Minutes - Council - 05/14/1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 4 Regular Council Meeting May 14, 1979 Letter from Dick Sha regarding Report of Laboratory Analysis. Councilman Cox said there should be follow up on methane venting systems and follow up on the well sampling. When we see a difference at'what point do we get involved. He requested the County to review and report back to the City if there is anything irregular. Steps should be taken to prevent contami~ation going into certain areas if it is present. Mayor Gamec noted that the City wants a report back on Item 10 for sure. Letter from Springsted, Inc., Public Finance Advisior. No action taken. COUNCIL OLD BUSINESS 1. VARIOLITE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 79-2 ACCEPTING/REJECTING BID Councilman Sorteberg asked Eng. Raatikka about the alternate bid. Engineer Raatikka said the alternate bid provided that the City would provide the borrow material stock piled on the northeast corner of the property which comes from grading of 161st between Variolite St. and Armstrong Blvd. Motion by Councilman Cox, seconded by Councilman Mickelson to adopt Resolution No. 79-26 accepting the lowest alternate bid of Lino Contracting Inc. for a total alternate bid of $169,553.00, provinding we have approval of the other projects. Other alternate bids were: Park Const. Co. $173,592.00 Northwest Mech. $251,525.00 Motion carried. Voting yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmen Cox, Mickelson, Reimann and Sorteberg. Voting no: N~ne. 2. STREET IMPROVEMENT 161ST LYING BETWEEN ARMSTRONG BLVD N.W. AND LLAMA STREET N'.W. AND LLA~ STREET N.W. LYING BETWEEN 16i~ST AVENUE--N. W. AND 163RD AVENUE N.W. -- Councilman Mickelson, Councilman Sorteberg and Engr. Raatikka have met regarding improvement of this street. Engineer Raatikka said they recommend reducing the number of units assessed for Mr. Delaney from 16 to 10, and assessing the total project on a unit cost of $321.10 per unit, delete restoration and taking alternate bids 1. Contractor doing complete job. 2. City doing grading if they have the time. Gary Albrecht questioned the City's assessing policy--are they changing '~:t? Mr. Fuhl questioned how the benefit is determined and how much is or isn't front footed. Attorney Goodrich co~ented that the determination is made as to the benefit of each property owner and it is assessed based on the benefit. Mr. Fuhl asked if he could prove that his property isn't benefitted that much, as he questions whether the portion is divided equally and that some parts of this project are benefitting more than other and are still all being equally assessed.