My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2006/01/23
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
Agenda Packets - 2006/01/23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:02 PM
Creation date
7/17/2018 4:48:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/23/2006
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/23/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
152
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
Mounds View City Council January 9, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 14 <br /> <br />Mr. McCarty stated he wants Building Official Osmonson to have the best backup possible and 1 <br />commented that Ms. Osmonson will become the best commodity for the City in the future. He 2 <br />suggested the Council approach engineering firms that could provide a higher comfort level. 3 <br /> 4 <br />Building Official Osmonson stated it sounds like everyone is on the “same page” in wanting to 5 <br />do the finest job on this project and suggested that an engineering firm be placed on retainer for 6 <br />highly specific or specialized issues that may arise. 7 <br /> 8 <br />Mayor Marty stated the fee for G & H Consultants is about one-third or less than what the other 9 <br />consultants quoted. 10 <br /> 11 <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated everyone realizes this is a big project and everyone wants to be 12 <br />comfortable before moving forward. He explained that having a list of consultants on retainer to 13 <br />address those specifics can be part of the package. City Administrator Ulrich stated that these 14 <br />two consultants are familiar with those firms and would be comfortable working with them. 15 <br />Since time is not of the essence, he suggested staff prepare that information. 16 <br /> 17 <br />Mayor Marty stated that as far as costs go, the plan review will be paid from the permit fees. He 18 <br />agreed that a more expensive firm could cover the specialized areas but he likes the fact that 19 <br />these people are available. He noted that one individual is retired so most of the building 20 <br />inspections and plan reviews would be done by these two consultants after business hours. 21 <br />Mayor Marty stated if the one consultant is retired, he would probably be available during other 22 <br />times. Building Official Osmonson stated that is correct; however, the contract is for plan 23 <br />review, not inspections. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Building Official Osmonson clarified that these individuals were not chosen because of the 26 <br />financials, they are her first choice. 27 <br /> 28 <br />Councilmember Gunn stated just because a company charges a lot of money does not make them 29 <br />a better company. She noted the City has had experiences with companies that have charged a 30 <br />lot and the City has not received what they paid for. Councilmember Gunn stated her agreement 31 <br />with Building Official Osmonson, who is the City’s expert. She stated she is comfortable with 32 <br />her recommendation of these consultants. In addition, she pointed out that Building Official 33 <br />Osmonson can gain expertise from these individuals and other inspectors will be coming in for 34 <br />the specialized inspections. Councilmember Gunn stated the agreement also requires the 35 <br />insurance requested. 36 <br /> 37 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Flaherty. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6694 38 <br />Authorizing an Agreement with G & H Consultants LLC for Plan Review Assistance Associated 39 <br />with Medtronic Phase I Construction. 40 <br /> 41 <br />Councilmember Flaherty noted that Ms. Grove and Mr. Hagedorn are not present to defend 42 <br />themselves. He stated previously he had mentioned that their cost is lower because they have no 43 <br />overhead while engineering firms have extensive overhead. Councilmember Flaherty noted that 44 <br />Ms. Gove and Mr. Hagedorn have 44 years of experience and the State recognized them as 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.