Laserfiche WebLink
has been c~pletsd since submittal of this bill, everything has been done <br />according to specs and the City, as normal procedure, is retaining 5%. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, CouncilOrs Sorteberg, <br />Reimann, and Van Wagner. Voting No: Councilm~r Schlueter. <br /> <br />b) Arcon Construction Ccmpany; Project %84-12 & %84-18 Trunk Sanitary <br /> Sewer - <br /> <br />Council consensus was to dispense with the reading of the proposed <br />resolution. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Van Wagner and seconded by Councilmember Sorteberg <br />to adopt Resolution %84-219 approving partial payment to Arcon Construction <br />Ccmpany for Project %84-12 and %84-18 Trunk Sanitary Sewer. (Please refer <br />to resolution file for Resolution ~84-219). <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilm~rs Sorteberg, <br />Reimann and Van Wagner. Voting No: Councilm~r Schlueter. <br /> <br />c) ~&S Asphalt C~pany; Street Improvement Projects %84-20 & %84-21) - <br /> <br />Council consenus was to dispense with the reading of the proposed <br />resolution. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilme~ber Van Wagner and seconded by Councilm~mber Sorteberg <br />to adopt Resolution %84-220 approving partial payment to ~&S Asphalt <br />Cc~pany for Street Improv~ent Projects ~84-20 and %84-21. (Please refer <br />to resolution file for Resolution %84-220). <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilm~mbers Sorteberg, <br />Reimann, Sshlueter and Van Wagner. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />~'~e %5: Vacation Of Drainage Ease~_nt For Lot 3, Block 4, Menkveld's <br /> Country Park; Case Of Mr. And Mrs. Gene Kellogg= <br /> <br />Mr. Kellogg was present and stated that City Engineer Raatikka rec~,,L,~nds <br />not vacating the easement unless an alternate drainage is provided; that <br />alternate drainage already exists and is entirely off his property. Mr. <br />Kellogg stated that he has (~ned that property for 7 years and it never <br />held water any longer than his front yard does. ~e subject property is a <br />vacant lot that he c~ns and the drainage easement involves about 1/3 of <br />that lot's street frontage; this lot would be more sellable if the easement <br />were vacated. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding that this drainage easement was originally <br />~btained to take care of anticipeted drainage needs when the area behind <br />the lot is developed. <br /> <br />Mr. Kellogg stated that he was told that the drainage easement running <br />between his two lots was for long term and the ~ement on Lot 3 was for <br />current purposes and time has sh(~al that it is not necessary.. <br /> <br />Councilme~ber Reimann stated that when things like watershed areas are <br /> <br />Page 15 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />