 $0 TOTAL CAST $93,000.00 MISSION STATEMENTS 1. Lino Lakes Park Board would like to explore the possibility of creating a joint use athletic complex ( A-3 ) with the cities of Centerville and Circle Pines. 2, in an effort to connect the northern part of the city to the southern part by means of a trail corridor, we would like to go on record in support of a new bridge wide enough to accommodate a transportation trail at the I iwy. 49 crossing of Rice Creek between Baldwin Lake and Rice Lake. The Park Board supports any cooperative efforts with the school district regarding joint development and joint use of school district recreational facilities. AGENDA ITEM 6A STAFF ORIGINATOR: David Ahrens, Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE:April 5, 1996 TOPIC: Resolution No. 96 - 38, Receive Feasibility Report, Pheasant Hills 7th Addition BACKGROUND: At the December 18, 1995, Council meeting, the City Council declared the petition adequate and ordered preparation of a report for the Pheasant Hills 7th Addition Street and Utility Improvements. The report is complete and, in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes 429 and the Lino Lakes City Charter, the feasibility report is to be received by council. No public hearing is planned for this project as the property owner has waived his right to a public hearing. OPTIONS; 1. Return to staff for further review. 2. Adopt Resolution Number 96-38 receiving the feasibility report for Pheasant Hills 7th Addition Street and Utility Improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends to Council to adopt Resolution Number 96-38. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-38 RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT ON IMPROVEMENT. WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the Council adopted December 18, 1995, a report has been prepared by Loucks and Associates, Inc., with reference to the improvement of Pheasant Hills 7th Addition by constructing streets, installing water system, sanitary sewer system, and storm sewer system, and this report was received by the council on April 8, 1996, WHEREAS, the property owner has waived their right to a public hearing and appeal of assessment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. The council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and the Section 8 of the Lino Lakes City Charter at an estimated cost of the improvement of $319,100. Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of April, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson Clerk -Treasurer The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on , 1996_ . Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer 41. AGENDA ITEM 6B STAFF ORIGINATOR: David Ahrens, Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: April 5, 1996 TOPIC: Resolution No. 96 - 02, Award Construction Contract Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements INTRODUCTION: Sealed bids were received and opened on Thursday, January 18, 1996, for the construction of streets and utilities for the Marshan Lake Condominiums. City Council action is required to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder. BACKGROUND: The City Council ordered the improvement for the Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements at the December 18, 1996, Council Meeting. On Thursday, January 18, 1996, thirteen sealed bids were received and opefled with the following results: Company Bid Amount Alternate Total, Bid C. W. Houle, Inc. $540,153.40 $24,215.00 $564,368.40 S.J. Louis Construction $575,238.00 $18,039.00 $593,277.00 Kadlec Excavating $573,522.90 $29,435.00 $602,957.90 Bonine Excavating $593,157.45 $24,430.85 $617,588.30 Forest Lake Contracting $594,387.50 $29,175.00 $623,562.50 Northdale Construction $594,926.36 $28,832.18 $623,758.54 Rehbein Excavating $593,406.00 $35,608.50 $629,014.50 S. M. Hentges $630,402.00 $18,450.00 $648,852.00 Ryan Contracting $617,256.75 $36,805.00 $654,061.75 Arcon Excavating $633,334.69 $31,670.15 $665,004.84 Richard Knutson $640,058.66 $31,957.70 $672,016.36 Brown & Cris $648,090.40 $34,547.50 $682,637.90 Kober Excavating $677,465.82 $29,879.99 $707,345.81 Engineer's estimate $626,662.00 $22,235.00 $648,897.00 A bid alternate was included in the bid form to extend sanitary sewer to properties south of Aqua Lane. The property owners have indicated to staff that they do not want this sewer extension. Marshan Condos Award Page 2 The low bidder, C.W. Houle, Inc., has worked for the City on past projects, including Clearwater Creek, Wenzel Farms, Wenzel Farms 3rd Addition, and Apollo Drive Phase II. C. W. Houle, Inc., is a reputable contractor capable of performing the required work. FINANCING SUMMARY: The construction costs (excluding the bid alternate) for this project are estimated to be funded as follows: Special Assessments $501,864.40 City's Area & Unit Fund $ 38,289.00 Total $540,153.40 The City's portion of this project includes the cost for jacking the trunk watermain under Highway 49 and oversizing the watermain to a trunk watermain. The Development Contract has been signed by the developer and the Letter of Credit has been submitted to the City. PROJECT SCHEDULE: It is anticipated that construction will begin in April, 1996, and, per the Contract, will be substantially complete by July 31, 1996. OPTIONS: 1. Return to staff for further review. 2. Adopt Resolution Number 96 - 02, awarding a construction contract for the Marshan Lake Condominium. Street and Utility Improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Resolution Number 96 - 02, awarding a construction contract for the Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements to C. W. Houle, Inc., be adopted. FUTURE M. H r.4 NOTE: LIFT STATION PUMPS & CONTROLS UPGRADED TO PROVIDE SANITARY SEWER FOR FULLY COMPLETED SERVICE AREA. POST ROAD - EX. 8" REROUTE 4" FORCEMAIN NORTH TO FUTURE MANHOL,E WHEN SERVICE AREA IS FULLY COMPLETE. $T. Il FM EX. 4" FM / 1 29,;•331 -22 -0011 CE;e4) rim= Li en COYWOMCs1 dz3U LAWS :1 -.31-22-4.....1 20 31 22 -23- 000 g I9- 3ri-22 • !4 • 0004 1/ 20-31-22-23-W09 11 i ; 1 25( • TRUNK EXTENSION SHALL BE PAID FOR BY CITY AND PETITIONED PROPERTY OWNERS. ill NOTE: ®ALL SERVICES SHALL BE 6" P.V.C. EXCEPT OTHERWISE NOTED. V A PETITIONED PROPERTY OWNERS FOR SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION. Drawn By: PH Date: 9-6-95 0 MR Orr Schelen Associates. Inc. Mayeron & Engineers si Architects • Planners • Surveyors 300 Park Place Wait si 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Ifinseapolls,1111 554154228 • 612-595-5775 Drawing Title SANITARY SEWER MARSHAN LAKE TOWNHOMES LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA Comm. 5521.1( Sheet r Subdivision Application -Check List IV. PREPARATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT Compliance Yes No V v pr d �rd REF: Subdcklst 11/18/92 rulcti4cot 6icIOE5 Development 1. A letter from the developer stating his preference for method of installation of improvements: EVELOPER & CITY INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS ITY INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS 2. A Final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control and Development Plan shall be submitted by the developer for approval. This plan must incorporate all revisions made or discussed during preliminary plat review and subsequent discussions or negotiations. This plan will be made part of the Development Contract. THE GRADING WILL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL THESE PLANS ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 3. The engineer shall have a Development Financial Requirement Worksheet prepared and attached to the Development Agreement. 4. The developer will meet with the City Staff to finalize the terms of the Development Contract. 5. Upon Finalization of the Development Contract the City Clerk shall have the Final Copy of the Contract signed by all appropriate parties. 6. Financial guarantees shall be posted with the City as outlined in the Development Contract. 7. Developer shall submit five (5) copies of the approved final grading, drainage, and erosion control and development plans to city staff. 6 ON. January 24, 1996 Orr Sthelen Mayeron& Associates, Inc. RECEIVED Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lino Lakes JAN 2 i 1996 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014-2123 CITY OF LINO I_AKEF Re: Utility Construction and Appurtenant Work Marshan Lake Condominiums OSM Project No. 5521.10 300 Park Place East 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228 612-595-5775 1-800-753-5775 FAX 595-5774 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Engineers Architects Planners Surveyors Bids were received for the above -referenced project at 10:00 a.m. on January 18, 1995, and were opened and read aloud. A total of thirteen responsive bids were received. C.W. Houle, Inc., submitted the lowest base bid in the amount of $540,153.40. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and the tabulation is enclosed. The engineer's base bid estimate was $626,662.00. C.W. Houle, Inc., has successfully completed projects for OSM and the City of Lino Lakes. City staff has worked with the contractor in other municipalities. Based on their previous performance on similar projects, we anticipate that C.W. Houle, Inc., is capable of successfully completing the Marshan Lake Condominium project. We, therefore, recommend award for the contract to C.W. Houle, Inc., 1300 West County Road I, Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 in the amount of $540,153.40. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. David D. Mitchell, P.E. Project Manager Enclosure c: Dave Ahrens, P.E. - City of Lino Lakes ce w\ssu.io\ava WORRES\012496.CFY Equal Opportunity Employer Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. * Denotes corrected figure. Item 9pso No DaeaptIon Quantity Unit ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Total BIQ $649,897.00 Unit Primp Item Total LOW BIDDER C.W. HOULE, INC. Total BM: $564,388.40 Unit Pike Item Total 2ND BIDDER SJ LOUIS CONSTR., INC Total Bid: $693,277.00 Unit Prins Item Total 3RD BIDDER KADLEC EXC. OF MORA Total Bid: • 3902,957.90 Unit Pdos kern Total 4TH BIDDER BONINE EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bid: 8917,588.30 Unit Nos Item Total SCHEDULE A: STREETS 1 2104.506-00120• REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 300 SQ YD $3.00 $900.00 $3.00 $900.00 $3.00 $900.00 $200 $900.00 $2.50 $750.00 2 2104.51340011- SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FUU. DEPTH) 670 UN FT $3.00 $2,010.00 $200 31,340.00 $5.00 33,350.00 34.00 $2,880.00 32.50 *1,675.00 3 2106.501-00016 COMMON EXCAVATION 3900 CU YD $3.00 311,700.00 31.35 $5,266.00 3425 $16,575.00 8200 37,800.00 $0.01 $39.00 4 2106.521-00010• GRANULAR BORROW (LV) 3000 CU YD 37.00 $27,300.00 $0.01 $39.00 $6.85 $22,816.00 3525 320,475.00 80.01 $39.00 6 2112.601-00010. SUBGRADE PREPARATION 33 ROAD STA $200.00 38,600.00 $156.00 $5,115.00 8130.00 34,200.00 3100.00 $3,300.00 8123.00 34,069.00 6 2211.50140006 AGGREGATE BASE C1A88 6 (RECYCLED) 3120 TON 87.00 $21,840.00 88.80 827,456.00 37.00 821,840.00 $825 $25,740.00 86.87 821,434.40 7 2331.514-00036 TYPE 31 BASE COURSE MIXTURE 1100 TON $30.00 333,000.00 326.40 827,940.00 $25.00 $27.500.00 324.00 826,400.00 324.70 $27.170.00 8 2331.60800040. TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 390 TON $31.00 812,090.00 $33.00 $12,870.00 $30.00 *11.700.00 $28.00 310,920.00 829.16 311.372.40 9 2631.5001-04110- CONCRETE CURB t GUTTER DESIGN D412 5870 LIN FT 38.00 $34,020.00 36.00 $34,020.00 3625 835,437.60 $625 329,767.50 38.13 $34,757.10 10 2367.60240016 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 190 GALLON 36.00 3960.00 $1.80 $304.00 31.85 3313.50 $200 3380.00 31.64 8311.80 11 7 251 3.503.00003- SILT FENCE, I REA 2000 UN FT $200 $4,000.00 8125 $2,500.00 32.00 34,000.00 31.50 $3.000.00 32.42 34,840.00 12 2873.50640030- SODDING TYPE LAWN (INCL. 4' TOPSOIL) 8300 SO YD $200 313,800.00 $1.80 $11,040.00 $1.40 $9,860.00 $1.96 313,456.00 $221 316,249.00 13 2232.50140115- MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.5') 2256 SQ YD 3200 84,510.00 $0.80 31,804.00 80.52 $1,172.80 $1.75 $3,94625 80.51 31,150.06 TOTAL SCHEDULE A: STREETS $172,720.00 $130,893.00 $159,663.80 3146,463.76 3122,846.66 SCHEDULES: STORM SEWER 14 2501.516-00421. 42' RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD 1 EACH 82,500.00 $2,500.00 81,700.00 $1,700.00 31,500.00 $1,600.00 81,500.00 81,500.00 31,89600 31.93600 16 2501.51640181. 18' RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD 4 EACH 8700.00 32,800.00 3880.00 $2,720.00 3840.00 32,580.00 3500.00 $2,000.00 3641.00 82,564.00 18 2503.54140125 12' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 140 UN FT $18.00 82,520.00 318.00 82,520.00 $28.00 33.640.00 317.00 $2,360.00 317.30 $2.422.00 17 2503.54140155- 16' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 Cl. V 838 UN FT 319.00 $12,12200 $19.60 $12,441.00 823.00 314,674.00 818.00 311,484.00 318.80 $11.994.40 18 2503.54140185- 18' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CI. V 300 LN FT 828.00 38,400.00 $2125 $6,375.00 826.00 $7,600.00 $20.00 $6.000.00 $20.55 $6,193.00 19 2503.54140215 21' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 175 UN FT 830.00 85,260.00 325.00 $4,375.00 $3200 35.600.00 $30.00 $5,250.00 $24.96 $4,313.75 20 2503.54140243- 24' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL 81 174 LIN FT $30.00 $3,220.00 326.00 84,524.00 $33.00 35,74200 $30.00 85,220.00 32520 84,384.80 21 2503.64140273- 27' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 Cl. III 29 UN FT $93.00 $1,015.00 333.00 $957.00 339.00 $1.131.00 $37.00 31.073.00 $32.20 3933.80 22 2503.54140303- 30' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 C1.111 283 LIN FT $45.00 $12,735.00 $37.00 810,471.00 339.00 311,037.00 340.00 311,320.00 837.80 310,697.40 23 2503.54140363- 36' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL III 268 LIN FT $90.00 $15,980.00 $50.50 $13,433.00 36200 813,832.00 $66.00 814,830.00 $61.95 313.818.70 24 2303.64140423 42' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL III 186 UN FT 375.00 $12,375.00 $71.00 811,715.00 373.00 $12,045.00 $80.00 $13,200.00 388.70 311.335.50 26 2506.50802426 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 48-4020 10 EACH 81,200.00 $12,000.00 $925.00 $9,260.00 31,200.00 312,000.00 $1,200.00 312,000.00 31,14200 311,420.00 26'2506.50840020. CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 60.4020 1 EACH $1,600.00 $1,500.00 $1,650.00 $1,550.00 81,800.00 $1,800.00 32,500.00 $2,500.00 81,571.00 31,671.00 27 2608.508-08620 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 72.4020 2 EACH 82,200.00 $4,400.00 $2,800.00 $6,800.00 32,800.00 $5,200.00 82.750.00 36500.00 82,252.00 34,504.00 28 2500.508-04219 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 84-4019 1 EACH $3,300.00 33,300.00 *4,060.00 $4,060.00 $3,500.00 83,500.00 83,500.00 $3,500.00 33223.00 83,223.00 29 2508.502-02426 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 8 EACH $1,200.00 89,800.00 $875.00 $7,000.00 31,100.00 88,800.00 31,200.00 39,000.00 $1.117.00 $8.936.00 30 2502.54147040. 4' PERF PE PIPE DRAIN 400 LIN FT 315.00 36,000.00 8720 32,880.00 $3.00 81,200.00 $5.75 82,300.00 $3.82 31,528.00 31 2511.50140013 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III WITH TYPE IV GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AND GRANULAR BEDDING 20 CU YD $40.00 3800.00 $58.00 31,100.00 $39.00 3780.00 845.00 3900.00 $40.00 $800.00 82 0461.80240046 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 670 TON $5.00 $3,360.00 $0.01 $6.70 $0.01 $6.70 $0.01 36.70 $0.01 36.70 Page 1 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT No. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. • Denotes corrected figure. Sam Spec No Description Ouan8ly Unit ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Toni Bid: 88484507.00 Unit Price Gram Total LOW BIDDER C.W. HOULE, INC. Total BW: $584,308.40 Un6 Price Ilan Total 2ND BIDDER SJ LOUIS CONSTR., INC Total Bid: 3593,277.00 Unit Price ham Total 3RD BIDDER KADLEC EXC. OF MORA Total Bid: • 8802,057.00 Unit Ptioa Item Total 4TH BIDDER BONINE EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bd 8617,550.30 Unit Noe Gam Total TOTAL SCHEDULE 8: STORM SEWER 3121,647.00 3102,727.70 8112,347.70 8110,363.70 8102,318.08 SCHEDULE C: WATERMAN 93 2011.50240001- CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN 2 EACH $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,250.00 32,500.00 $330.00 8080.00 8500.00 *1,000.00 32,725.00 85,450.00 34 2811.50304241. 24' STEEL CASING PIPE (JACKE)) 70 LN FT $150.00 810,500.00 8162.00 $10,010.00 $160.00 $10,500.00 $125.00 $8.750.00 812.7.00 $8.810.00 34 2011.60241143. 808' WET TAP 1 EACH 81,600.00 81,500.00 81,500.00 81,500.00 31,200.00 31,200.00 $1,025.00 31,025.00 81,456.00 81,455.00 96 2611.50240002. 4' GATE VALVE AND BOX 11 EACH 8360.00 $3,850.00 $420.00 $4,620.00 3370.00 34.070.00 3375.00 $4,125.00 $294.00 $3,234.00 30 2611.60200803. 6' GATE VALVE AND BOX 12 EACH 8450.00 95,400.00 $440.00 86,260.00 $420.00 85,040.00 3425.00 86,100.00 8346.00 $4.15200 97 2611.60240804. 6' GATE VALVE AND BOX 8 EACH 8560.00 34,400.00 $685.00 $4,880.00 $570.00 $4,580.00 $575.00 $4.600.00 $479.00 $3,832.00 38 2811.60240808. is' GATE VALVE AND BOX 6 EACH 8900.00 $6,400.00 $930.00 $5,680.00 8980.00 85,760.00 3950.00 $5,700.00 81,023.00 36,138.00 30 2611.50301047. 4' WATER MAIN DUCT IRON CL 52 400 UN FT 816.00 $8,000.00 *14.70 86,500.00 316.00 $6,400.00 811.90 34,780.00 810.00 14,000.00 40 2811.50240410 1' CORPORATION STOP 99 EACH 850.00 $1.960.00 831.00 $1,209.00 $47.00 81,833.00 330.00 $1,170.00 $16.00 3685.00 41 2811.603.1067- 6' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON CL 62 130 LN FT 818.00 $2,340.00 816.00 82.080.00 817.00 82,210.00 $1275 31,657.50 $10.70 81,391.00 42 2611.60243100- 1' CURB STOP & BOX 99 EACH 8100.00 83,900.00 $70.00 82,730.00 389.00 93,471.00 875.00 $2.926.00 $80.00 92,340.00 43 2611.503-01087- r WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON CL 52 1956 IJN FT 920.00 *39,100.00 91720 933.826.00 $14.00 927.370.00 81525 929,813.75 913.30 928,001.50 44 2811.60300710 1' TYPE K COPPER PIPE 1500 UN FT 910.00 $15,000.00 $9.10 813,850.00 $9.00 813,500.00 95.75 98,625.00 98.95 913,425.00 46 2811.50301127- 12' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON CL 62 2370 UN FT $25.00 $69,250.00 $23.80 $55,932.00 $22.00 862,140.00 82226 952,732.50 821.75 851,647.60 46 2811.52000020 DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 10000 POUND 8125 812,600.00 81.30 313,000.00 8125 912.500.00 91.00 $10,000.00 31.80 816,000.00 47 2811.50200020 HYDRANT 12 EACH 81,000.00 812,000.00 91,330.00 916.960.00 91,000.00 319,200.00 91,050.00 912,800.00 31,546.00 918,562.00 48 0451.00240040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 870 TON 35.00 93,500.00 80.01 $6.70 $0.01 $0.70 30.01 36.70 $0.01 86.70 TOTAL SCHEDULE C: WATERMAIN 8150,340.00 81714873.70 $170,420.70 3154,190.46 8186,710.70 SCHEDULE D: SANITARY SEWER 49 2021.608.07410. STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (0109 16 EACH $1.200.00 818,000.00 81,200.00 818,900.00 $1,300.00 919,500.00 $1,000.00 $16,000.00 81,294.00 319,410.00 500 2821.50047410. EXTRA48' DIA. M.H. DEPTH OVER 10' 46 UN FT 8100.00 $4,500.00 870.00 83,150.00 $108.00 84,770.00 $75.00 $3,376.00 9699.00 33,105.00 51 0451.80240060. GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 400 TON $6.00 $2,000.00 $0.01 94.00 30.01 94.00 818.00 $8,,400.00 $0.01 84.00 50 2621.50240206 CONST. r TYPE'A' OUTSIDE DROP (0.4') 2 EACH 31,000.00 92000.00 81,200.00 82,400.00 9450.00 $900.00 3800.00 81,000.000 $1,300.00 92,600.00 53 2821.50007420. EXTRA DROP SECTION DEPTH OVER 4' 2 UN FT $100.00 $200.00 8120.00 8240.00 133.00 386.00 3200.00 8400.00 $75.00 8150.00 54 2821.50240003- CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES (SAN) 1 EACH 8600.00 8500.00 34,100.00 84,100.00 9500.00 9500.00 31.100.00 81,100.00 921.400.00 921,400.00 56 2821511-13086- r PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 36 3045 UN FT 819.00 957,856.00 91820 155,419.00 923.50 871,667.50 827.00 982,215.00 937.11 8112,999.96 56 2621.50213086 8706' PVC WYE 19 EACH 8100.00 $1,300.00 982.00 $1,080.00 850.00 $767.00 835.00 9455.00 932.00 3416.00 67 2021.611.13000- 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 28 SERVICE PIPE 660 UN FT 816.00 88,260.00 $12.50 36,875.00 811.00 96,060.00 327.00 914,860.00 86.48 83.563.00 58 2821.60240010. LFT STATION UPGRADE 1 EACH $6,000.00 86,000.00 92,350.00 92,350.00 92.900.00 92,900.00 96,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,84200 81,842.00 59 2821.50340206 r FORCE MAN DUCTILE IRON PIPE 1120 UN FT $25.00 $28,000.00 318.75 818,780.00 813.00 $14,600.00 315.50 817,380.00 921.81 824,20320 00 2611.50200803. r GATE VALVE AND BOX 2 EACH 9450.00 3900.00 9800.00 31,720.00 9420.00 9840.00 9425.00 3850.00 9548.00 81,092.00 61 2821.50240100 PLUG & ABANDON PIPE SEWER 2 EACH 82,000.00 84,000.00 9850.00 91,700.00 $250.00 9500.00 9300.00 8800.00 3100.00 9200.00 82 2104.60140086- REMOVE FORCE MAIN 160 UN FT 95.00 3750.00 888.60 91,275.00 $0.01 81.60 96.00 9900.00 9200 9300.00 WaYIUBl05562110na Page 2 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. Denotes corrected figure. Nam Spas No Description Clundty Unit ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Total Bid: *945,97.00 Unit Price Item Total LOW BIDDER C.W. HOULE, INC. Total Bld: $654,395.40 Unit Pilo. Mem Total 2ND BIDDER SJ LOUIS CONSTR., INC Total Bid: $593,277.00 Unit Pdoa Mem Total 3RD BIDDER KADLEC EXC. OF MORA Total Bid: • 6902,957.90 Unit Pilo. Item Total 4TH BIDDER BONINE EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bid: $917,559.30 Unit PAoa Mem Toth TOTAL SCHEDULE D: SANITARY SEWER 0133,255.00 $117,95940 $122,919.00 $150403.00 =191,275.15 SCHEDULE E: MOBIUZATION & CLEANUP 83 2021.500140001- MOBIUZATPON 1 LUMP SUM $5,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 $5.000.00 :5,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,000.00 65.000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 84 2021.60140004- CLEANUP 1 LUMP SUM $5,000.00 15,000.00 $5,000.00 15,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5.000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE E: MOBILD'ATION S CLEANUP $10,000.00 $10,000.00 510,000.00 $10,000.00 *10,000.00 SCHEDULE F: ALTERNATE BID 86 2021.60847410• STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (0.10) 4 EACH $1200.00 14,500.00 $1,200.00 $5,040.00 01,300.00 $5200.00 $1,000.)0 *4,000.00 $1,294.00 $6,176.00 M6 2521.50647410. EXTRA 4r DIA. M.H. DEPTH OVER 10' 20 UN FT $100.00 $2,000.00 $70.00 $1,400.00 $105.00 $2.120.00 $75.00 51,500.00 $69.00 $1,380.00 57 2621.511-13086. 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 36 605 LIN FT 019.00 012,635.00 $2320 $15.425.00 $12.00 67,980.00 $29.00 $19,255.00 124.09 616.019.55 58 2821311.13040. 4• PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 28 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT 610.00 $400.00 $14.60 $680.00 $11.00 $440.00 $27.00 *1,080.00 $6.00 $240.00 GI 2521311-13050. 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 28 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT $15.00 $800.00 $15..50 $820.00 $12.00 5480.00 $27.00 $1,080.00 $7.00 $280.00 70 2821302.13084- 8'X4• PVC WYE 2 EACH $500.00 $100.00 086.00 013200 $50.00 1100.00 $35.00 $70.00 $20.00 640.00 71 2021302.13086. VW PVC WYE 2 EACH $100.00 $200.00 682.00 6164.00 168.00 6118.00 $36.00 370.00 032.00 184.00 72 2575.60140010. SEEDING 1 ACRE 01.000.00 11,000.00 $860.00 $850.00 01,000.00 61,800.00 3750.00 5750.00 01,230.00 51230.00 73 0451.802-00040. GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 100 TON $5.00 $500.00 $0.01 61.00 $0.01 $1.00 $15.00 61.500.00 50.01 $1.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE Ft ALTERNATE BID $4$23$.00 $24,215.00 $19,03940 $29,435.00 $24,430.95 TOTAL SCHEDULES A THROUGH E (BASE BID) $525,992.00 $640,1533.40 $575,239.00 $373,522.90 5693,157.46 TOTAL BID $645,997.00 , :554,355.40 $593,27740 6802.957.90 $M7, 8130 INGML003652110.XL5 Page 3 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTIUTY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1998 10:00 A.M. Denotes corrected figure. Item Spec No MoorlptIon Qusngry Unk 5TH BIDDER FOREST LAKE CONTR., INC. Total Bkl: N23,582.30 Unit PAos Item Todd 6TH BIDDER NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION Todd Bid: 1923,758.54 Unit PAW Item Total 7TH BIDDER REHBEIN EXC., INC. Total Bid: '3829,014.50 Unit Price Item Total 8TH BIDDER S.M. HENTGES & SONS, INC. Total 91d 1948252.00 Unit Price Item Todd 9TH BIDDER RYAN CONTR., INC Total Bid: 1854,081.76 UNt Price Item Total SCHEDULE A: STREETS 1 210450600120- REMOVE BITUMINOUS P4VEMENT 300 SQ YD $200 6800.00 $4.00 81,200.00 $1.00 $300.00 3200 6800.00 1200 6000.00 2 2104.613.00011- SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) 670 UN FT $225 $1,607.50 $425 12.847.50 $125 $837.50 $2.00 $1,340.00 $250 $1.675.00 3 2106.601-00010 COMMON EXCAVATION 3900 CU YD 1326 612,875.00 $1.26 84,875.00 $0.01 $39.00 $5.00 319,500.00 13.50 113.850.00 4 2106.521-00010 GRANULAR BORROW (LV) 3900 CU YD 34.00 815,000.00 31.25 14,875.00 10.01 339.00 $5.00 $19,500.00 $8.50 125,360.00 6 2112.501430010 SUBGRADE PREPARATION 33 ROAD STA $150.00 $4,950.00 $125.00 $4,125.00 $130.00 $4290.00 1100.00 $3.300.00 3125.00 $4.125.00 6 221150100000 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 (RECYCLED) 3120 TON 38.00 $18,720.00 18.06 $26.115..00 17.10 $22,152.00 17.00 $21.840.00 $8.00 124,950.00 7 2331.514-00030 TYPE 31 BABE COURSE MIXTURE 1100 TON $24.00 $26,400.00 124.60 326,960.00 325.66 , 828,106.00 124.50 328,960.00 $23.00 $25,300.00 8 2331.60600040- TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 390 TON 128.00 310,920.00 $27.50 110,725.00 $3020 *11,778.00 $28.50 $11,115.00 125.00 110,140.00 9 2531.601-04110 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN 0412 5870 LIN FT 15.50 $31,185.00 38.46 138,82820 $6.00 $34,020.00 15.60 $31,752.00 15.00 $28,350.00 10 7367.60240010 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 190 GALLON 11.60 $285.00 11.85 $313.50 $1.70 1323.00 31.00 $304.00 $1.50 1285.00 11 2573.6060000.$ SILT FENCE, PREASSEMBLED 2000 LIN FT $2.00 $4,000.00 $2.25 $4,500.00 31.50 $3.000.00 $2.00 $4.000.00 $125 12.500.00 12 2573.50600030 8000210 TYPE LAWN (INCL 4• TOPSOIL) 6900 80 YD $1.75 $12,076.00 $1.84 312,896.00 $1.75 $12,075.00 11.580 010,350.00 11.90 813,110.00 13 2232.501-00115 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.6') 2266 so YD 31.20 82,705.00 $1.80 $4,069.00 30.55 91,24026 10.50 31,127.50 31.05 33,720.75 TOTAL SCHEDULE A: STREETS 3141,823.60 3133,910.20 :116,199.76 6151,678.50 8153,796.76 SCHEDULE S: STORM SEWER .14 260151640421. 42' RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD 1 EACH $1,700.00 11,700.00 11,85724 11,85724 81,670.00 31,670.00 31,600.00 81,500.00 31,350.00 31,350.00 16 250151540181. ir RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD 4 EACH 1700.00 $2,800.00 159252 12,370.08 1645.00 82,580.00 1750.00 $3,000.00 1726.00 12,900.00 18 2503.54140125- 12' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 140 LIN FT 321.00 12.940.00 122.37 $3,131.80 $20.50 $2,884.00 $17.00 32,380.00 $25.00 $3,500.00 17 2503.54140166 16' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V 838 LN FT 322.00 314,035.00 $23.84 315,082.32 $20.90 313,33420 119.00 112,122.00 326.00 118,688.00 18 2503541401 16' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL V 300 UN FT $23.00 38,900.00 82553 17,869.00 $2335 17,006.00 121.00 68,300.00 $29.00 $8,700.00 19 250354140216 21' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 175 LIN FT $28.00 $4,560.00 $2920 35,110.00 $27.70 34,84750 $25.00 $4.375.00 $36.00 $8,125.00 20 260354140243. 24' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL 111 174 UN FT $27.00 14,898.00 129.62 $5,153.88 8288.30 $4,92420 $26.00 • $4.624.00 $35.00 $8,090.00 21 2503.54140273. 27' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL II 29 UN FT $35.00 31,016.00 136.01 $1,04429 537.70 31,093.30 $33.00 1957.00 341.00 11,305.00 22 2603.54140303- 30' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CLAN 283 LIN FT $30.00 311,037.00 $39.84 311,218.12 341.00 1$11,77280 $37.00 110,471.00 $48.00 313,018.00 23 2503.54140383. 36' RC PPE SEWER DESIGN 3005 CL III 208 LIN FT 353.00 $14,088.00 $5290 *14,071.40 355.10 314.858.00 85200 313,832.00 $82.00 116,49200 24 250854140423 42' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CUM 186 LIN FT $73.00 312,046.00 $7022 311.58620 $72.90 312,02850 $70.00 111,550.00 $84.00 113,950.00 25 2506.50842420 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 484020 10 EACH 31,200.00 312,000.00 31,08027 110,802.70 *1,185.00 $11,850.00 $1,250.00 112,500.00 31,080.00' 810,800.00 28 2606.50803020 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE 0E81011 00.4020 1 EACH $1,800.00 $1,800.00 11,881.84 11,881.84 12,0000.00 12,0000.00 $2,0800.00 $2,000.00 $1,680.00 $1,880.00 27 2608.60603820 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 72-4020 2 EACH $2,700.00 $5,400.00 32,50329 $5,008.58 $2,960.00 $5.900.00 13,500.00 17,000.00 12,200.00 84,400.00 28 250650604216 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 84-4019 1 EACH $4.000.00 $4,000.00 $3,793.92 $3,790.92 $4,185.00 $4,166.00 $5,000.00 35,000.00 $3,070.00 $3,070.00 29 250160602420- CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 8 EACH $1,200.00 39,800.00 $1,080.49 38.643.92 31,145.00 19,100.00 $1,250.00 $10,000.00 $796.00 16,360.00 30 2502.54107040 4' PERF PE PIPE DRAIN 400 LIN FT $4.76 81,000.00 6650 32,600.00 37.00 81,800.00 21200 $4,800.00 310.00 $4.000.00 31 2611.601-00016 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS m WITH TYPE IV GEOTEXRE FABRIC AND GRANULAR BEDDING 20 CU YD 866.00 31,100.00 $87.93 31,358.80 655.00 31,100.00 650.00 $1,000.00 340.00 $800.00 32 0451.80640040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 870 TON 66.00 $4,020.00 $0.01 $8.70 $0.01 15.70 310.00 66.700.00 $10.00 16.700.00 ►NCIVLLNEND81032110.XL9 Page 4 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF UNO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. ' Denotes corrected figure. Item Spee No DusalptIo,. Quentlty Unit 5Th BIDDER FOREST LAKE CONTR., INC. Total BIQ 8823,664.80 Unit PAW Item Total 6111 BIDDER NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION Total Bid: '*523,789.64 Unit Price Item Total 7TH BIDDER REHBEIN EXC., INC. Total Bld: '829,014.80 UMI Price Ilam Total 871i BIDDER S.M. HENTGES & SONS, INC. Total Bid: '*848,862.00 Unit Pros Item Total 9111 BIDDER RYAN CONTR., INC Total Nth 1654,061.78 Ung Price Item Total TOTAL SCHEDULE B: STORM SEWER 8115,638.00 3111,950.89 *113,777.0 8120,011.00 $127,730.00 SCHEDULE C: WATERMAN 33 2011.50400001- CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN 2 EACH $460.00 8000.00 8360.14 *70028 31,500.00 *3,000.00 $350.00 8700.00 81,360.00 32,700.00 '34 2811.603.04241- 24' STEEL CASING PIPE (JAC1ED) 70 LIN FT *175.00 812.250.00 *120.95 *8,48720 3120.00 $8,400.00 3118.00 38,120.00 $200.00 314,000.00 34 281150241143- 11138' WET TAP 1 EACH *1,800.00 $1,300.00 $1,700.79 *1,700.79 *1,800.00 *1,080.00 $1250.00 *1250.00 *1,000.00 *1.000.00 36 2811.50200802. 4' GATE VALVE AND BOX 11 EACH *375.00 34,125.00 3177.63 *4,153.93 3390.00 $4290.00 3400.00 34,400.00 *316.00 *3,486.00 38 2811.602.00603 IP GATE VALVE AND BOX 12 EACH 3426.00 $6,100.00 8452.50 86,430.00 *410.00 $4,920.00 3450.00 $6,400.00 3370.00 *4,440.00 37 2611.602.00604. 8' GATE VALVE AND 80X 8 EACH *560.00 *4,400.00 $590.63 *4,84424 3575.00 *4,800.00 *800.00 $4,800.00 $600.00 *4.000.00 38 2811502,0808. 1r GATE VALVE AND 9O)f 8 EACH 8325.00 35,650.00 *978.18 36,858.98 $1.075.00 *6,450.00 *1.000.00 88.000.00 3880.00 *6.180.00 39 2611.503-01047. 4' WATER MAN DUCT IRON CL 62 400 UN FT *17.00 38,800.00 81027 30,506.00 $1420 $5.880.00 *12.50 *5.000.00 *17.00 *6,800.00 40 2611.60200410 I' CORPORATION STOP 39 EACH 846.00 11,766.00 825.44 $992.16 *25.00 8075.00 350.00 *1,960.00 *43.00 *1,677.00 41 2811.60341067. 8' WATER MAN -DUCT IRON CL 62 130 LIN FT *18.00 *2,340.00 *17.16 *2,229.50 *16.00 *2,060.00 *13.00 $1,630.00 319.60 $2.535.00 42 261150200100. 1' CURB STOP & BOX 39 EACH *105.00 *4,095.00 3999.18 33,88724 *70.00 32,730.00 *100.00 13,900.00 383.00 $3237.00 43 281150341087. 8' WATER MAN -DUCT IRON CL 62 1956 UN FT $21.00 341,066.00 818.94 $33,117.70 315.00 329,325.00 118.60 832,257.50 321.00 $41.065.00 44 281150340710- 1' TYPE K COPPER PIPE 1600 LIN FT *1250 $18,750.00 5723 *10,845.00 $8.60 *12,750.00 $11.00 318,500.00 37.70 311,550.00 46 2811.50341127. 12' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON CL 62 2370 UN FT 329.00 $88,730.00 *23.94 356,737.80 523.45 *55,5/0.50 823.00 154,510.00 $27.80 *65.412.00 46 2811.62000020- DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 10000 POUND *1.00 310,000.00 *1.58 115,000.00 *1.45 314,600.00 81.40 314,000.00 *0.80 *8,000.00 47 261150240020 HYDRANT 12 EACH 81,600.00 818,000.00 $1,169.31 313,911.72 $1,490.00 117,680.00 11,300.00 315,800.00 31,190.00 814,280.00 48 0451.80240040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 870 TON 38.00 *4,020.00 $0.01 18.70 30.01 *6.70 *10.00 *6,700.00 810.00 36,700.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE Cr WATERMAN *208,170.00 8174,78922 1174,923.20 8182,777.60 8198,011.00 SCHEDULE 0* SANITARY SEWER 49 282150847410 STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (010') 16 EACH 81.400.00 121.000.00 3120262 318.039.30 81,465.00 521.975.00 *1.300.00 ' 119,500.00 81,375.00 *20,825.00 60 2821508-07410 EXTRA 48' DIA. M.H. DEPTH OVER 10' 46 LIN FT 880.00 83,800.00 386.49 13,847.05 860.00 $2.700.00 180.00 53,600.00 875.00 33.375.00 61 0461.80200040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 400 TON 38.00 *2,400.00 10.01 *4.00 50.01 $4.00 110.00 $4,000.00 110.00 $4,000.00 62 212150200208- CONST. 8' TYPE 'A' OUTSIDE DROP (0.4') 2 EACH 81,100.00 32,200.00 1826.10 $1,65020 1950.00 *1,900.00 *1,600.00 *3.000.00 11210.00 32,420.00 63 282150607420 EXTRA DROP SECTION DEPTH OVER 4' 2 UN FT 1110.00 *220.00 183.68 1167.18 *30.00 *80.00 3300.00 8600.00 1100.00 5200.00 64 282150240003- CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES (SAN) 1 EACH 1800.00 *800.00 11.000.00 *1,000.00 31,475.00 *1.475.00 1350.00 *350.00 *812.00 *812.00 66 2821511.13086 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 35 3046 LIN FT 119.00 *67,856.00 132.35 396,606.75 *38.45 *117,060.25 316.00 145,875.00 82200 388,990.00 66 202150243088- 81(6' PVC WYE 13 EACH 180.00 3780.00 *45.43 169059 340.00 3520.00 *50.00 5850.00 850.00 8650.00 57 2821511.13060 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 28 SERVICE PIPE 660 UN FT 116.00 *8,260.00 *7.94 *4,367.00 17.80 *4,290.00 $12.00 *6,600.00 38.00 $4,400.00 68 2621,60240010 UFT STATION UPGRADE 1 EACH 82,000.00 82,000.00 *2.073.84 12.873.84 *1,960.00 *1.960.00 *04.000.00 *84.000.00 19,600.00 89,500.00 69 2821.60300206 8' FORCE MAIN DUCTILE IRON PIPE 1120 LN FT 116.00 816,800.00 *18.62 *18,502.40 313.00 *15,232.00 113.00 *14,580.00 113.00 $14,580.00 00 281150240803- 8' GATE VALVE AND BOX 2 EACH 1426.00 *860.00 8449.83 $899.06 3405.00 8930.00 *450.00 3900.00 $370.00 1740.00 81 282150240100 PLUG & ABANDON PIPE SEWER 2 EACH 1250.00 $500.00 *250.00 8500.00 *120.00 *240.00 *500.00 11.000.00 *300.00 $800.00 82 210450140086 REMOVE FORCE MAIN 150 UN FT *6.00 *900.00 155.81 *8,341.60 166.00 $8.250.00 110.00 *1,600.00 *5.80 *870.00 /NOmL18IDEP664110.xt3 Page 5 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. • Denotes corrected figure. Item Spec No Caaorg0on QwnBly UNt 5TH BIDDER FOREST LAKE CONTR., INC. Toted BIQ *823,882.50 Unit PAoe Inn Total 6TH BIDDER NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION Total Bid: 1823,788.84 Unit PAW Ium Total 7TH BIDDER REHBEIN IXC., INC. Total Bid: '*825,014.50 Unit Price Item Total 8TH BIDDER S.M. HENTGES & SONS, INC. Total Bid: 1848,88200 Unit Pike Item Total 9T1-1 BIDDER RYAN CONTR., INC Toted Bid: 1064,081.76 Unit Piles Item Total TOTAL SCHEDULE D: SANITARY SEWER *117,958.00 $159,2811.25... *178,808.25 *185,838.00 *129,742.00 SCHEDULE Et MOBILIZATION & CLEANUP 03 2021,50140004 MOIRUZATION 1 LUMP SUM *5,000.00 *5,000.00 *5,000.00 25,000.00 *5,000.00 *5.000.00 *5.000.00 *5,000.00 *5,000.00 *5.000.00 64 2021.501.00004- CLEANUP r 1 LUMP SUM *5,000.00 *5,000.00 *5.000.00 *5.000.00 *5,000.00 *6,000.00 *5,000.00 *5,000.00 *5,000.00 *5,000.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE Et MOBILIZATION & CLEANUP *10,000.00 *10.000.00 *10,000.00 *10,000.00 *10,000.00 SCHEDULE F: ALTERNATE BID 06 2021.506-07410. STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (0.101 4 EACH 21,400.00 *5,000.00 *1,202.62 24,810.48 *1,465.00 *5,860.00 21,300.00 25,200.00 *1,375.00 25.500.00 00 2621.506-07410. EXTRA 46' DU. M.H. DEPTH OVER 10' 20 UN FT *90.00 81,800.00 *85.49 21,709.80 *00.00 *1,200.00 *60.00 21,600.00 *75.00 21,500.00 07 2821.51143045. 8' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 35 006 LIN FT *27.00 217,965.00 *30.34 220,176.10 *39.50 226,267.50 *12.00 27,960.00 *41.00 *27,205.00 N 2821.51143040. 4' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT *1200 *480.00 211.94 *477.00 *18.00 2720.00 220.00 _ 2800.00 *8.50 2340.00 09 2621.51143060. 6' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 28 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT *13.00 2520.00 211.94 2477.60 *19.00 2700.00 220.00 2800.00 $9.00 *360.00 70 2821.502-13084. 17)(4' PVC WYE 2 EACH *50.00 3100.00 $44.90 *89.80 *50.00 3100.00 *50.00 *100.00 345.00 *90.00 71 2021.502-13066- 89X6' PVC WYE 2 EACH 800.00 $120.00 844.90 *89.80 850.00 3100.00 *00.00 *120.00 *500.00 8100.00 72 2575.501410010. SEEDING 1 ACRE 82,000.00 82,000.00 *1,000.00 81,000.00 $600.00 *600.00 *850.00 2850.00 2850.00 2850.00 73 0451.60200040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 100 TON *6.00 *600.00 $0.01 *1.00 80.01 81.00 810.00 81,000.00 310.00 81.000.00 r TOTAL SCHEDULE Ft ALTERNATE BID 829,175..00 828,932.19 835,80S.50 818,460.00 839,805.00 TOTAL SCHEDULES A THROWN 5 (BASE Bro)_ *694,391,60 2594,920.38 2693,409.00 2830,40200 *917,259.75 ' *854,091.75, TOTAL 510 $.23,6112.110 2623,769.54 2029,014.60 ' *946,062.00 [r. CML1800Ks2110xis Page 6 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTIUTY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. Denotes corrected figure. Item Spec No Description Quantity Unit 10Th BIDDER ARGON CONSTRUCTION CO.,IN Total Bid: 1686,004.84 Unit Price Item Total 11TH BIDDER RICHARD KNUTSON INC. Total BW: 14172,016.38 Unit Pilo. Item Total 12TH BIDDER BROWN & CRIS, INC. Total Bid: $682,837.10 Unit Price Item Total 13Th BIDDER KOBER EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bid: $707,345.81 Unit Price item Total SCHEDULE As STREETS 1 2104.506-00120- REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 300 SO YD $200 3800.00 $2.50 $750.00 31.55 $468.00 37.05 $2,115.00 2 2104.61340011• SAWING BIT PAVEMENT (BULL DEPTH) 870 LIN FT $5.00 $3,350.00 ' $3.00 $2,010.00 $3.06 $2043.50 3297 81.969.90 3 2105.601-00010 COMMON EXCAVATION 3000 CU YD $0.00 $23,400.00 33.90 815,210.00 32.50 39.750.00 31.53 $5,967.00 4 2106.521-00010 GRANULAR BORROW (LV) 3000 CU YD 3820 $31,980.00 $7.10 $27,690.00 313.95 354,406.00 37.50 329,250.00 5 2112.501-00010 SUBGRADE PREPARATION 33 ROAD STA 3176.00 35775.00 $123.00 $4,078.80 312240 $4,03920 $12320 34,006.80 0 2211.501-00000. AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 (RECYCLED) 3120 TON $7.67 $23,930.40 88.90 321,528.00 37.85 324,492.00 310.12 $31,574.40 7 2331.61440030 TYPE 31 BASE COURSE MIXTURE 1100 TCN $23.00 $25,300.00 $24.82 $27,302.00 $24.68 $27,038.00 $3124 $34.364.00 8 2331.60840040 TYPE 41 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 390 TON $26.00 310,140.00 $29.30 311,427.00 $29.02 311,317.80 $38.74 $14,328.00 0 2531.601-04110 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN D412 5870 UN FT $5.88 $33,22820 36.63 $31,355.10 $6.51 $31,241.70 $6.81 832,04270 10 2357.50200010 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 190 GALLON 31.50 3285.00 $1.85 $313.50 $1.83 3309.70 31.32 $250.80 11 2573.003-00003- 8117 FENCE. PREASSEMBLED 2000 UN FT 8125 $2.500.00 31.38 $2,700.00 31.90 $3,800.00 $127 $2,540.00 12 2673.506-00030 SODDING TYPE LAWN (INCL 4' TOPSOIL) 8900 SO YD 8225 $15,625.00 $1.48 810,212.00 31.90 $13,110.00 $237 318,353.00 13 2232501-00116 MEL BITUMINOUS SURFACE (1.5') 2255 SO YD 81.65 33,720.75 80.52 81,172.00 $1.05 $2.387.75 31.43 33,224.65 TOTAL SCHEDULE A: STREETS 3179,732.33 8155,009.00 8184,379.85 3175,965.85 SCHEDULE Bs STORM SEINER 14 2601.615-90421. 42' RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD 1 EACH 82.000.00 $2,000.00 81,918.51 81,916.61 81,323.00 81,323.00 31,543.92 31,543.92 15 2501.61540181• 18' RC PIPE APRON WRRASH GUARD 4 EACH 3886.00 $2,800.00 8887.00 $2,748.00 5503.00 $2,012.00 $638.45 32,663.80 18 250354140126 12' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 140 LIN FT $20.62 $2,87280 821.89 33,064.00 321.90 $3,088.00 321.15 $2,961.00 17 2503.64140165 15' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 638 UN FT $20.48 813,08624 822.28 314,814.04 $22.75 814,514.50 $1959 812,498.42 18 250354140186 18' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 300 UN FT _ 323.72 37,118.00 $25.12 $7,530.00 $2450 $7,350.00 325.40 37,020.00 19 250354140216 21' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL V 175 UN FT $25.83 84,62025 327.46 $4,80650 $27.85 84,873.75 $35.51 $6,21425 20 25800.64140243. 24' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL III 174 LN FT 52028 54,572.72 $27.92 34,858.08 528.70 $4,903.80 83624 $8,306.78 21 2603.54140273- 27' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 CL III 29 LIN FT $38.83 31,12027 815.39 31,026.31 834.80 $1,00920 341.23 31,196.87 22 250354140300 30' RC P1PE SEWER DESIGN 3006 CL III 283 UN FT 338.18 $10,238.04 $37.48 $10,601.18 $39.00 311.037.00 $49.17 $13,915.11 23 250354140303. 38' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3008 C1.111 208 LN FT $50.52 $13.438.32 $50.88 313,634.08 $5150 813,899.00 $8524 517,363.84 24 2503.54140423- 42' RC PIPE SEWER DESIGN 3006 C1.111 106 LIN FT 887.72 311,173.80 $07.87 311,19855 38850 811,302.50 375.33 $12429.45 25 2500.608-02420 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 48-4020 10 EACH 31,240.00 812400.00 81,385.55 $13,855.50 51,043.00 310,430.00 31,398.93 813,989.30 28 2608.60840020. CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 00.4020 1 EACH 81,900.00 81,900.00 $2107.60 82,107.60 51,080.00 31,680.00 $1,882.01 $1.882.01 27 2506.608-03020 CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 72-4020 2 EACH $3,096.00 86,190.00 83,465.03 86.910.06 53.066.00 30.132.00 83.136.88 56,73.78 26 2506.50604213. CONSTRUCT MANHOLE DESIGN 84-4019 1 EACH 84,320.00 $4,320.00 $4,83950 $4,83950 33.709.00 $3.796.00 84,306.11 $4,306.11 29 2508.50242420 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48-4020 8 EACH 31,206.00 39,610.00 31,185.01 59.480.08 31,020.00 38,100.00 81,398.93 311,191.41 30 2502.641-07040. 4' PERF PE PIPE DRAIN 400 UN FT 313.00 $5,200.00 810.00 $4,000.00 $9.30 33,720.00 88.34 83,336.00 31 2511.50140013- RANDOM R1PRAP CLASS III WITH TYPE N GEOTEXTILE FABRIC AND GRANULAR BEDDING 20 CU YD 849.00 $980.00 340.00 $800.00 343.80 887200 $40.42 $606.40 32 0451.60240040 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 870 TON $0.01 $6.70 31250 $8,375.00 $0.10 $07.00 $7.40 $4,99820 FecmLsos6ti2t1oxL8 Page 7 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. Denotes corrected figure. Item Spec No Description Quantity that 10TH BIDDER ARCON CONSTRUCTION CO.,IN Total Bid: '885,004.14 Unit Price Item Total 11TH BIDDER RICHARD KNUTSON INC. Total Bid: •:672,016.36 Unit Price Iron Total 12TH BIDDER BROWN & CRIS, INC. Total Mk 8992,637.10 Unit PAW Item Total` 13TH BIDDER KOBER EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bid: $707,348.61 Unit Price Item T TOTAL SCHEDULES: STORM SEWER 5113,478.04 8125,971.09 8110,010.75 8131,436.44 SCHEDULE C: WATERMAIN 33 2611.502-00001- CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN 2 EACH $340.00 $680.00 5800.00 81200.00 5665.00 51,172.00 8290.16 8680.32 34 2611.503-04241. 24' STEEL CASING PIPE (JACKED) 70 LIN FT 8187.00 513,090.00 8116.85 88,179.50 $128.00 58250.00 512320 $8,624.00 34 2611.602.01143. 6'X6' WET TAP 1 EACH 51260.00 51,200.00 $1,019.00 $1,019.00 81,577.00 51,577.00 5120226 81,20226 36 2811.502-00602. 4' GATE VALVE AND BOX 11 EACH 8324.00 $3,564.00 8319.00 $3,509.00 5451.00 $4,961.00 8387.16 $4258.76 36 2611.502-00803. 6' GATE VALVE AND BOX 12 EACH $375.00 54,600.00 8385.75 $4.629.00 $503.00 56,036.00 $445.56 85.348.60 37 2611.602-00004. 8' GATE VALVE AND BOX 8 EACH 5637.00 55,096.00 5625.00 $4,200.00 $638.00 55,104.00 $628.00 $6.024.00 38 2611502-00006 12' GATE VALVE AND BOX 6 EACH 5961.00 $5,766.00 578024 84,881.44 81,008.00 86,036.00 $1289.53 56,537.18 39 2011.503-01047. 4' WATER MAN DUCT IRON CL 52 400 UN FT 518.17 $7208.00 515.04_ 56,016.00 514.70 55,880.00 81528 50,112.00 40 2611.60200410. 1' CORPORATION STOP 39 EACH $33.00 51,287.00 $38.57 81,50423 $25.00 5975.00 89721 $3.791.19 41 2011.503-01087. 8' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON C152 130 UN FT 816.77 82,180.10 - $16.09 82,109.70 815.50 $2,015.00 517.37 $2258.10 42 2611.502-03100. 1' CURB STOP & BOX 39 EACH 878.00 83,042.00 899.65 $3,886.35 867.00 52,613.00 8118.75 $4,65325 43 2811.503-01087. 8' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON Cl. 62 1955 LIN FT 81425 $27,858.75 516.00 $32,453.00 81820 535,581.00 817.94 53527270 44 2011503-00714 1' TYPE K COPPER PIPE 1600 UN FT 510.44 815,860.00 57.88 511,820.00 87.95 511,925.00 87.43 511,145.00 45 2611.603-01127- 12' WATER MAIN -DUCT IRON CL 52 2370 UN FT 520.73 849.130.10 822.82 554,083.40 525.45 $60,316.60 827.08 864,179.60 40 2611.62000020. DUCTILE IRON FITTINGS 10000 POUND 51.48 814,800.00 81.05 816,500.00 81.35 513,500.00 51.66 816200.00 47 2611.602.00020- HYDRANT 12 EACH 51,235.00 814,820.00 51,468.00 817,616.00 81,190.00 814,280.00 51,583.56 519.002.72 48 0451.602-00040- GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 670 TON 80.01 $8.70 812.50 88.375.00 80.10 567.00 58.05 $5,39350 TOTAL SCHEDULE et WATER/AAM 8170,006.16 8161,841.12 8180,98.10 8189,991.18 SCHEDULED: SANITARY SEWER , 49 2621.508-07414 STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (0-109 16 EACH 51200.00 824.900.00 51,689.50 523,842.50 81,380.00 520.700.00 51,589.71 523.845.65 50 2621.508-07414 EXTRP 48' DIA. M.H. DEPTH OVER 10' 46 LIN FT 878.00 53,610.00 885.00 83225.00 867.00 83,015.00 813357 88,010.85 51 0461.602-00014 GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 400 TON $9.80 $3,920.00 $12.50 55,000.00 50.10 540.00 510.48 54.184.00 62 2021502-00208- CONST. 6' TYPE'A' OUTSIDE DROP (0-4) , 2 EACH 51.060.00 52.120.00 8640.00 81,280.00 8544.00 81,088.00 51,569.83 $3.139.66 53 2621506-07420- EXTRA DROP SECTION DEPTH OVER 4' 2 UN FT $69.00 8118.00 5150.00 $300.00 $132.00 8284.00 8134.48 5288.8 54 2021.602-00003- CONNECT TO EXISTING MANHOLES (SAN) 1 EACH $405.00 8406.00 8000.00 5800.00 5544.00 8544.00 8832.03 8632.63 55 2021511.13086 M PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 36 3046 UN FT 831.91 597,110.96 833.03 5100,678.35 52620 879,779.00 825.66 578,134.70 66 2021.602-13086 8'X6' PVC WYE 13 EACH $45.90 5596.70 $45.00 $585.00 838.00 8494.00 $59.00 5774.80 57 262151143000- 6' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 560 UN FT $1056 85,808.00 $950 $5,225.00 518.00 59,900.00 $10.30 85.610.00 58 2021.602-00010- UFT STATION UPGRADE 1 EACH 52,80.00 $2.900.00 85.28.5.00 55,285.00 $5,025.00 55,025.00 $2,19424 $2,19424 69 2021.503.00206. 6' FORCE MAIN DUCTILE IRON PIPE 1120 UN FT 814.45 816,184.00 516.10 818,032.00 $3555 $39,818.00 $25.70 528,784.00 50 2811.602-00603. 6' GATE VALVE AND BOX 2 EACH $375.00 5760.00 6355.55 5711.10 $417.00 5834.00 8462.15 5924.30 61 2821502-00100- PLUG & ABANDON PIPE SEWER 2 EACH $120.00 5240.00 _ 5150.00 $300.00 $126.00 8250.00 5134.73 $209.46 62 2104.501-00086. REMOVE FORCE MAIN 160 LIN FT $9.60 $1,440.00 56.50 5975.00 56.36 $952.50 $17.03 3225450 IFACMUBIDS662110XLS Page 8 of 9 Extension of Bids STREET AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUMS CITY OF UNO LAKES, MINNESOTA ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA OSM PROJECT NO. 5521.10 Bid Date: January 18, 1996 10:00 A.M. Denotes corrected figure. Item Spec No DesaiptIon Quantity Unit 10TH BIDDER ARGON CONSTRUCTION CO.,IN Total Bid: 1555,004.84 Unit Price Item Total 11TH BIDDER RICHARD KNUTSON INC. Total Bld: 1572,016.36 Unit PAW Item Total 12TH BIDDER BROWN & CRIS, INC. Total Bid: 3662,637.60 Unit Pilo. Item Total 13TH BIDDER KOBER EXCAVATING, INC. Total Bld: 8707,346.61 Unit Price Item Total TOTAL SCHEDULE D: SANITARY SEWER 81110,117.66 3158,636.35 8182.701.50 $157,382.55 SCHEDULE E: MOBIUZATKON & CLEANUP 63 2021.501.00001- MOBILIZATION 1 LUMP SUM 85,000.00 $5,000.00 85,000.00 35,000.00 55,000.00 85,000.00 55,000.00 $5,000.00 64 2021.501.00004- CLEANUP 1 LUMP SUM $5,000.00 55,000.00 35,000.00 35,000.00 $5,000.00 55.000.00 35,000.00 85,000.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE Et MOBILIZATION & CLEANUP 810,000.00 510,000.00 810,000.00 310, 00 I SCHEDULE F: ALTERNATE IND 05 2621.506-07410. STANDARD 4' SANITARY SEWER MH (0.101 4 EACH 81.660.00 86,640.00 81,435.00 $5,740.00 81,421.00 55.684.00 51.589.71 06,358.84 86 2021.50347410. EXTRA 46' DIA M.N. DEPTH OVER 10' 20 LIN FT 578.00 81,550.00 885.00 51.700.00 869.00 51,380.00 3142.42 52,848.40 67 2521.511-13066 r PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 35 006 UN FT 530.31 820.166.15 831.18 820,734.70 $35.90 323,873.50 324.53 816,378.95 68 2021.511-13040. 4' PVC PIPE SEWER SCR 26 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT 31424 3569.60 38.70 8348.00 32206 8882.00 322.50 8900.00 60 2621.511.13060. 6' PVC PIPE SEWER SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 40 UN FT 315.04 3601.60 $9.50 3380.00 $2320 3928.00 323.37 3934.80 70 2621.502-13064- 8'X4' PVC WYE 2 EACH 336.00 372.00 336.50 373.00 330.00 300.00 36725 3134.50 71 2621.502-13066- 8'X0' PVC WYE 2 EACH 345.40 390.80 $50.00 3100.00 340.00 380.00 378.75 3157.50 72 2575.501.00010• SEEDING 1 ACRE 31.000.00 31,000.00 31,632.00 51,63200 81.650.00 51,650.00 51.320.00 51,320.00 73 0451.602.00040- GRANULAR FOUNDATION AND/OR BEDDING 100 TON 39.80 3960.00 312.50 81,250.00 30.10 810.00 38.47 3847.00 TOTAL SCHEDULE Ft ALTERNATE BID 331,370.16 331,957.70 334,547.50 529,879.99 TOTAL SCHEDULES A THROUGH E (BASE BID) 583',334.a9 3640,0 05 $143,080.40 3577 ,46622 TOTAL BID $665,004.94 35772,015.36 8852,637.00 3707,346.81 ItCML16105‘662110.1 8 Page 9 of 9 Council Member adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-02 RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - MARSHAN LAKE CONDOMINIUM STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVMENTS. WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the construction of Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Name C. W. Houle, Inc. S.J. Louis Construction Kadlec Excavating Bonine Excavating Forest Lake Contracting Northdale Construction Rehbein Excavating S. M. Hentges Ryan Contracting Arcon Excavating Richard Knutson Brown & Cris Kober Excavating Bid Amount $540,153.40 $575,238.00 $573,522.90 $593,157.45 $594,387.50 $594,926.36 $593,406.00 $630,402.00 $617,256.75 $633,334.69 $640,058.66 $648,090.40 $677,465.82 Bid Alternate Total Bid $24,215.00 $564,368.40 $18,039.00 $593,277.00 $29,435.00 $602,957.90 $24,430.85 $617,588.30 $29,175.00 $623,562.50 $28,832.18 $623,758.54 $35,608.50 $629,014.50 $18,450.00 $648,852.00 $36,805.00 $654,061.75 $31,670.15 $665,004.84 $31,957.70 $672,016.36 $34,547.50 $682,637.90 $29,879.99 $707,345.81 AND WHEREAS, it appears that C. W. Houle, Inc., 1300 West County Road I, Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 is the lowest responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with C. W. Houle, Inc., of Shoreview, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Lino Lakes for the Marshan Lake Condominium Street and Utility Improvements according to the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk for the base bid amount of $540,153.40. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 11th day of March, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was duly passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on March 11, 1996. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer AGENDA ITEM 6C STAFF ORIGINATOR: David Ahrens, Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: April 5, 1996 TOPIC: Resolution No. 96 26, Award Construction Contract - Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements INTRODUCTION: Sealed bids were received and opened on Wednesday, February 21, 1996, for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvement. City Council action is required to award a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder. BACKGROUND: The City Council ordered the improvement for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements at the January 22, 1996, Council Meeting. On February 21, 1996, ten sealed bids were received and opened with the followings results: Company S. R. Weidema, Inc. F. M. Frattalone Kadlec Excavating Richard Knutson Bonine Excavating S.J. Louis Construction Arcon Excavating C. W. Houle, Inc. Northdale Construction Brown & Cris Engineer's estimate Bid Amount $342,454.73 $379,512.50 $391,370.05 $393,322.09 $402,249.45 $422,266.30 $458,242.89 $472,648.55 $476,435.09 $478,010.76 $471,214.00 The City's consulting engineer, John Powell, TKDA, Inc., has performed a thorough reference check on S. R. Weidema, Inc., and has found that S. R. Weidema, Inc., has performed the same type of work in other communities. Based on Mr. Powell's review, S. R. Weidema, Inc. is a reputable contractor capable of performing the required work. Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Award Page 2 FINANCING SUMMARY: The construction costs for this project will be paid by the Area and Unit Funds collected from the Behm's Century Farms Development. - • The Development Contract has been signed by the developer and the Letter of Credit has been submitted to the City. PROJECT SCHEDULE: It is anticipated that construction will begin in April, 1996, and, per the Contract, will be substantially complete by May 31, 1996. OPTIONS: 1. Return to staff for further review. 2. Adopt Resolution Number 96 - 26, awarding a construction contract for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Resolution Number 96 - 26, awarding a construction contract for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements to S. R. Weidema, Inc., be adopted. IMMO MINN NMI .111111111 1 Ii1Ii11TJ i so 1"ivok i Spun y gew,er 1.12 :Es ©■©pow _ _ IS CO MO Oil— m ru r ew i J pop of, coo" M70 = c pOrei � ZIG 31. si 3114 IPS •- _It1 1r 1..1.(11 17,3 Subdivision Application -Check List IV. PREPARATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT Compliance Yes No ii-Qe_77),\AAk u4,3 Development 1. A letter from the developer stating his preference for method of installation of improvements: a. DEVELOPER & CITY INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS CITY INSTALLED IMPROVEMENTS ✓ 2. A Final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control and Development Plan shall be submitted by the developer for approval. This plan must incorporate all revisions made or discussed during preliminary plat review and subsequent discussions or negotiations. This plan will be made part of the Development Contract. THE GRADING WILL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL THESE PLANS ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 3. The engineer shall have a Development Financial Requirement Worksheet prepared and attached to the Development Agreement. 4. The developer will meet with the City Staff to finalize the terms of the Development ti/ 5. 5. Upon Finalization of the Development Contract the City Clerk shall have the Final Copy of the Contract signed by all appropriate parties. 6. Financial guarantees shall be posted with the City as outlined in the Development Contract. 7. Developer shall submit five (5) copies of the REF: Subdcklst 11/18/92 approved final grading, drainage, and erosion control and development plans to city staff. 6 FOURTH AVENUE TRUNK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 10952 BIDS OPENED: FEBRUARY 21, 1996 1:00 PM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS -ARCHITECTS -PLANNERS *DENOTES ERROR IN THIS LINE ON ORIGINAL BID ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE S. R. WEIDEMA, INC. UNIT PRICE UNIT EXTENSION PRICE F. M. FRATTALONE EXCAVATING UNIT EXTENSION PRICE EXTENSION SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION 2 CLEARING 3 GRUBBING 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING SAN. SEWER 5 8" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 6 10" PVC, SDR 35 SS 14'-16' 7 12" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 8 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 14'-16' 9 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 16'-18' 10 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 11 25" PVC, SDR 26 SS 20'-22' 12 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS THRU CASING 13 CONSTRUCT 4' DIA. MANHOLE 0'-10' 14 EXTRA DEPTH OF 4' DIA. MANHOLE 15 4" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 NYE BRANCH 16 6" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 17 4" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 18 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 19 30" DIAM. STELL CASING PIPE -JACKED 20 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER MAINS 21 DEWATERING WATERMAIN 1.00 LS $15,000.00 20.00 EA $200.00 20.00 EA $100.00 1.00 EA $1,200.00 35.00 LF $18.00 35.00 LF $20.00 35.00 LF $40.00 1360.00 LF $45.00 785.00 LF $47.00 805.00 LF $49.00 375.00 LF $51.00 120.00 LF $50.00 11.00 EA $1,300.00 82.00 LF $60.00 7.00 EA $50.00 1.00 EA $55.00 50.00 LF $9.00 20.00 LF $11.00 120.00 LF $160.00 3445.00 LF $0.60 1.00 LS $25,000.00 1 CONNECT TO EXIST. WATERMAIN 1.00 EA 2 6" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 20.00 LF 3 8" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 135.00 LF 4 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 3365.00 LF 5 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN THRU CASING 90.00 LF 6 6" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 4.00 EA 7 8" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 3.00 EA 8 12" MJ BFV 6.00 EA 9 6" MJ HUB HYDRANT 4.00 EA 10 1" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 105.00 LF 11 1-1/2" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 10.00 LF 12 1" CORPORATION STOP 7.00 EA 13 1-1/2" CORPORATION STOP 1.00 EA 14 1" CURB STOP W/BOX 7.00 EA 15 1-1/2" CURB STOP W/BOX 1.00 EA 16 MJ DIP FITTINGS 2046.00 LB 17 22" DIAM. STEEL CASING -JACKED 90.00 LF STORM SEWER $950.00 $25.00 $27.00 $35.00 $40.00 $400.00 $475.00 $900.00 $1,350.00 $10.00 $12.00 $75.00 $80.00 $75.00 $80.00 $2.00 $130.00 $15,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,200.00 $630.00 $700.00 $1,400.00 $61,200.00 $36,895.00 $39,445.00 $19,125.00 $6,000.00 $14,300.00 $4,920.00 $350.00 $55.00 $450.00 $220.00 $19,200.00 $2,067.00 $25,000.00 $254,157.00 $950.00 $500.00 $3,645.00 $117,775.00 $3,600.00 $1,600.00 $1,425.00 $5,400.00 $5,400.00 $1,050.00 $120.00 $525.00 $80.00 $525.00 $80.00 $4,092.00 $11,700.00 $158,467.00 $10,000.00 $100.00 $100.00 $1,160.00 $23.95 $25.40 $32.70 $27.00 $27.00 $27.00 $27.00 $27.00 $1,345.00 $73.00 $132.00 $155.00 $40.50 $22.00 $183.00 $0.40 $0.01 $337.00 $36.00 $28.00 $32.50 $14.00 $325.00 $450.00 $675.00 $1,280.00 $20.00 $22.00 $16.00 $38.00 $59.00 $91.00 $1.75 $142.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,160.00 $838.25 $889.00 $1,144.50 $36,720.00 $21,195.00 $21,735.00 $10,125.00 $3,240.00 $14,795.00 $5,986.00 $924.00 $155.00 $2,025.00 $440.00 $21,960.00 $1,378.00 $0.01 $158,709.76 $337.00 $720.00 $3,780.00 $109,362.50 $1,260.00 $1,300.00 $1,350.00 $4,050.00 $5,120.00 $2,100.00 $220.00 $112.00 $38.00 $413.00 $91.00 $3,580.50 $12,780.00 $146,614.00 $18,000.00 $85.00 $85.00 $2,500.00 $17.50 $19.00 $21.00 $22.00 $22.00 $25.00 $26.00 $14.00 $1,560.00 $65.00 $120.00 $150.00 $15.00 $16.50 $193.00 $0.40 $52,000.00 $18,000.00 $1,700.00 $1,700.00 $2,500.00 $612.50 $665.00 $735.00 $29,920.00 $17,270.00 $20,125.00 $9,750.00 $1,680.00 $17,160.00 $5,330.00 $840.00 $150.00 $750.00 $330.00 $23,160.00 $1,378.00 $52,000.00 $205,755.50 $600.00 $600.00 $17.00 $340.00 $18.00 $2,430.00 $23.80 $80,087.00 $20.00 $1,800.00 $445.00 $1,780.00 $580.00 $1,740.00 $830.00 $4,980.00 $1,400.00 $5,600.00 $9.00 $945.00 $13.00 $130.00 $65.00 $455.00 $90.00 $90.00 $100.00 $700.00 $150.00 $150.00 $1.25 $2,557.50 $152.00 $13,680.00 $118,064.50 1 REMOVE/DISPOSE OF EXIST. SEWER PIPE 2 27" RCP CLASS 3 STORM SEWER 3 15" CM PIPE CULVERT 4 18" CM PIPE CULVERT 5 27" RC FES 6 15" CM FES 7 18" CM FES 8 CONSTRUCT STD. 4' DIAM. CB STREET CONST. & RESTORATION 1 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 2 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 3 ROADSIDE SEEDING, COMPLETE 4 SODDING 5 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6 REMOVE/REPLACE BIT. DRIVEWAYS 120.00 LF 18.00 LF 130.00 LF 59.00 LF 1.00 EA 8.00 EA 3.00 EA 1.00 EA $10.00 $31.00 $16.00 $19.00 $600.00 $100.00 $110.00 $900.00 1745.00 TN $7.00 842.00 CY $8.00 2.01 AC $1,000.00 5420.00 SY $2.00 1.00 LS $10,000.00 400.00 SY $23.00 $1,200.00 $558.00 $2,080.00 $1,121.00 $600.00 $800.00 $330.00 $900.00 $7,589.00 $12,215.00 $6,736.00 $2,010.00 $10,840.00 $10,000.00 $9,200.00 $51,001.00 i21.111101•M 1•411.1q=••=•0111111. $471,214.00 $8.30 $30.50 $19.00 $20.70 $880.00 $66.00 $79.00 $1,047.00 $8.35 $0.01 $650.00 $1.35 $1,000.00 $12.50 a $996.00 $549.00 $2,470.00 $1,221.30 $880.00 $528.00 $237.00 $1,047.00 $7,928.30 $14,570.75 $8.42 $1,306.50 $7,317.00 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 fl MMINIMIMVII111===l1=11•111.1 $29,202.67 $342,454.73 $8.00 $36.00 $22.00 $24.00 $1,340.00 $150.00 $175.00 $1,000.00 $8.50 $8.00 $1,600.00 $1.45 $2,500.00 $26.50 $960.00 $648.00 $2,860.00 $1,416.00 $1,340.00 $1,200.00 $525.00 $1,000.00 $9,949.00 $14,832.50 $6,736.00 $3,216.00 $7,859.00 $2,500.00 $10,600.00 $45,743.50 il=3MMBINIIIMMISIERIMOMMIM $379,512.50 FOURTH AVENUE TRUNK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 10952 BIDS OPENED: FEBRUARY 21, 1996 1:00 PM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY *DENOTES KADLEC EXCAVATING OF MORA, INC. UNIT PRICE ERROR TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS -ARCHITECTS -PLANNERS IN THIS LINE ON ORIGINAL BID RICHARD KNUTSON, INC. UNIT EXTENSION PRICE BONINE EXCAVATING, INC. UNIT EXTENSION PRICE EXTENSION SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION 2 CLEARING 3 GRUBBING 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING SAN. SEWER 5 8" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 6 10" PVC, SDR 35 SS 14'-16' 7 12" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 8 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 14'-16' 9 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 16'-18' 10 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 11 25" PVC, SDR 26 SS 20'-22' 12 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS THRU CASING 13 CONSTRUCT 4' DIA. MANHOLE 0'-10' 14 EXTRA DEPTH OF 4' DIA. MANHOLE 15 4" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 16 6" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 17 4" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 18 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 19 30" DIAM. STELL CASING PIPE -JACKED 20 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER MAINS 21 DEWATERING WATERMAIN 1 CONNECT TO EXIST. WATERMAIN 2 6" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 3 8" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 4 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 5 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN THRU CASING 6 6" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 7 8" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 8 12" MJ BFV 9 6" MJ HUB HYDRANT 10 1" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 11 1-1/2" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 12 1" CORPORATION STOP 13 1-1/2" CORPORATION STOP 14 1" CURB STOP W/BOX 15 1-1/2" CURB STOP W/BOX 16 MJ DIP FITTINGS 17 22" DIAM. STEEL CASING -JACKED STORM SEWER 1.00 LS $12,500.00 20.00 EA $50.00 20.00 EA $50.00 1.00 EA $1,200.00 35.00 LF $22.50 35.00 LF $22.50 35.00 LF $30.00 1360.00 LF $30.00 785.00 LF $30.00 805.00 LF $40.00 375.00 LF $40.00 120.00 LF $20.50 11.00 EA $1,200.00 82.00 LF $85.00 7.00 EA $155.00 1.00 EA $175.00 50.00 LF $15.00 20.00 LF $17.50 120.00 LF $180.00 3445.00 LF $0.50 1.00 LS $50,000.00 1.00 EA $750.00 20.00 LF $15.00 135.00 LF $17.50 3365.00 LF $22.00 90.00 LF $20.50 4.00 EA $450.00 3.00 EA $585.00 6.00 EA $850.00 4.00 EA $1,250.00 105.00 LF $10.50 10.00 LF $12.50 7.00 EA $50.00 1.00 EA $100.00 7.00 EA $65.00 1.00 EA $125.00 2046.00 LB $1.75 90.00 LF $120.00 $12,500.00 $6,000.00 $1,000.00 $76.50 $1,000.00 $25.50 $1,200.00 $500.00 $787.50 $30.76 $787.50 $25.28 $1,050.00 $35.14 $40,800.00 $28.08 $23,550.00 $31.04 $32,200.00 $35.79 $15,000.00 $37.51 $2,460.00 $7.33 $13,200.00 $1,820.26 $6,970.00 $85.75. $1,085.00 $127.50 $175.00 $152.50 $750.00 $7.88 $350.00 $8.87 $21,600.00 $186.66 $1,722.50 $0.45 $50,000.00 $53,391.50 $228,187.50 $750.00 $300.00 $2,362.50 $74,030.00 $1,845.00 $1,800.00 $1,755.00 $5,100.00 $5,000.00 $1,102.50 $125.00 $350.00 $100.00 $455.00 $125.00 $3,580.50 $10,800.00 $109,580.50 $6,000.00 $1,530.00 $510.00 $500.00 $1,076.60 $884.80 $1,229.90 $38,188.80 $24,366.40 $28,810.95 $14,066.25 $879.60 $20,022.86 $7,031.50 $892.50 $152.50 $394.00 $177.40 $22,399.20 $1,550.25 $53,391.50 $224,055.01 $5,000.00 $50.00 $50.00 $16,786.00 $35.00 $29.00 $39.00 $33.00 $36.50 $40.20 $43.70 $8.75 $1,529.00 $84.00 $152.00 $177.00 $5.75 $6.50 $188.00 $0.50 $49,400.00 $234.94 $234.94 $500.00 $15.84 $316.80 $1b.35 $17.67 $2,385.45 $12.75 $22.54 $75,847.10 $18.60 $15.67 $1,410.30 $14.35 $395.35 $1,581.40 $322.00 $537.33 $1,611.99 $462.00 $612.29 $3,673.74 $976.00 $1,213.38 $4,853.52 $1,498.00 $7.44 $781.20 $6.60 $8.78 $87.80 $7.85 $33.43 $234.01 $14.00 $60.73 $60.73 $90.00 $90.49 $633.43 $48.00 $128.09 $128.09 $133.00 $1.56 $3,191.76 $2.00 $144.85 $13,036.50 $146.00 $110,068.76 $5,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $16,786.00 $1,225.00 $1,015.00 $1,365.00 $44,880.00 $28,652.50 $32,361.00 $16,387.50 $1,050.00 $16,819.00 $6,888.00 $1,064.00 $177.00 $287.50 $130.00 $22,560.00 $1,722.50 $49,400.00 $249,770.00 $500.00 $207.00 $1,721.25 $62,589.00 $1,291.50 $1,288.00 $1,386.00 $5, 856.00 $5,992.00 $693.00 $78.50 $98.00 $90.00 $336.00 $133.00 $4,092.00 $13,140.00 $99,491.25 1 REMOVE/DISPOSE OF EXIST. SEWER PIPE 2 27" RCP CLASS 3 STORM SEWER 3 15" CM PIPE CULVERT 4 18" CM PIPE CULVERT 5 27" RC FES 6 15" CM FES 7 18" CM FES 8 CONSTRUCT STD. 4' DIAM. CB STREET CONST. & RESTORATION 1 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 2 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 3 ROADSIDE SEEDING, COMPLETE 4 SODDING 5 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6 REMOVE/REPLACE BIT. DRIVEWAYS 120.00 LF $7.50 18.00 LF $25.00 130.00 LF $15.50 59.00 LF $17.05 1.00 EA $950.00 8.00 EA $75.00 3.00 EA $100.00 1.00 EA $1,500.00 1745.00 TN $8.50 842.00 CY $10.05 2.01 AC $650.00 5420.00 SY $1.50 1.00 LS $5,750.00 400.00 SY $18.50 $900.00 $450.00 $2,015.00 $1,005.95 $950.00 $600.00 $300.00 $1,500.00 $7,720.95 $14,832.50 $8,462.10 $1,306.50 $8,130.00 $5,750.00 $7,400.00 $45,881.10 $391,370.05 $4.70 $564.00 $42.82 $770.76 $15.37 $1,998.10 $18.56 $1,095.04 $1,166.77 $1,166.77 $81.24 $649.92 $110.55 $331.65 $1,701.75 $1,701.75 $12.75 $9.15 $653.82 $1.46 $4,500.00 $18.10 $8,277.99 $22,248.75 $7,704.30 $1,314.18 $7,913.20 $4,500.00 $7,240.00 $50,920.43 $393,322.19 $4.00 $33.60 $12.50 $14.15 $962.00 $96.00 $110.00 $1,170.00 $12.82 $8.75 $615.00 $1.45 $500.00 $17.20 $480.00 $604.80 $1,625.00 $834.85 $962.00 $768.00 $330.00 $1,170.00 $6,774.65 $22,370.90 $7,367.50 $1,236.15 $7,859.00 $500.00 $6,880.00 $46,213.55 $402,249.45 FOURTH AVENUE TRUNK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 10952 BIDS OPENED: FEBRUARY 21, 1996 1:00 PM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS -ARCHITECTS -PLANNERS *DENOTES ERROR IN THIS LINE ON ORIGINAL BID S.J. LOUIS CONSTRUCTION, INC. UNIT PRICE ARCON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. UNIT EXTENSION PRICE C.W. HOULE, INC. UNIT EXTENSION PRICE EXTENSION SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION 2 CLEARING 3 GRUBBING 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING SAN. SEWER 5 8" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 6 10" PVC, SDR 35 SS 14'-16' 7 12" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 8 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 14'-16' 9 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 16'-18' 10 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 11 25" PVC, SDR 26 SS 20'-22' 12 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS THRU CASING 13 CONSTRUCT 4' DIA. MANHOLE 0'-10' 14 EXTRA DEPTH OF 4' DIA. MANHOLE 15 4" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 16 6" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 17 4" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 18 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 19 30" DIAM. STELL CASING PIPE -JACKED 20 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER MAINS 21 DEWATERING WATERMAIN 1 CONNECT TO EXIST. WATERMAIN 2 6" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 3 8" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 4 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 5 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN THRU CASING 6 6" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 7 8" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 8 12" MJ BFV 9 6" MJ HUB HYDRANT 10 1" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 11 1-1/2" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 12 1" CORPORATION STOP 13 1-1/2" CORPORATION STOP 14 1" CURB STOP W/BOX 15 1-1/2" CURB STOP W/BOX 16 MJ DIP FITTINGS 17 22" DIAM. STEEL CASING -JACKED 1.00 LS $20,000.00 20.00 EA $52.00 20.00 EA $52.00 1.00 EA $1,100.00 35.00 LF $39.00 35.00 LF $40.00 35.00 LF $42.00 1360.00 LF $29.00 785.00 LF $31.00 805.00 LF $32.00 375.00 LF $34.00 120.00 LF $37.00 11.00 EA $1,600.00 82.00 LF $109.00 7.00 EA $136.00 1.00 EA $160.00 50.00 LF $28.00 20.00 LF $29.00 120.00 LF $190.00 3445.00 LF $0.50 1.00 LS $58,380.00 1.00 EA $550.00 20.00 LF $20.00 135.00 LF $22.00 3365.00 LF $25.00 90.00 LF $28.00 4.00 EA $430.00 3.00 EA $560.00 6.00 EA $790.00 4.00 EA $1,600.00 105.00 LF $11.00 10.00 LF $12.00 7.00 EA $49.00 1.00 EA $110.00 7.00 EA $93.00 1.00 EA $125.00 2046.00 LB $2.00 90.00 LF $148.00 $20,000.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 $1,100.00 $1,365.00 $1,400.00 $1,470.00 $39,440.00 $24,335.00 $25,760.00 $12,750.00 $4,440.00 $17,600.00 $8,938.00 $952.00 $160.00 $1,400.00 $580.00 $22,800.00 $1,722.50 $58,380.00 $246,672.50 $550.00 $400.00 $2,970.00 $84,125.00 $2,520.00 $1,720.00 $1,680.00 $4,740.00 $6,400.00 $1,155.00 $120.00 $343.00 $110.00 $651.00 $125.00 $4,092.00 $13,320.00 $125,021.00 $8,500.00 $150.00 $75.00 $1,100.00 $66.50 $68.00 $69.65 $48.78 $48.78 $59.73 $59.73 $36.28 $1,882.50 $87.75 $131.25 $157.50 $25.75 $26.60 $183.00 $0.50 $40,000.00 $300.00 $18.08 $20.43 $22.68 $21.25 $377.50 $516.00 $766.00 $1,350.00 $14.35 $27.85 $37.00 $137.50 $85.00 $8,500.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,100.00 $2,327.50 $2,380.00 $2,437.75 $66,340.80 $38,292.30 $48,082.65 $22,398.75 $4,353.60 $20,707.50 $7,195.50 $918.75 $157.50 $1,287.50 $532.00 $21,960.00 $1,722.50 $40,000.00 a® $295,194.60 $300.00 $361.60 $2,758.05 $76,318.20 $1,912.50 $1,510.00 $1,548.00 $4,596.00 $5,400.00 $1,506.75 $278.50 $259.00 $137.50 $595.00 $157.50 $157.50 $1.83 $3,744.18 $142.00 $12,780.00 $114,162.78 $20,000.00 $75.00 $75.00 $6,500.00 $33.00 $33.00 $37.00 $36.00 $39.00 $42.00 $45.00 $31.00 $1,570.00 $82.00 $230.00 $250.00 $17.00 $20.00 $205.00 $0.65 $56,300.00 $2,700.00 $16.00 $19.00 $25.00 $25.00 $610.00 $725.00 $915.00 $1,310.00 $17.00 $23.00 $50.00 $75.00 $85.00 $130.00 $2.30 $159.00 $20,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $6,500.00 $1,155.00 $1,155.00 $1,295.00 $48,960.00 $30,615.00 $33,510.00 $16,875.00 $3,720.00 $17,270.00 $6,724.00 $1,610.00 $250.00 $850.00 $400.00 $24,600.00 $2,239.25 $56,300.00 $277,328.25 $2,700.00 $320.00 $2,565.00 $84,125.00 $2,250.00 $2,440.00 $2,175.00 $5,490.00 $5,240.00 $1,785.00 $230.00 $350.00 $75.00 $595.00 $130.00 $4,705.80 $14,310.00 11MMI=Me $129,485.80 STORM SEWER 1 REMOVE/DISPOSE OF EXIST. SEWER PIPE 2 27" RCP CLASS 3 STORM SEWER 3 15" CM PIPE CULVERT 4 18" CM PIPE CULVERT 5 27" RC FES 6 15" CM FES 7 18" CM FES 8 CONSTRUCT STD. 4' DIAM. CB STREET CONST. & RESTORATION 1 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 2 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 3 ROADSIDE SEEDING, COMPLETE 4 SODDING 5 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6 REMOVE/REPLACE BIT. DRIVEWAYS 120.00 LF $5.00 18.00 LF $49.00 130.00 LF $15.00 59.00 LF $17.00 1.00 EA $800.00 8.00 EA $75.00 3.00 EA $86.00 1.00 EA $1,000.00 1745.00 TN $9.00 842.00 CY $9.00 2.01 AC $680.00 5420.00 SY $1.50 1.00 LS $3,500.00 400.00 SY $18.00 $600.00 $882.00 $1,950.00 $1,003.00 $800.00 $600.00 $258.00 $1,000.00 $7,093.00 $15,705.00 $7,578.00 $1,366.80 $8,130.00 $3,500.00 $7,200.00 $43,479.80 $422,266.30 $7.50 $52.00 $24.00 $26.00 $987.50 $115.00 $125.00 $1,500.00 $8.50 $8.50 $650.00 $1.35 $0.01 $20.00 $900.00 $936.00 $3,120.00 $1,534.00 $987.50 $920.00 $375.00 $1,500.00 $10,272.50 $14,832.50 $7,157.00 $1,306.50 $7,317.00 $0.01 $8,000.00 $38,613.01 $458,242.89 $23.00 $48.00 $28.00 $31.00 $2,100.00 $110.00 $130.00 $1,450.00 $9.80 $8.75 $1,100.00 $2.10 $6,300.00 $18.90 $2,760.00 $864.00 $3,640.00 $1,829.00 $2,100.00 $880.00 $390.00 $1,450.00 $13,913.00 $17,101.00 $7,367.50 $2,211.00 $11,382.00 $6,300.00 $7,560.00 s® $51,921.50 $472,648.55 FOURTH AVENUE TRUNK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA COMMISSION NO. 10952 BIDS OPENED: FEBRUARY 21, 1996 1:00 PM ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY *DENOTES ERROR TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS -ARCHITECTS -PLANNERS IN THIS LINE ON ORIGINAL BID NORTHDALE CONST. COMPANY, INC. BROWN & CRIS, INC. UNIT PRICE UNIT EXTENSION PRICE EXTENSION SANITARY SEWER 1 MOBILIZATION 2 CLEARING 3 GRUBBING 4 CONNECT TO EXISTING SAN. SEWER 5 8" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 6 10" PVC, SDR 35 SS 14'-16' 7 12" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 8 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 14'-16' 9 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 16'-18' 10 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS 18'-20' 11 25" PVC, SDR 26 SS 20'-22' 12 15" PVC, SDR 26 SS THRU CASING 13 CONSTRUCT 4' DIA. MANHOLE 0'-10' 14 EXTRA DEPTH OF 4' DIA. MANHOLE 15 4" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 NYE BRANCH 16 6" ON 15" PVC, SDR 26 WYE BRANCH 17 4" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 18 6" PVC, SDR 26 SERVICE PIPE 19 30" DIAM. STELL CASING PIPE -JACKED 20 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER MAINS 21 DEWATERING WATERMAIN 1 CONNECT TO EXIST. WATERMAIN 2 6" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 3 8" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 4 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN 5 12" DIP CL 50 WATERMAIN THRU CASING 6 6" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 7 8" MJ RES SEAT GATE VALVE 8 12" MJ BFV 9 6" MJ HUB HYDRANT 10 1" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 11 1-1/2" TYPE K COPPER TAP SERVICE 12 1" CORPORATION STOP 13 1-1/2" CORPORATION STOP 14 1" CURB STOP W/BOX 15 1-1/2" CURB STOP W/BOX 16 MJ DIP FITTINGS 17 22" DIAM. STEEL CASING -JACKED STORM SEWER 1.00 LS $10,000.00 20.00 EA $75.00 20.00 EA $75.00 1.00 EA $1,000.00 35.00 LF $31.93 35.00 LF $29.54 35.00 LF $35.53 1360.00 LF $50.09 785.00 LF $50.09 805.00 LF $50.09 375.00 LF $50.09 120.00 LF $38.72 11.00 EA $1,368.37 82.00 LF $87.47 7.00 EA $140.52 1.00 EA $168.48 50.00 LF $21.15 20.00 LF $22.14 120.00 LF $192.15 3445.00 LF $0.50 1.00 LS $51,901.20 1.00 EA $1,000.00 20.00 LF $18.05 135.00 LF $20.40 3365.00 LF $26.26 90.00 LF $35.66 4.00 EA $424.42 3.00 EA $558.61 6.00 EA $732.38 4.00 EA $1,264.89 105.00 LF $22.23 10.00 LF $32.52 7.00 EA $23.82 1.00 EA $124.29 7.00 EA $85.24 1.00 EA $142.87 2046.00 LB $2.24 90.00 LF $149.10 $10,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,000.00 $1,117.55 $1,033.90 $1,243.55 $68,122.40 $39,320.65 $40,322.45 $18,783.75 $4,646.40 $15,052.07 $7,172.54 $983.64 $168.48 $1,057.50 $442 .80 $23,058.00 $1,722.50 $51,901.20 $290,149.38 $1,000.00 $361.00 $2,754.00 $88,364.90 $3,209.40 $1,697.68 $1,675.83 $4,394.28 $5,059.56 $2,334.15 $325.20 $166.74 $124.29 $596.68 $142.87 $4,583.04 $13,419.00 $130,208.62 $7,800.00 $22.00 $22.00 $1,275.00 $37.70 $32.05 $42.40 $38.00 $44.00 $54.30 $69.20 $13.50 $1,511.00 $71.00 $125.00 $152.00 $8.75 $9.85 $196.00 $0.80 $45,900.00 $590.00 $18.60 $21.15 $28.50 $26.00 $416.00 $557.00 $675.00 $1,330.00 $10.00 $11.40 $24.45 $98.00 $67.00 $108.00 $1.85 $157.00 $7,800.00 $440.00 $440.00 $1,275.00 $1,319.50 $1,121.75 $1,484.00 $51,680.00 $34,540.00 $43,711.50 $25,950.00 $1,620.00 $16,621.00 $5,822.00 $875.00 $152.00 • $437.50 $197.00 $23,520.00 $2,756.00 $45,900.00 !WM 101•1111•111•1• $267,662.25 $590.00 $372.00 $2,855.25 $95,902.50 $2,340.00 $1,664.00 $1,671.00 $4,050.00 $5,320.00 $1,050.00 $114.00 $171.15 $98.00 $469.00 $108.00 $3,785.10 $14,130.00 s1•11:11!••=fo $134,690.00 1 REMOVE/DISPOSE OF EXIST. SEWER PIPE 2 27" RCP CLASS 3 STORM SEWER 3 15" CM PIPE CULVERT 4 18" CM PIPE CULVERT 5 27" RC FES 6 15" CM FES 7 18" CM FES 8 CONSTRUCT STD. 4' DIAM. CB STREET CONST. & RESTORATION 1 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 5 2 TOPSOIL BORROW (LV) 3 ROADSIDE SEEDING, COMPLETE 4 SODDING 5 TRAFFIC CONTROL 6 REMOVE/REPLACE BIT. DRIVEWAYS 120.00 LF $6.00 18.00 LF $37.99 130.00 LF $24.10 59.00 LF $25.74 1.00 EA $891.82 8.00 EA $96.01 3.00 EA $109.64 1.00 EA $1,524.75 1745.00 TN $9.50 842.00 CY $9.40 2.01 AC $1,134.00 5420.00 SY $1.42 1.00 LS $5,000.00 400.00 SY $17.60 $720.00 $683.82 $3,133.00 $1,518.66 $891.82 $768.08 $328.92 $1,524.75 Mi•=2•11•11MINNI= =AM $9,569.05 $16,577.50 $7,914.80 $2,279.34 $7,696.40 $5,000.00 $7,040.00 $46,508.04 ==e=11M=M1a $476,435.09 $5.95 $43.75 $25.30 $27.05 $845.00 $88.00 $102.00 $940.00 $8.55 $8.70 $691.00 $1.65 $28,000.00 $14.75 $714.00 $787.50 $3,289.00 $1,595.95 $845.00 $704.00 $306.00 $940.00 $9,181.45 $14,919.75 $7,325.40 $1,388.91 $8,943.00 $28,000.00 $5,900.00 $66,477.06 $478,010.76 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-26 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS FOR THE FOURTH AVENUE TRUNK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, Pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Name and Address Amount of Bid S. R. Weidema, Inc. $342,454.73 17600 113th Avenue North Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369 F. M. Frattalone $379,512.50 3066 Spruce Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55117 Kadlec Excavation of Mora, Inc. $391,370.05 Route 5, Box 81 Mora, Minnesota 55051-9301 Richard Knutson, Inc. $393,322.19 12585 Rhode Island Avenue South Savage, Minnesota 55378 Bonine Excavating, Inc. $402,249.45 12669 Meadowvale Road Elk River, Minnesota 55330 S. J. Louis Construction, Inc. $422,266.30 7284 County Road 138 P. O. Box 1373 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 Acron Construction Company, Inc. P. O. Box 57 Mora, Minnesota 55051 C. W. Houle, Inc. 1300 West County Road I Shoreview, Minnesota 55126 $458,242.89 $472,648.55 Name and Address Amount of Bid Northdale Construction Company, Inc. $476,435.09 14450 Northdale Blvd. Rogers, Minnesota 55374 Brown and Cris, Inc. $478,010.76 East Frontage Road of 1-35 19740 Kenrick Avenue Lakeville, Minnesota 55044 Engineer's Estimate $471,214.00 AND WHEREAS, it appears that S. R. Weidema, Inc., Maple Grove, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with S. R. Weidema of Maple Grove, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Lino Lakes for the Fourth Avenue Trunk Utility Improvements, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 11th day of March, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson Clerk -Treasurer The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on , 1996. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer STAFF ORIGINATOR DATE AGENDA ITEM NO. 6D John Powell. TKDA TOPIC April 5. 1996 Consideration of Resolution No. 96-41 Ordering the Improvement, Approving the Plans and. Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the Birch Street Trunk Watermain Inprovemente BACK GROUND This project addresses the need for a trunk watermain extension to serve the businesses to be located in the Clearwater Creek Development Center near the southeast quadrant of the I-35E/Main Street interchange. The watermain would be extended to this area from the existing trunk watermain on Birch Street near Sherman Lake Road. The plans for this project were ordered by the City Council on February 12, 1996 and a draft set of plans have been submitted to the City staff for their review. Construction of these improvements is scheduled to begin near the end of May, 1996. The funding source for this project is the City's Area/Unit (Enterprise) Fund, no assessments are proposed as part of this project. Please note that as the City initiated this project as a trunk system improvement, a 4/5 majority vote is required to order the improvement. OPTIONS: 1. Approve Resolution No. 96-41 Ordering the Improvement, Approving the Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the Birch Street Trunk Watermaln Improvements. 2. Order the Improvement but delay action on the Plans and Specifications pending further review by staff. 3. Return the entire matter to staff for further review. RECO NDATION: Option No. 1 Approve Resolution No. 96-41 Ordering the Improvement, Approving the Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the Birch Street Trunk Watermain Improvements. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 96-41 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT, APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR BIDS FOR THE BIRCH STREET TRUNK WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, a resolution of the Lino Lakes City Council adopted the 12th day of February, 1996 fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement and, WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 25th day of March, 1996, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, AND WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on the 12th day of February, 1996, TKDA has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement and has presented such plans and specifications to the City for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted the 12th day of February, 1996. 2. Such plans and specifications are hereby approved. 3. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for the bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two days, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened and bids will be received by the City Clerk until 1:00 P.M. on Wednesday, May 8, 1996, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, will be tabulated and will be considered by the Council at 6:30 P.M. on Monday, May 13, 1996 in the Council Chambers. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given the opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the Clerk for five (5) percent of the amount of such bid. Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of April, 1996. John L. Landers, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member _ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above is a correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council on , 1996. Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer AGENDA ITEM 7 STAFF ORIGINATOR Randy Schumacher, City Administrator DATE 5 April 1996 TOPIC Appointments Due to a clerical error, it has been deemed necessary to rescind the action taken at the March 25th Council meeting concerning appointments, and place this issue on the April 22nd City Council Agenda. Rescind the motion made at the March 25th Council meeting regarding annual appointments, and place the issue of annual appointments on the April 22 Council agenda. 1. AGENDA ITEM NO, 9A STAFF ORIGINATOR Marilyn Anderson, Clerk -Treasurer DATE April 4,1996 TOPIC Consideration of Renewal of Gambling License for Centennial Fire Relief Association BACKGROUND: A gambling license was issued to the Centennial Fire Relief Association to conduct lawful gambling at Miller's on Main beginning June 1, 1995. The license will expire on June 1, 1996 and they have requested that their gambling license be renewed. The Centennial Fire Relief Association has been conducting lawful gambling in the City of Lino Lakes since the lawful gambling laws were enacted. Since the Centennial Fire District serves three (3) communities (Lino Lakes, Centerville, Circle Pines), proceeds from their gambling activities support many activities in all three communities. Specifically during the past year, the Centennial Fire Relief Association gambling proceeds have supported the school patrol programs, the drug free program, the Boy Scout Troops, and the annual Safety Camp at Rice Lake Elementary School. They have purchased bicycles for police patrol in addition to setting aside money for the purchase of equipment for the Centennial Fire District During the past year, money was also set aside to upgrade some traffic signs in this commtmity. All of the proceeds from lawful gambling conducted by the Centermial Fire Relief Association are returned to the community The Centennial Fire Relief Association has complied with all the regulation of the Lino Lakes gambling ordinance. OPTIONS 1. Adopt a motion approving to renew the gambling license. 2. Return the matter to staff for further information. RECOMMENDATION Adopt option 1 Northwest STATE OF MINNESOTA GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION LG214PPR PRINTED:O1/02/96 IFOR BOARD USE ONLY AMT PAID CHECK NO. DATE LICENSE NUMBER: B-03017-003 EFFECTIVE DATE: 05/01/95 EXPIRATION DATE: 06/30/96 NAME OF ORGANIZATION: ian�snniw) Firs .Ss . GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION NAME OF ESTABLISHMENT WHERE GAMBLING WILL BE CONDUCTED Millers on Main 8001 Lake Dr Lino Lakes 55014 COUNTY Anoka IS THE PREMISES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS?: Y LESSOR INFORMATION •"bOES YOUR ORGANIZATION OWN THIS SITE?: No IE NO, LIST THE LESSOR: James Miller 7851 Knoll Dr Lino Lakes MN 55014 NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER (WHEN NOT LESSOR): /00 0 SQUARE FEET PER MONTH: 36 AMOUNT PAID FOR RENT PER MONTH: Ag59- SQUARE FEET PER OCCASION: 0 AMOUNT PAID PER OCCASION: 0 BINGO ACTIVITY BINGO IS CONDUCTED ON THIS PREMISES: No IF YES, REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS FOR REQUIRED ATTACHMENT STORAGE ADDRESS 14042 Lake Dr Forest Lake MN 55025 Firstar -:Centennial 1 Commercial St Circle Pines MN 55014 BANK INFORMATION GAMBLING BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER: 1016989 ON THE LINES PROVIDED BELOW LIST THE NAME;..' ADDRESS AND, TITLE OF AT.LEAST TWO PERSONS:,; AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND MAKE -:DEPOSITS AND -WITHDRAWALS -FOR -THE GAMBLING - ACCOUNT. THE -ORGANIZATION'S TREASURER MAY NOT:.HANDLE-: GAMBLING' FUNDS. /1-40, im7!bP /74% PeWier 1�K a iee• mi /U j 1S4nr7 e r r 696/ Glrnvi LHServ114i )n V �So3R f�/�f0 f.a•KoS� hIA% ' grICnadVa..-N. i 7/417 ?r 'lt., Ltday Zen'iCI// �,... ,S'5 _._03: 8' /Irr,v7�`iy `At I / /1375- G ue1ec. /1en1 •tryi /k rim/ - 503? (BE SURE TO COMPLETE THE REVERSESIDE OF THIS APPLICATION) THIS FORM WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE IN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT (I.E.::LARGE PRINT, BRAILLE) UPON REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGMENT', GAMBLING PREMISES AUTHORIZATION I HEREBY GIVE CONSENT TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD, OR AGENTS OF THE BOARD,OR;THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OR PUBLIC SAFETY, OR AGENTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS, TO ENTER THE PREMISES -TO 'ENFORCE THE LAW .• BANK RECORDS INFORMATION THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD IS AUTHORIZED TO INSPECT THE .BANK RECORDS OF THE GAMBLING ACCOUNT WHENEVER NECESSARY TO FULFILL REQUIREMENTS OF CURRENT GAMBLING RULES AND STATUTES. I DECLARE THAT: • I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION AND ALL INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD; • ALL INFORMATION IS TRUE, ACCURATE AND COMPLETE;; • ALL OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION HAS BEEN FULLY DISCLOSED; • I AM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE ORGANIZATION; • I ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAIR AND LAWFUL OPERATION OF ALL GAMBLING ACTIVITIES TO. BE CONDUCTED; • I WILL FAMILIARIZE MYSELF WITH THE LAWS OF MINNESOTA GOVERNING LAWFUL GAMBLING AND RULES OF THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND AGREE,' IF ISSUED A PREMISES PERMIT, TO ABIDE THOSE LAWS AND RULES, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO THEM; *-.ANY CHANGES IN APPLICATION INFORMATION WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE CHANGE; • I UNDERSTAND THAT FAILURE TO PROVIDE REQUIRED INFORMATION OR PROVIDING FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION MAY RESULT IN THE DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF THE PREMISES PERMIT. 8I jze LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1. THE CITY* MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATION IF THE GAMBLING PREMISES IS LOCATED WITHIN CITY LIMITS. 2. THE COUNTY** AND TOWNSHIP** MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATION IF THE GAMBLING PREMISES IS LOCATED WITHIN A TOWNSHIP. : 3. FOR TOWNSHIPS THAT ARE UNORGANIZED OR UNINCORPORATED, THE COUNTY** IS REQUIRED TO ATTACH A LETTER TO THIS APPLICATION INDICATING THE TOWNSHIPS STATUS. 4. THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT (CITY OR COUNTY) MUST PASS A RESOLUTION SPECIFICALLY APPROVING OR DENYING THIS APPLICATION. S. A COPY OF THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESOLUTION APPROVING THIS APPLICATION MUST BE ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION. 6. IF THIS APPLICATION IS DENIED BY THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT, IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD. TOWNSHIP: BY SIGNATURE BELOW, THE TOWNSHIP ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS APPLYING FOR A PREMISES PERMIT WITHIN TOWNSHIP LIMITS.. OF CHI OFFICER DATE CITY* OR commilicH.:: T;';'44Z TA vit:d CITY OR COUNTYNAME •i• -;:,,TOWNSHIP**.; J.JiTOWNSHIPDNAME-4 rifa,4405/1.-/ • SIGNATURE ritA4: ERSON RECEIVING APPLICATION 1.777TUR7OFTPE SRON RECEIVING APPLICATION TITLE --- DATE REFER TOTHE CHECKLIST FOR REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS MAIL TO: GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD 1711 W COUNTY RD'S SUITE 306 13 ROSEVILLE, MN 55113 DATE RECEIVED: LGZ02 (09rosros) Minnesota Lawful Gambling LEASE AGREEMENT FOR PULL -TAB, PADDLEWHEEL, TIPBOARIA AND/OR RAFFLE ACTIVITY ATA PERMITTED PREMISES Name of Legal Owner of Property ...Jame." /%71/i-er 72-5/ .'iv// hr. 4 / L.) L -L , /77N ....s-...,---0.4. (64,2) 74W- 68/9 Name of Lessor Street Address City Zip Daytime Phone (This may or may not be the same as the Legal Owner of the Property) ar...Ys 177; lick 7Bs/ Xiwl/ hr: L1 Lc.hesI Street Address City Zip Daytime Phone Name of Leased Premises tae Street Address • mN s -So/ y (6/4) 781-6(/9 City Zip Daytime Phone Name of Lessee ame of Organization Leasing the premises) �-� 1-0/Y(61.2) -74 3 — 7/40,6 GCB License # of Organization Daytime Phone Type of gambling activity (check all that apply) that will be conducted at this gambling premises. ,® Rattles ES Paddlewheels oPull-tabs Ea- Tipboards Total rent cannot exceed S1,000 per month for all non -bingo lease agreements with your organization for this gambling premises. An organhation may not pay rent to itself or to any of its affiliates for space used for the conduct of lawful gambling. Rent to be paid per month S List dimensions of all areas leased by your organization for the conduct of gambling activity checked above, including storage. The leased areas are: feet by S feet for a total of 30 square feet feet by feet fora total of square feet feet by .. feet for a total of square feet. feet by feet for a total of square feet Storage „3 feet by . feet fora total of 6 square feet. Storage feet by feet fora total of square feet Combined total 36 square footage Subndt`a'sketch (drawing) of the' gambling prembes. ` This must show the location of your organization's leased area(s) for the conduct of lawful gambling; including areas leased for storage of your gambling product on this gambling premises. Be sure to write'the dimensions of the leased areas on the sketch. THE DIMENSIONS ON THE SIETCHMUST BE THE •SAME AS -THOSE LISTED ABOVE MN Statute 349.18 Subdi 1 states that the. term of,the lease may not begin before the effective date of the premises permit and must expire on the same day `that the premises permit expires. ONLY write an effective date in this area of the lease if this is a renegotiated lease agreement oocuring during the teen of your current premises permit. Effective Date for Amended Lease Agreements % / f / 96, By agreeing to the terms of this kase, it is mutually agreed that: The owner of the property or the lessor may not manage gambling at the pre- mises; The lessor of the premises, his or her immediate family, and any agents or employees of the lessee may not partici- pate as players in the conduct of lawful gambling on the leased premises; The lessor and the lessee do not have a direct or indirect financial interest in the distribution or manufacture of gambling equipment The organization must obtain an organi- zation license, gambling manager license and a premises permit from the Lam- bing Control Board. The organization wil be responsible for complying with the laws and rules of lawful gambling; The term of the lease shall be concur- rent with the premises permit The lessor of the premises will allow the Board or agents of the Board, the Commis- sioner of Public Safety or agents of the com- missioner, or the Commissioner of Revenue or agents of the commissioner, and law en- forcement personnel to inspect the premises at any reasonable time, and permit the organization to conduct lawful gambling at the premises ac cordng to the terms of this lease. The lessor may not impose any con- ditions on the organization regarding dis- tributors of gambling equipment, services, or the use of profits; The lease shall be terminated for any ilegal gambling violations occurring on the pre- mises; i The organization wM be responsible for en- suring that the lessor's business activities are not conducted on the leased premises; LG2a2 (09/05/95) The lessor of the premises shah provide the lessee access to the permitted pre- mises during any time reasonable and necessary to conduct lawful gambling on the premises and as agreed upon in this lease; The lessor shall not modify, terminate or refuse to renew this lease in whole or in part because the organization reported to a state or local law enforcement au- thority or the Board the occurrence at the site of illegal gambling activity in which the organization did not participate; and The organization must have, at the gam- bling premises, a current inventory of gambling equipment, a sketch with di- mensions of the premises available for review, and a dear physical separation or divider between the lessee's gambling equipment and the lessor's business equipment List any other conditions or restrictions that wl l be induded as part of the lease. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Be sure both parties date and initial any attachments to this lease. This lease is the total and only agreement between the lessor and the organization conducting lawful gambling activities other than bingo and pull -tab dispensing devices. There is no other agreement and no other consideration required between the parties as to the lawful gambling and other matters related to this lease. Any changes in this lease must be submitted to .the Gambling Control Board within 10 days of the change. Signature of Lessor Date . 3//%9G3//%9G. S f Organization 00,4 (lessee) Date // o� ` 96 of Lessor Signatory i , , 1 Prr .aCK f , Title of Lessee Signatory m Y4 dee/- a r it /4,-,e. A copy of this lease and a sketch, with dimensions must be submitted with the premises pew appikation or premises permit renewal or when any change; in the lease agreement occur:.: This publication will be made available in alternative format (Le. large print, braille) upon request. _ Questions'on this form should be directed to the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at (612)639-4000. Hearing impaired individuals using a TDD may call the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 in the Greater Minnesota Area or 297-5353 in the Metro Area. The information requested on this form will be used by the Gambling Control Board (GCB) to determine your compli- ance with MinnesotaStatues and rules governing lawful .. 'ling activities. All of the information that you supply on this form will become public information when received . the GCB. s 0.4 it' AZ• r 01 WAT e)Lee '10.4-11c. • -••• 7:ZiltA1E .1 k t t -,1"1z -y 641—cps" *S -t12 -Y tc‘S 67r ITh CAPoP'r . I _ .21J -1z-rAur"2-4,441-. hoot mit46(2.— Owwu.t. 1,INOLr-Kol . I • ---A) • A-14 PS 1Z -SE . - 531 •VloS • e? • $5,1 . s 1)— 16 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE : March 13, 1996 TIME STARTED : 6:32 p.m. TIME ENDED : 10:37 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Gelbmann, Herr, Johnson, MEMBERS ABSENT : Schaps, Schones ALSO PRESENT Planning Coordinator Wyland, Planning Consultant Kirmis, Economic Development Director Wessel, City Engineer Ahrens. I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Guy Herr made a MOTION to approve the minutes of the February 14, 1996 meeting as submitted and was supported by Rick Gelbmann. Motion carried 4-0-1. (Al Robinson abstained as he was not present at the February 14, 1996 meeting). III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Acting Chair Johnson noted for the audience that Item VD., Public Hearing was removed from the agenda per request of the applicant. He then suggested changing the order of the agenda action items to B., C., A. and E. IV. OPEN MIKE: Acting Chair Johnson declared the Open Mike portion of the meeting open at 6:36 p.m. Hearing no public comments at this time, Al Robinson made a MOTION to close the Open Mike portion of the meeting at 6:37 p.m. and was supported by Thomas Mesich. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. ACTION ITEMS: B. Site Plan Review, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, Ware Road Planning Coordinator Wyland briefly reviewed the staff report regarding the request to construct a building resembling a single family home on Outlots A and B of the Pine Ridge 3rd Addition that will house a MCES Sanitary Sewer Lift Station. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Ms. Wyland recommended approval of the site plan review subject to the following conditions: 1. Proper building permits be obtained prior to construction. 2. The landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. Outlot A and B shall be maintained as a single family residence at all times with a well trimmed and maintained yard area. 3. Site drainage plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer 4. Trash generated from the site shall be stored in an enclosed container located in the garage area of the structure. 5. Noise levels generated from the use of the building shall be within required MPCA Standards for a residential area. Mr. Robinson asked if this would be located adjacent to the ponding area and noted his concern with erosion control. Ms. Wyland stated there are ponding areas behind the proposal to the north and south. She noted the lots are quite large. Acting Chair Johnson noted the plan included silver maple trees on the northeast end of the property. He stated he felt there should be more of a buffer on that edge of the property. Planning Coordinator Wyland stated the forester had not yet approved the landscape plan. Mr. Herr noted there was a stipulation for the noise level generated. He asked if there was equipment in the building which would generate a significant amount of noise. Mr. Bill Johnson from MCES stated the building houses a standby generator which will run the pumps in case of electrical failure. This generator will be quite noisy when it runs. He noted maintenance crews come by weekly and make sure the generator is operational. He stated he could not speculate the decibel level on the outside of the building. 2 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 He noted the building will be cavity wall construction and face brick which will be sound deadening. The exhaust louver for the generator faces to the north and there are no homes close in that direction. Mr. Herr asked if the City had any restrictions in place for maximum decibel levels. Ms. Wyland stated the City uses the MPCA standards which go into great detail regarding decibels. She stated the MCES is required to obtain a permit from the MPCA. Mr. Johnson from MCES stated this lift station will replace the lift station currently located northeast of Laurene Avenue. That generator has been in place for twenty years and is mounted on a trailer. That station will be conveyed to the City and the portable generator will be removed on completion of the proposed lift station. Mr. Gelbmann asked if the older lift station will remain in operation. City Engineer Ahrens stated it would remain in operation. Mr. Mesich asked if the tanks housed in the building contained hazardous chemicals. Mr. Johnson stated the tank in the building injected chemicals to protect against erosion and provide odor control. Some possible chemicals included ferrous chloride and dioxin. He did not know if the chemicals were hazardous but he knew they were not flammable. He noted there will be a diesel fuel storage tank in the building which is flammable. Mr. Mesich asked if the building would be sprinklered. Mr. Johnson stated his initial interpretation was that it would not be necessary. Ms. Wyland noted the Building Inspector has not yet performed the inspection for issuance of the building permit. If it is found that the State Building code requires sprinklers, the City will require it. Mr. Gelbmann asked how frequently the chemicals in the tank are replenished. 3 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Johnson stated he thought the tanks only required filling once per month. He stated an option being considered was to eliminate the chemicals and add them later if odor complaints • were received from residents or if corrosion was noticed. Al Robinson made a MOTION to approve the site plan review for the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, 6290 Ware Road subject to the 5 stated conditions and was supported by Guy Herr. All voted in favor. Motion carried. C. Site Plan Review / Minor Subdivision Progressive Engineering, 450 Apollo Drive Economic Development Director Brian Wessel explained this was the first of five projects which would be discussed at the next three meetings. He briefly outlined Progressive Engineering's background. He recommended approval of the proposed site plan and minor subdivision. Planning Coordinator Wyland briefly reviewed the staff report regarding a request to construct a 16,000 square foot office/manufacturing facility in the Apollo Business Park on a parcel of property approximately 2.5 acres in size. Ms. Wyland recommended approval of the Site Plan Review and Minor Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. Proper building permits be obtained prior to any construction. 2. The applicant shall sign a development agreement and post financial guarantees as specified by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. The development agreement shall include provisions for a shared driveway. 3. The City Engineer shall review and approve the grading, utility and drainage plans. 4. Proper sign permits shall be obtained prior to installation of any signage. 5. The City Forester shall review and approve the landscape plan. 4 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 6. Roof top heating and ventilating units shall be screened and/or blended with the design coloring of the building. 7. The parking area shall be constructed according to City Standards including concrete curb, gutter, bituminous paving and handicapped spaces as required by the ADA Rules and Regulations. Mr. Robinson asked if the project was being funded by TIF assistance. Mr. Wessel stated all light industrial in the Apollo District was provided TIF assistance. The provided amount was to cover land and assessments at 10,000 square feet/per acre. The building proposed is approximately 16,000 square feet which would result in approximately 1.7 acres of incremental assistance. They would finance the remaining .6 acres themselves. The proposed expansion purchase would not include TIF assistance. Mr. Wessel explained this was a new TIF district in 1995. Mr. Mesich asked if hazardous chemicals were used in the manufacturing process. Harry Chappell, owner of Progressive Engineering, stated the company uses a small amount of chemicals. The cutting oil used in the machining process is bio -degradable and the machine lubricant is an oil-based substance which is recycled. Mr. Mesich asked how the bio -degradable substance is disposed of. Mr. Chappell explained they use an evaporator to reduce the waste . He stated they have had the equipment for a couple of years and still have not filled one barrel. Acting Chair Johnson stated he liked the design and was glad to see the diversity in the industrial buildings. Mr. Chappell explained the exterior of the building would be an aggregate brown color with off -set treatments. The front entrance will be constructed of glass and colored metal to match the trim on the windows and doors. 5 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Robinson asked if there would be a sign located on the back side of the building facing Highway 35W. Mr. Chappell stated the building in Blaine had a sign which was one foot high with the name of the company. He felt it may be appropriate to place this same type of sign on the back side of the building. Mr. Herr stated he felt a lighting plan should be required and included as a condition. Guy Herr made a MOTION to approve the site plan review for Progressive Engineering, 450 Apollo Drive with the 7 stated conditions and an additional condition 8; A lighting plan shall be provided to be approved by staff, and was supported by Al Robinson. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Al Robinson made a MOTION to approve the minor subdivision for Progressive Engineering, 450 Apollo Drive and was supported by Thomas Mesich. All voted in favor. Motion carried. C. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING - 96-1, Rezoning,Minor Subdivision, Site Plan Review, Centennial School District, Elm Street City Engineer Ahrens explained the Planning and Zoning Board had continued this item at the previous meeting and directed the Engineering Consultant, City staff and School District to meet with the residents and present the options available for this project. This joint meeting was held on February 22, 1996 and approximately 75 residents were in attendance. On March 4, 1996, an open house meeting was held and 31 comment cards were received from residents in attendance. Mr. Ahrens reported the School District was requesting action on the site plan this evening as the site plan will not change depending on which road plan is approved. Acting Chair Johnson opened the public hearing 7:14 p.m. Planning Consultant Kirmis briefly reviewed the staff report regarding concerns which were addressed at. the February 14, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board meeting. 6 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Kirmis recommended approval of the Rezoning from Light Industrial, LI and Single Family Residential, R1 to PSP, Public Semi -Public subject to the following conditions: A. Amend Land Use Plan to reflect the proposed use. B. Subject to Final Plat Approval Mr. Kirmis recommended approval of the Subdivision creating two parcels, one parcel for the school site and one parcel for the Tight industrial site with the condition that a preliminary and final plat be submitted to the City Council for approval which includes all the necessary drainage and utility easements as recommended by the City Engineer. Mr. Kirmis briefly reviewed the issues and discussions involved with the site plan review. Mr. Kirmis recommended Site Plan approval subject to the following conditions: 1. On site traffic control signage must identify entry, exits, one - ways, no parking along fire hydrants, etc. 2. The site plan dated 3/7/96 be made part of the permit approval. 3. Signs for the proposed site are in compliance with the Sign Ordinance. 4. The tree preservation plan and landscape/fencing plan dated 3/7/96 be made a part of this permit and reviewed and approved by the City Forester. 5. Grading, drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for his review and approval. 6. A comprehensive lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer - there shall be no lighting, except the hockey rink, of any athletic fields. 7. Proper building permits be obtained prior to construction. 7 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 8. The City Council adopt a roadway alignment to serve the middle school facility which would not alter the submitted site plan. 9. The City finds no adverse environmental impact and there is no need for an EIS as related to the EAW. Mr. Kirmis recommended approval of a conditional use permit to allow construction of a middle school in a PSP Zoning District and subject to all conditions of the site plan review. Acting Chair Johnson noted the road alignment is the decision of the City Council not the Planning and Zoning Board. David Mitchell, OSM Engineering presented four alternatives for the road alignment, two of which he found acceptable from an engineering standpoint. He stated he felt from the public safety standpoint it was imperative that a signal light be installed on Lake Drive. Mr. Mitchell explained Option A would provide realignment of Elm Street to the north along the east side of the school site back to Highway 49. This would eliminate Elm Street as it exists between 4th Avenue and Highway 49. This option would guarantee installation of a stop light. Mr. Mitchell explained Option B is similar to Option A except that it would provide a one-way portion of Elm Street between 4th Avenue and Lake Drive. This would provide access for individual property owners who wished to access Highway 49 from the area south of Elm Street. This option would also warrant a stop light. Mr. Mitchell explained Option C is similar except it will maintain Elm Street as it exists and provide access from Elm Street to 4th Avenue to the north. There would be no access to Highway 49 coming south out of the school site. All eastbound traffic on Elm Street will access the school site on 4th Avenue. Mr. Mitchell explained Option D provides total separation of traffic. It leaves Elm Street as it is and provides no connection to the school site from Elm Street. A cul-de-sac would be installed to terminate 4th Avenue at the southern most access to the school site. Mr. Mitchell noted Options C and D would not warrant a stop light. 8 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Troy Weigold, Cinnamon Teal Court, distributed a graph illustrating data he and other neighbors had collected from a survey of residents in the Wenzel Farm area. Almost all of the residents preferred option D. Mr. Weigold felt OSM Engineering had failed to work with the residents in reducing the number of design options and coming to an agreement on the design. Mr. Weigold noted OSM had presented an option 5 or C1. Some of the residents were in favor of this option. He stated he felt OSM is not addressing the citizens concerns but only the concerns of the Superintendent. He stated OSM has not presented data of the impact of any of the designs on the intersection of 2nd Avenue and Elm Street. He expressed his concern with the trees on site. He questioned if the trees removed could be sold for firewood to help fund the road project. He felt there was not enough specific information being provided to make an informed decision. Kim Sullivan, 7132 Whippoorwill Lane, stated she agreed with much of what Mr. Weigold had expressed. She felt an easier solution would have been obtained if the City would have discussed this project with the citizens in the earlier planning stages. She stated she believed Option C1 had been developed with the input of the citizens. 100% of the citizens are not in favor of option C1 but it will produce the minimal impact to the most people. She stated the citizens are not fighting placement of a signal Tight on Highway 49. Citizens are concerned with the safety issue. She was concerned that a pedestrian survey had not been completed. She felt this was necessary and believed the City would have full resident support. She advocated a flashing yellow light at the intersection of Elm Street and Highway 49 to mark the crosswalk. She stated the citizens did not want a lot of traffic on Elm Street and Elm Street was not in condition to support a lot of additional traffic. She asked that a condition be included for no parking on Elm Street. Ms. Sullivan stated she was concerned with the balance of residential, commercial and industrial properties in the overall development plan of the area. She asked that the Tree Preservation Plan be reviewed carefully before approval. She was concerned that a buffer be provided between the school and the citizens. She noted the Minnesota Department of Education Facilities had submitted their Planning Design Guidelines of a comparison for the proposed athletic fields. She suggested this be taken into consideration but the City look at the site individually and make the best decision based on what would fit in this space and design. 9 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Steve Wurscher, 7132 Gray Heron Drive, stated he had been asked to represent the citizens at the joint meeting. He felt the proposed plan was making a road more dangerous to rationalize a stop light. He did not believe MnDOT would feel this was a good idea. The residents do not want Elm Street closed. He asked that the Planning and Zoning Board consider the neighbors as well as the School District. He noted the property owners in the area were concerned with the decrease in property values. Angela Weigold, Cinnamon Teal Court, stated she felt if there was enough money available to turn Elm Street into a four lane road, there should be enough money available to create a cul-de-sac and not intermingle the school, residential and light industrial traffic. Dave Radik, 7184 Cinnamon Teal Court, stated last night he saw the new plan which created a "freeway" on Elm Street. He expressed concern for the children in the area. He felt the cul-de-sac was the best option and would keep the citizens in the area happy. Angela Weigold noted OSM has indicated there will be difficulties with stacking of the buses and cars. She suggested the designers be more creative and find a way to design the site so the neighborhood would not have to have the impact of the increased traffic. She felt it was not fair to force Cinnamon Teal Court and Gray Heron Drive to withstand the full impact of the increased traffic. Daryl Mullens, 7199 Cinnamon Teal Court, stated he had been one of the persons out obtaining the survey information. He stated the residents he had talked to were concerned about the extra cost incurred with the cul-de-sac option but were also concerned with the traffic flow. He felt the City and School District needed to work together to determine the best possible solution. Donald Dunn, 6885 Black Duck Drive, stated he did not understand the purpose of creating a right -turn -only onto Elm Street. He felt it would not be long before traffic would be using 2nd Avenue as a cut -through. He asked if the impact to 2nd Avenue had been considered. He stated he was non -impacted because he did not live in the neighborhood but was impacted as a citizen of Lino. Lakes who would like to see things done right. He encouraged the Planning and Zoning Board to send a strong message. to the City Council. 10 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Hearing no further comments, Al Robinson made a MOTION to Close the Public Hearing at 8:06 p.m. and was supported by Thomas Mesich. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Mesich noted Elm Street was currently substandard and stated his disappointment that none of the plans included upgrading of that street. He suggested traffic be brought into the school site from Elm Street, the cul-de-sac installed, and the business park install it's own road if necessary. A signal light could then be installed on Elm Street. Mr. Ahrens explained a pedestrian study is planned to assist the school staff and police staff to determine a plan to meet the pedestrian traffic in the area. This pedestrian study will not be performed until a specific roadway plan for the area is determined. He noted there is intent to ask the City Council to consider Elm Street as a state roadway. At that time, it would be possible to consider reconstruction of the road with State Aid. Mr. Ahrens noted Elm Street is narrow and a trail is proposed for the south side of Elm Street. He stated the City Council would be asked to install regulatory signing assuming the roadway approved is inadequate for parking. Mr. Mitchell stated he was confident the pedestrian issue would be addressed. He noted the signal light is a major issue in this proposal. EIm Street currently carries 1000 trips per day. It is estimated the school will generate 1500 to 2000 trips per day. Options A and B will triple the amount of traffic on EIm Street. Option C decreases the amount of traffic and Option D eliminates the traffic on EIm Street. He noted the proposal is making a more dangerous intersection to provide for a safer intersection with installation of a signal light. OSM feels this is a better option than having two mediocre intersections. Option C does not allow for a signal light and Option C1 which will leave EIm Street open does not provide for a signal light. He noted if southbound traffic on 4th Avenue is forced to go to EIm Street and wanted to access Highway 49, their best opportunity would be to use 2nd Avenue. This would impact 2nd Avenue. He noted, however, all options would impact 2nd Avenue. Mr. Mitchell noted the option presented by Mr. Mesich had been considered but was not feasible as it would not provide ample storage for the signal. He stated from a professional standpoint, he could not support either Option C or D. 11 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Police Chief, Pecchia, stated the Police Department had requested a pedestrian survey be performed. He noted it would be easy for middle school age children to ride their bikes to the school •and there is concern of how they would cross Lake Drive. He stated the pedestrian survey was not an issue which should be addressed by the Police Department or the School District as they did not have the necessary expertise. Acting Chair Johnson asked if the Police Department would be able to monitor the intersection during crossing times if it was not possible to have a signal Tight installed. The Police Chief noted there currently is not the staff available to do so. The School District would have to hire someone to perform the monitoring. Mr. Wessel noted the industrial park and school site were two separate issues. There was no relationship between the two sites. Mr. Mesich asked if the school site could be shifted over on the property to allow stacking for busses and other traffic on Elm Street. Mr. Mitchell stated this would be a much more palliative situation. He explained the difficulty with this option was a row of houses and also it would only provide for one access to the school. He noted the original site plan did provide access to Elm Street for the sole purpose of parent drop off or pick up of the children. He indicated residents were against that proposal. Mr. Robinson asked if Mr Rehbein was a party to the funding of the road being built to Lake Drive and if so, which option he preferred. Mr. Ahrens noted Mr. Rehbein was a party in the funding. He stated at the last meeting held in January of 1996, all parties involved had agreed to Option B which included realignment of Elm Street. Mr. Wurscher stated he felt if there was an option to negotiate with Mr. Rehbien for more support it should be explored. Mr. Weigold stated it was obvious to him, after hearing the conversation, that there were still too many questions involved to make a decision. 12 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Mesich stated his biggest fear was the intersection at Elm Street and Highway 49. He questioned who regulated installation of crosswalks. Mr. Ahrens stated any activity on a State right-of-way required State approval. He noted installation of crosswalks had to be approved by MnDOT. Mr. Mitchell explained crosswalks required the same warrants be met as signal lights. Acting Chair Johnson noted the actions before the Board tonight included rezoning, minor sub -divisions, site plan review and conditional use permit. Guy Herr made a MOTION to approve the Rezoning from Light Industrial, LI and Single Family Residential, R-1 to PSP, Public Semi -Public for Centennial School District, Elm Street, subject to conditions A and B stated by staff and was supported by Al Robinson. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Al Robinson made a MOTION to approve the Subdivision creating two parcels, one parcel for the school site and one parcel for the light industrial site for Centennial School District, Elm Street, with the conditions stated by staff and was supported by Rick Gelbmann. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Al Robinson made a MOTION to approve the Site Plan for Centennial School District, Elm Street, with the nine conditions stated by staff and was supported by Rick Gelbmann. Mr. Mesich stated he felt in order to approve a site plan for a school, the site plan needed to fit the school and amenities into the area and should also address the study of safety. He stated he did not believe the pedestrian safety issue was being addressed at all in this plan. He suggested if the site was not able to be made safe, then possibly this was not the correct site for a school. He noted the townhouses that were being built and suggested there would be many more children in the area. He noted the City park and asked how children would cross to access the park. 13 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Acting Chair Johnson acknowledged these concerns but noted these were not issues for the Planning and Zoning Board to address. He stated they could be referred to when the Board members stated their preference of road plan. Mr. Herr stated he would like to be ensured a pedestrian study would be conducted and a correct decision be made based on results of that study. Acting Chair Johnson suggested that could be included as a condition of approval. Mr. Herr suggested amending the MOTION to include condition 10; That a pedestrian study be conducted and propose the necessary safety measures to solve the pedestrian traffic. Mr. Robinson amended his motion and Mr. Gelbmann concurred. Voting on the motion: 4-1 (Mr. Mesich voted naye). Motion carried. Mr. Herr made a MOTION to approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a middle school in a PSP Zoning District for Centennial School District, EIm Street, subject to all conditions of the site plan review. Voting on the motion: 4-1 (Mr. Mesich voted naye). The motion carried. Mr. Robinson stated he preferred roadway Options D and C1. He stated he was concerned with closing EIm Street. He stated he could not imagine the State not installing a signal light in an area with this magnitude of traffic. He asked if the City could install a signal light on their own. Mr. Mitchell stated the City would not be allowed to install a stop light without State approval. Traffic from the school alone would not warrant placement of a stoplight. Mr. Robinson suggested a stop sign instead. Mr. Mitchell stated there were similar warrants required for installation of a stop sign. It was not likely that the State would install a stop sign on this type of roadway. Mr. Mitchell expressed his concern with the 14 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 legalities of either Option C or D and suggested this be discussed with the City Attorney. Mr. Gelbmann stated he preferred Option C. He stated he understood the concerns of the neighborhood and the desire to keep the traffic off Elm Street. He felt it was in the City's best interest to justify a signal light at the intersection although he expressed concern that the students would not use the Tight at 4th and would cross at Elm and Lake anyway. Mr. Herr stated he preferred Option C-1 because of the added potential of pedestrian traffic. Mr. Mesich stated he preferred Option C-1 due to the combination of trips per day and pedestrians. Acting Chair Johnson stated he would prefer either Option B or C-1. He emphasized the concern for pedestrians crossing at EIm Street and felt this needed to be addressed. Mr. Herr noted the concerns of the Church had not been addressed tonight. He stated the Church had been present at the last meeting and had expressed concern about the closing of EIm Street. Angela Weigold stated she felt Option C-1 was not appropriate as it still called for the stoplight to be placed at 4th Avenue and Highway 49 and EIm Street to be widened. Paul Snyder, Project Architect, stated he wished Superintendent McClellan was present at this meeting tonight. The School District is struggling to make the site and the whole area safe. The 1880 students are their responsibility and Mr. McClellan feels strongly that a light should be installed to make the site safe for students and residents. Mr. Snyder noted it is his responsibility to make sure the building and whole project are under budget. He asked the Planning and Zoning Board to make their recommendations by considering total build -out. All parts of the project may not be completed at once, it may have to be done in phases. Randy Schumacher, City Administrator, noted the pedestrian study had not yet been completed due to the engineer's recommendation to wait until the road design had been determined. The City and School District 15 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 have agreed to perform the pedestrian survey. He noted a previous instance on Birch Street where the City and School District worked together to fund an underpass for pedestrians. - He noted the Police Department is only being asked for input as a department. Acting Chair Johnson called a brief recess at 9:07 p.m. Acting Chair Johnson reconvened the meeting at 9:16 p.m. E. PUBLIC HEARING - Animal Ordinance Planning Coordinator Wyland reviewed the changes to the Animal Ordinance. She noted a letter which was received from Sharon J. Lane, a member of the committee who worked on the ordinance, who was unable to attend this evening. Ms. Lane expressed her approval of the ordinance but asked that a collar not be required for animals which are strictly confined to the indoors. Ms. Wyland recommended Planning and Zoning Board approval of the ordinance as submitted and that it be forwarded to the City Council for adoption. Acting Chair Johnson opened the Public Hearing at 9:22 p.m. Steve Andre, 495 Ash Street, stated he had been present at every meeting regarding the ordinance. He explained the ordinance had originally become a concern for a majority of the citizens when their quality of life and value of their homes was affected by a kennel being placed 50 feet from their home. He expressed concerns that the proposed ordinance did not state a maximum allowable number of dogs in a private kennel and allowed a kennel to be placed on 1 acre rather than the previously required 5 acres. He felt the proposed ordinance was too permissive and did not protect the rights of the adjacent property owners. He noted the ordinance did not include violation guidelines for revocation of a kennel permit. He recommended the ordinance not be approved as it was not in the best interest of the majority of the community and the detrimental impact to the quality of life in Lino Lakes it would produce. Donald Dunn, 6585 Black Duck Drive, stated he had also attended the meetings and had no grudge against dogs. His concern was with the owners of the animals and the abuse of the privilege of licenses. He 16 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 objected to animals running loose in the City and depositing feces in other property owners yards. He felt the ordinance needed to be more clearly defined and more restrictive to protect the rights of people who do not have dogs. He stated there had not been a consensus reached at the last two meetings regarding this ordinance. He stated the ease with which a private kennel could go from 2 to 5 to 10 dogs bothered him. He felt the minimum amount of land required for a private dog kennel in residential areas should be maintained at 5 acres. He expressed concern that the maximum number of dogs allowed in a private kennel should be clearly stated in the ordinance. He felt the limit of one litter in a 12 month period per kennel license would allow too many litters. Mr. Gelbmann explained this restricted the owner to "one" litter per kennel license, not per dog. Mr. Robinson explained the input from neighbors was always considered at the public hearing when issuing a kennel license and is included in the conditions of issuance of the permit. If the conditions are not adhered to, the permit will be revoked. Mr. Dunn stated he was concerned that if the requirement for a private kennel was reduced from 5 to 1 acre there would be a flood of people requesting permits. Mr. Robinson noted there had only been 2 applications for a private kennel license in the City in the past 9 years. Police Officer Jeanie Kenow noted some items specific to cats and pot belly pigs. A resident at 6250 Red Maple Lane, felt the ordinance needed to be restrictive in order to prevent nuisances from occurring rather than allowing them to happen and having to resolve the issues after the fact. John Sullivan, commended Mr. Mesich and Mr. Schones for their work on the ordinance and stated it had been a pleasure to work with them. He felt the group who worked on this ordinance had diverse input and had made an attempt to work towards the center. He noted it had been stated there was not a consensus in the group but he felt there was. He felt the group had toughened up the ordinance. He stated by allowing 17 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 the number of dogs, etc. to be determined by the Conditional Use Permit process, situations could be evaluated individually. He felt the Planning and Zoning Board would make decisions in the best interest of the residents of the City of Lino Lakes. Mark Kinney, 6425 Rice Court, stated he did not think this ordinance would be acceptable to the residents of Lino Lakes. He felt the restrictions for a private kennel should be left as they were in the previous ordinance or this ordinance should be sent back for further consideration. Mr. Sullivan questioned why the people who were against this ordinance did not get involved with the planning process. He stated the committee had worked together to try to determine an ordinance which would work for the entire City. He felt individual circumstances could be handled by the Conditional Use Permit process and the Planning and Zoning Board would not allow a private kennel in an area which was not good for the whole community. Al Robinson made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 10:00 p.m. and was supported by Tom Mesich. All voted in favor. Motion carried. Mr. Mesich explained the committee had tried to establish a set of guidelines as they worked through the ordinance. The committee felt putting an artificial number on the number of dogs allowed was not putting faith in the Conditional Use Permit process. He noted there was a $350.00 fee for a Conditional Use Permit and he did not feel people would apply if they were not serious. The kennel license application requires submittal of a site plan illustrating where the kennel will be placed, where the neighboring houses located, how it will be kept clean., etc. Neighbors within 1000 feet are notified and a public hearing is held. He noted this ordinance is more restrictive than many other City's animal ordinances. Mr. Gelbmann asked under what circumstances an owner would want more than six dogs in a private kennel. Mr. Mesich stated there may be special cases which would apply to smaller dogs such as poodles, etc. This can be addressed with the Conditional Use Permit process. 18 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Gelbmann expressed concern that owners of a private kennel would breed one dog every year and keep the litters. Mr. Mesich stated this was not an option. The Conditional Use Permit would limit the number of animals allowed. Mr. Gelbmann stated he would like to see a limit on the number of animals allowed included in the ordinance. Mr. Mesich noted there were other restrictions stated in the ordinance which would result in violation such as the kennel being kept properly. Ms. Wyland noted the Conditional Use Permit also included an annual review process. Other items have been included in previous Conditional Use Permits such as restrictions that when one dog expired, it could not be replaced with another. Mr. Herr stated he saw a problem with an unspecified number of dogs being allowed in a private kennel. Mr. Gelbmann noted there could be situations where a resident would want to have more dogs, such as raising dogs for dog sledding. But he agreed that he would like to see a maximum number of dogs allowed with flexibility for persons with special circumstances. Mr. Mesich stated he felt the problem in Lino Lakes was not with people with more than one dog but was with people who owned one dog and were not responsible. Mr. Herr stated he would like to see six dogs specified as the maximum unless there was a reason for exception. Ms. Wyland stated the reason the number had been eliminated was that the Committee could not agree on a certain number. They then decided the Conditional Use Permit was appropriate to determine the number allowable. Officer Kenow stated she felt the proposed ordinance would allow for better enforcement in the field. 19 J PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1996 Mr. Herr stated he felt a maximum number of dogs allowed should be 4 and private kennels should only be allowed on lots 5 acres and above. Mr. Mesich suggested verbiage be included in the ordinance that if a resident with a Conditional Use Permit receives more than three violations the Conditional Use Permit will be revoked. Mr. Gelbmann made a MOTION to approve the Lino Lakes Animal Ordinance with three modifications; 1. Property of greater than one acre and less than five acres be allowed 6 dogs in a private kennel. Properties of 5 acres and above are allowed an unspecified amount of dogs to be kept in the kennel which will be specified at the time of the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit. 2. Three or more violations in one calendar year are grounds for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. 3. No leash is required for cats or fish which are kept indoors at all times and was supported by Al Robinson. All voted in favor. Motion carried. VI. DISCUSSION: Ms. Wyland stated due to scheduling difficulties, she would contact the Planning and Zoning Board members to schedule the upcoming work session. Mr. Mesich announced this would be his last Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting as he was moving to Elk River. He thanked the City and stated this had been a great learning experience. Members of the Board thanked Mr. Mesich for his service. VII. ADJOURNMENT: Thomas Mesich made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 10:37 p.m. and was supported by Guy Herr. All voted in favor. Motion carried.