My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 09/29/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2009
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 09/29/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 4:21:39 PM
Creation date
9/25/2009 10:37:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
09/29/2009
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
211
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />CITY RESPONSE: <br /> <br />There was a meeting by the parties on July 1, 2008 at which time an oral agreement was <br />reached whereby Knife River agreed to honor its contract and that it would be paid from <br />Oakwood's Letter of Credit (the "LOC") by the bank in return for City reducing the LOC <br />in a like amount. Knife River completed the work but has not been paid. The Developer is <br />obligated to pay its subcontractors per paragraph 6. of the respective Development <br />Agreements and Section 9.50.50 Subd. 5 of City Code which provide in part "Upon total <br />completion of Stage I Improvements (including the removal of 'temporary' erosion control <br />measures as identified in the approved Grading Plan), acceptance by the City, supported <br />by appropriate lien waivers. . ." (emphasis added) the Developer can request a reduction of <br />the LOC. Therefore, the City takes the position that Knife River should be paid from the <br />LOC, notwithstanding that Knife River's lien rights have expired. <br /> <br />B. Unfinished Work <br /> <br />The City's engineer has furnished a punch list of other work that remains incomplete, and has <br />estimated that the cost of finishing the work would be about $123,000.00. They have suggested <br />that a continuing Letter of Credit for 125% of this work would be necessary (about <br />$152,000.00). There is perhaps another $18,000.00 in potential incomplete work for <br />landscaping and irrigation housing that would bring this total to perhaps $170,000.00. <br /> <br />The City is entitled at this point to demand that the Bank pay to the City an amount sufficient to <br />pay for the unfinished work, which by our calculations (based on the City's estimates) would be <br />about $140,000.00, assuming that the Bank did not take the position that some of the punch list <br />items are maintenance issues, for which the Letter of Credit provides no surety. The City would <br />then use this money to complete the punch list items. That would leave about $131,000 <br />remaining on our Letter of Credit. However, as indicated earlier, the Letter of Credit does not <br />guarantee payment to unpaid contractors, project maintenance, Homeowners' association issues <br />or pond construction issues. <br /> <br />Absent any agreement, it would appear that the Bank's obligations under its Letter of Credit <br />would be limited to completing the punch list.items. <br /> <br />CITY RESPONSE: <br /> <br />City agrees Contractor/Bank is responsible to complete punch list items including <br />"Additional Items" as listed on the punch list. In addition, paragraph 6. of the <br />Development Agreements does require that the LOC will be reduced but ". . . only if the <br />maintenance e:uarantee (emphasis added) required by paragraph 8 below has been <br />deposited." City agrees the LOC does not guarantee payment for Homeowner's Association <br />issues and pond liner construction issues. However, it should be noted that trunk and <br />lateral drainage facilities are Stage I improvements and if the liner is not functioning as <br />intended, the design of the pond may need to be amended. The City does agree that the <br />pond liner was initially installed as a developer amenity and was not required by the City. <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.