Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ponds subdivision and that all remaining escrow funds from the developer be retained to pay for <br />existing and future repair work. On May 5th the developer of this subdivision held a meeting with <br />City staff and requested that this recommendation be reconsidered. The developers have been <br />invited to present their case to the Public Works Committee. <br /> <br />Mike Black of Royal Oaks Realty stated their company will repair any damaged sidewalks and <br />curbs in this development, and intends to do that this year. He does not see any reason to take <br />escrow money. The issue is concerning the 6-inch think sidewalk in the driveways, as opposed <br />to the entire sidewalk. He stated there was a problem with the communication of that standard to <br />their company as they did this development. He read the minutes from the last meeting and sees <br />that the City was in the process of changing the specs right at the time The Ponds was approved. <br />Royal Oaks Realty received the City's standard plate for four-inch sidewalks. The sidewalks <br />were started in 2002 and finished in 2003. Royal Oaks Realty was not officially notified of the <br />change in standards until they received a letter from Engineer Jankowski in 2004. There was a <br />statement made that the inspector on site told one of the contractors from Shade Tree or <br />Halverson of the requirement to put 6-inch sidewalks in the driveway, but that statement never <br />got back to them, so they never knew there was an issue to deal with. He stated it would have <br />only made sense if they had to do 6-inch sidewalks in the driveways to have them all poured at 6 <br />inches. The difference would be another $12,000 to $15,000 to do that. Halverson says they <br />would never go with sidewalks at 4 inches in the walkway and 6 inches in the driveway; they <br />would pour it all at 6 inches. He stated he is here to first let the Committee know this was an <br />honest mistake, and no one had the intent of cutting comers. He would also point out that the <br />City insisted they put the sidewalks in up front with the development, and they did not know <br />where the driveways would be. <br /> <br />Assistant Public Works Director Olson questioned if Royal Oaks Realty's specs were submitted <br />to the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Black replied there are a lot of different checks and balances and points that could have been <br />done to avoid this situation from the beginning. The point Royal Oaks Realty wants to make is <br />that they are not arguing that that they should repair sidewalks. But if a sidewalk is going to <br />break at 4 inches it will break at 6 inches. Their point is to establish this as a 4-inch <br />neighborhood and fix any sidewalks that are broken. Royal Oaks Realty will caITy a warranty <br />through another year, and if the sidewalks are broken again they will fix them again. He thinks <br />Engineering is suggesting they replace all of the driveway sidewalks whether they are broken or <br />not, and he would question why they should be replaced if they are not broken. There will be <br />neighbors watching and questioning why their sidewalks are not being replaced. He stated Royal <br />Oaks Realty has never argued that the sidewalks should not be fixed. It was late last year when <br />they were notified, and too late for it to be done. What they have questioned is what happened <br />and why they had this standard put on them. He stated they have been informed to be cautious <br />replacing 6-inch pieces between the 4-inch pieces. There is an issue of a difference in pressure <br />between the 4 and 6 inch pieces that could cause cracking, as well as in issue of dealing with the <br />blacktop. They have been informed the best thing to do would be to leave the sidewalks at 4 <br />inches and repair them at 4 inches. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee/May 17,2005 <br />Page 6 of 12 <br />