CC 01-26-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting, January 26, 1987 Page 4 Status Report on Sewer Interceptor Barry Peters reported that he had received information from the Attorney that all documents necessary to proceed with the project have been obtained. Peters . noted a right of entry document was obtained from Naegele. He recommended the following schedule for advertisement for bids, bid opening and award of bid: February 4th February 6th March 2nd March 9th Advertise for Bids in New Briahton Bulletin Advertise for Bids in Construction Bulletin Bid Opening Council consider Award of Bid at Regular Meeting Hansen moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council adopt Resolution No. 87-6; Approvina Plans and Specifications and Authorizina the Advertisement for Bids for Combined Improvements Nos. SS-83-6 and W-86-2, New Briahton Sewer Interceptor and Truhler Addition Water; subject to the Attorney receiving the right of entry documents from all affected properties. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) Status Report - MSA Classification for Snellina Avenue, South of Hiahwav 96 Mayor Woodburn asked the Engineer to report on the status of obtaining the MSA classification for Snelling Avenue, south of Highway 96. Christoffersen explained he has discussed the matter with MN DOT and sent maps of the area, however, he has not had the opportunity to meet with the Engineers . at the site and review the problem with them. He adVised he will contact them and report back to Council. Case No. 86-34 - Special Use Permit for Fire Station No. I and Review of Architectural Chanaes Wayne Johnson of the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Department appeared before Council to review the proposed architectural changes in the renovation of Station No.1. He explained the peaked roof style and decorative entrance were eliminated, due to the fact that cost estimates for structural design were higher than anticipated. Johnson reported that he has discussed the change to a flat roof and elimination of the decorative entrance with Planner Miller; noted Miller did not see that the changes would significantly impact the area. He also stated that the entrance Was designed for decorative purposes and would now be modified to blend with the new proposed roof line. Hicks expressed concern that neighbors may see the design change as significant; stated he would not be comfortable in approving such a change without input from residents in the area, He asked if Johnson had contacted any of the reside~ts near the station to review the design changes with them. Johnson advised he had not discussed the proposed change with the neighbors. . Hansen stated she preferred the peaked roof line, but noted any renovation to the station would be an improvement. She agreed with Hicks that neighbors should be contacted regarding the changes. Peck asked Johnson what the cost difference would be with the peaked roof versus the flat roof. Johnson stated the architect has estimated it would run approximately $30,000.00 over budget with the peaked roof as originally proposed. There was discussion regarding the rubber type flat roof, estimated life span of each type of roof and maintenance costs. Also discussed were various options for notification of residents in the area Hicks asked the Clerk Administrator if Planning Commission minutes from the public hearing on this matter could be reviewed to determine the residents concerns about the renovation. After review of the Planning minutes, Council consensus was that the neighbors did not express concern relating to the building design. only to social functions at the Station. .