My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
gr000990_000040_pg128
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
MNHistoricalSocietyFiles (CC Minutes page-by-page 1958-1981)
>
gr00090_000040
>
gr000990_000040_pg128
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2011 4:38:18 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 10:03:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mayor Johnson asked if we shouldn't assess the first $9,000 <br />and put that to bed first? Atty. Meyers recommended combining <br />the total assessment and spreading it over five years. Adm. <br />Achen stated that splitting up the assessment would involve <br />fighting the battle twice. The first $9,000 was not satisfac- <br />tory to take care of the job. An open ditch is not satisfactory <br />there. <br />Mayor Johnson asked if the District had approved the original <br />project. Adm. Achen stated Dist. 9 did then, but District 5 <br />Maintenance is in charge of upkeeping now. If we don't <br />undergound the pipe, we'll have complaints that the system is <br />not operating properly, City will be blamed because we put <br />the project in in the first place. <br />Councilman Shelquist inquired as to how much the cost would <br />have been reduced if we had gone with this plan in the first place <br />Eng. Bearden stated that what was spent is useful and there <br />won't be duplication. A lot of the $9,000 was meetings <br />before the project even started with Paster and the Rice Creek <br />Watershed District. The cost that is construction cost would <br />be added on to whatever the cost is now. <br />Adm. Achen stated he didn't think the city should be blamed <br />for the delay and uncertainty as to how the improvement should <br />be made. Council spent considerable time waiting to see if <br />the developer was going to do something himself to alleviate <br />the problem; the owner kept emphasizing he wanted it done <br />at minimal expense. <br />Atty. Meyers stated some of that $9,000 was emergency work, <br />so that would be sustainable based on our emergency action. <br />Eng. Bearden pointed out that this project has gradually <br />progressed to a better drainage project. Consequently, the <br />cost has gone up. <br />MSP (Johnson- Hodges) that we receive the feasibility report <br />and cost estimate of Comstock & Davis and that we order final <br />plans and specifications for the project and that we set a <br />public hearing for the project on May 10, 1976, at 8:30 p.m. <br />and that we advertise for bids. <br />Councilman Shelquist questioned the point in Bearden's <br />feasibility report about the ditch bottom being elevated. Is <br />there room for water to drain? Eng. Bearden answered yes, there <br />is no open ditch, pipe all the way through <br />Adm. Achen questioned if the first section is left open, if <br />the system backs up, will it drain to Paster's property or to <br />County Rd. I? Eng. Bearden stated there is a new culvert <br />in there. Last year, without the culvert it backed up and <br />over I. Should any one of the culverts get blocked, it will <br />happen again. Adm. suggested the system should be designed <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.