My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1992/03/09
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
Agenda Packets - 1992/03/09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:51 PM
Creation date
7/17/2018 2:47:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/9/1992
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
3/9/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
4Itunds View City Council Page Seven <br /> Regular Meeting March 9, 1992 <br /> Councilmember Rickaby stated that the lighting was discussed at the <br /> last meeting of the Environmental Quality Task Force. The group <br /> consensus was that the Task Force opposed this amount of electricity <br /> being spent on lighting. This lighting goes against the priority <br /> of conserving electricity. _ ^ <br /> Mayor Linke polled the Council and it was felt that this was too <br /> expensive and felt the lights should just be placed at the top of <br /> the tower and the access point. <br /> Minetor stated that the cost without the lighting would be $697,000 <br /> with ten percent contingency for a total of $766,700 to Pit - <br /> Des Moines, Inc. <br /> Councilmember Rickaby stated that the Environmental Quality Task <br /> Force suggested that we use solar lighting. <br /> MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Blanchard to award bid to Pit Des Moines, Inc. <br /> for the construction of a new water in an amount not to exceed $766,700 <br /> which includes ten percent contingency to be charged to account number <br /> • 680-4121-705. These monies would come from the water bond fund and <br /> tear down of the old towers. <br /> Councilmember Quick commented that it was cheaper to tear down and put <br /> up one new tower than to refurbish the existing two. <br /> Ric Minetor, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, indicated that <br /> the main problem with refurbishment of the two existing towers is the <br /> lead paint and structure repairs need to be made at each tower. <br /> Councilmember Quick verified that Minetor had stated at a previous <br /> meeting that the towers would have to be completely shrouded in order <br /> to da the repairs as paint from_the towerswou-ld-ha-v-e to_be-contained <br /> when the towers were sandblasted and the dust collected and hauled <br /> away as hazardous waste. - <br /> Orduno stated this would be a potential liability. <br /> Bill Frits, 8072 Long Lake Road, asked if someone else would purchase <br /> and put up these towers or would they be scrapped out. <br /> Minetor stated that sometimes smaller towns will purchase these towers. <br /> What they do is-take t towers into the shop and structurally repair <br /> the towers before they put them back up. Minetor stated he had two <br /> - interested contractors contact the City. <br /> • VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.