Laserfiche WebLink
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council 1 1�(�((�(� <br />FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development ,yf�.� <br />DATE: July 30, 1984~ <br />SUBJECT: PINECREST PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT <br />The City has received two letters on the subject project. The <br />first letter is dated July 18, 1984 from the Minnesota Department <br />of Transportation and the second letter is dated July 24, 1984 <br />from Beim Construction Company. I will discuss the Minnesota <br />Department of Transportation letter first. <br />Enclosed please find a copy of the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation letter dated July 18, 1984, a letter from <br />Short -Elliott -Hendrickson, Inc. dated July 19, 1984, a proposed <br />resolution and my letters to Bob Waste and Ervin Herbst, Sr. <br />dated June 11, 1984. Staff has held meetings with the Minnesota <br />Department of Transportation and has carefully reviewed the July <br />18, 1984 MnDOT letter. We recommend that the City adopt this <br />resolution and submit a copy to the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation. <br />The second item is a letter from Beim Construction Company. <br />Enclosed please find a letter from Beim Construction Company <br />dated July 24, 1984. staff has numbered the issues in the letter <br />/ from one to five. I will present staff's comments on each issue. <br />1. Staff agrees with this proposal provided the contractor seeds <br />the berm and provides proper erosion controls and agrees to <br />cleaning the culvert between County Road H-2 and Lambert Park <br />just east of Jackson Drive if the culvert is sediment laden <br />in the spring. <br />2. Staff recommends denying this request because City Resolution <br />No. 1765 states that the security in the amount of five years <br />payment of assessments on the entire project should be <br />received prior to ordering and awarding the project for <br />construction. <br />3. Staff recommends denial of this request. If no park <br />dedication fee was previously paid, they are obligated tc, <br />current code and not past agreements that they did not <br />fulfill. Any lot splits shall be delt with on a case by case <br />basis. <br />4. Staff concurs with this item. <br />5. The berm was proposed by your people in conjunction with the <br />City and is necessary for the project. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the City take the above <br />positions on the subject project. <br />SWT/bc <br />Enclosure <br />