Laserfiche WebLink
CC Regular Session <br />Meeting Date: 09/13/2011 <br />By: MaryJo Warner, Engineering/Public <br />Works <br />Title: <br />Report from Public Works <br />5. 16. <br />Background: <br />The Public Works Committee held its regular meeting on Monday, August 15, 2011 and discussed the following <br />three cases: <br />Case 5.1 Review Standard Cointract Language Related to Construction Projects <br />Staff reviewed the highlighted contract language related to construction projects and explained how these <br />conditions would assist the City in ensuring projects would be executed and completed in a timely and quality <br />manner. <br />It was the consensus of the Committee to agree with the recommendations from staff regarding the close out of <br />construction projects with minor outstanding items, and the Council can determine whether it is acceptable for <br />outstanding items to be covered by the warranty bond for the project. <br />Motion to recommend City Council include a 3% construction contingency, up to $15,000, on all projects with City <br />Administrator approval. This would give staff the ability to effectively manage projects to account for unforeseen <br />conditions and necessary project revisions. <br />Case 5.2 Update on Recent Storm and Flooding Complaints <br />Staff reviewed the properties that have submitted storm and flood complaints. Staff is proposing to prepare plans <br />and specifications, receive quotes, and address the immediate actions identified in the report, such as repairing or <br />replacing a culvert. <br />The Committee discussed the high levels of rain and the number of 100-year events that have taken place this year; <br />noting the system within the City has performed well under the conditions. <br />Motion to recommend that the City Council authorize staff to prepare the necessary plans and specifications, and <br />receive quotes, to address the immediate corrective actions identified in staff's summary. <br />Case 5.3 Discuss Grading Permit Requirements <br />Staff reviewed that the City currently does not have a grading permit and advised that staff has been drafting <br />requirements which could be used. <br />The Committee discussed the adoption of the State Building Code and whether all sections of that Code were <br />adopted; staff believed that the section regarding grading permits had not been adopted with the Code. <br />Staff suggested that a grading permit be treated similar to an interim permit, in regard to the fee schedule <br />and confirmed that an erosion control plan would be required with a grading plan. <br />It was the consensus of the Committee to verify if the grading portion of the State Building Code had already been <br />adopted and recommend that an administrative grading permit process be developed. <br />