Agenda Packets - 2005/07/25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council June 27, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 17 approving. He asked if this is in Mounds View and if it isn’t, why are they approving this. He 1 asked if the money is just passing through. 2 3 Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated that the best estimate he has is that 4 approximately 25-percent of the road is in the City of Mounds View. He explained that one of 5 the challenges for redevelopment of this particular road is the fact that it is bounded by three 6 cities, two counties and the State is part of the mix. He noted that there are portions of this road 7 also in Blaine, Shoreview, in both Anoka and Ramsey counties, noting that one of the elements 8 that has been involved is that all of the transportation stakeholders have held meetings so that all 9 parties understand the needs. He stated that at this point there is not a final design, which is the 10 point of doing the design. 11 12 Mayor Marty noted that all transportation stakeholders have been involved in this and asked who 13 is looking out for Mounds View’s transportation concerns. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND Stigney/Flaherty To Approve the Resolution 6566 Accepting the 16 appropriation of a $5,000,000 grant to the City of Mounds View for County Road J 17 Reconstruction and other public improvements necessary for the Medtronic Project in Mounds 18 View and waive the reading. 19 20 Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Marty) Motion carried. 21 22 K. Resolution 6489 Approving Expenditure of Funds to Repair Roof Top Unit 23 No. 7 at the Community Center. 24 25 Public Works Director Lee explained that this was brought to the Council on March 28, 2005 26 stating that at that time it was referred to as Roof Top Unit. No. 4 noting that Council Member 27 Thomas was correct at that time that Roof Top Unit No. 4 had already been worked on. He 28 reviewed issues brought up at the March 28th meeting noting that Roof Top Unit No. 7 is seven 29 years old and the warranty is five years old. He stated that staff researched the possibility of 30 extending the warranty with the manufacturer and vendor noting that neither is willing to extend 31 the warranty. He stated that the cost to replace the unit is approximately $40,000.00. He 32 referenced Council’s suggestion to review all other units noting that the cost to do this would be 33 approximately $1200.00. He stated that this could be done if Council wishes to do so. He 34 referenced the city’s relationship with UHL noting that the clerk would review the city’s 35 relationship with UHL. He stated that staff is presenting a proposal to repair Roof Top Unit No. 36 7, not to exceed $8100.00. He noted that this is the high-end estimate to do the work and could 37 end up being as low as $5000.00. He stated that they were unable to get completely accurate 38 numbers, as they were not sure what the extent of the work would be that has to be done. 39 40 Council Member Flaherty stated that he met with Mr. Dazenski on the roof to take a look at it. 41 He explained that he questioned the amount of labor and expenditure on that piece of equipment 42 noting that Mr. Dazenski thought that the quote would come in at approximately $5,000.00. He 43 stated that he is not satisfied with the verbiage ‘not to exceed $8100.00’ and moved to table this 44 item until the city could receive re-quote from UHL that would be more accurate. 45