My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 01-10-2005
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CC 01-10-2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:11 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 12:08:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />.. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES <br />JANUARY 10,2005 <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />room, and the second quote was to redo the through wall flashing in selected areas at the base of <br />the wall, just above the grade line. This area had been previously grouted in certain areas to help <br />stop the water infiltration. While the majority of the water infiltration (flooding) has been <br />reduced, the City still experienced some water infiltration this past year. He stated the quotes the <br />City received were from Building Restoration and Kraus Anderson. He indicated Building <br />Restoration quoted $10,820.00 and Kraus Anderson quoted $12,040.00 to repair the area above <br />the Council conference room. The second quote to repair the through wall flashing at grade level <br />were $224.34 per lineal foot by Building Restoration and $264.61 per lineal foot by Kraus <br />Anderson. The total price may vary dependent upon the actual footage of through wall flashing <br />needing to be replaced. He noted at this time, staff anticipated approximately 210 lineal feet to <br />potentially still be leaking. This would make for a total amount of $47,111.00 by Building <br />Restoration and $55,568.00 by Kraus Anderson to replace 210 lineal feet ofthrough wall flashing <br />at the base of the building. <br /> <br />He indicated staff had met with the League of Minnesota and filed an insurance claim for the <br />repair of the water damage. Staff is unsure if the League will pay for any of the repairs. The <br />League did suggest that the City do another water test of the repaired areas to verify the proper <br />corrections have been made. Staffhas obtained a quote of$I,500.00 from Architectural Testing <br />to retest the repaired areas. <br /> <br />He stated staff was requesting authorization to proceed with only the repair ofthe flashing above <br />the Council conference room. Staffrecommended hiring Building Restoration for $10,820.00 to <br />do the repairs. Due to the time of year, Building Restoration would charge an additional fee of <br />approximately $1,000.00 to tent and heat the area. Staff also requested authorization to have <br />Architectural Testing retest the repaired areas for $1,500. The remainder of the flashing would <br />be left to do dependent upon the results of the arbitration proceedings with the general contractor, <br />Rochon Corporation. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a <br />motion to authorize staff to retain Building Restoration and Architectural <br />Testing in an amount not to exceed $13,320 for the repair of the flashing <br />above the Council conference room and to retest the repaired areas. The <br />motion carried unanimously (4-0). <br /> <br />C. Librarv Maintenance Al!:reement with Ramsev County <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe stated at the December 20, 2004 Work Session, the City Council reviewed the <br />existing agreement with Ramsey County Suburban Libraries. She noted the City currently <br />provided snow removal and lawn maintenance services. She indicated when originally brought <br />before the City Council in 2003, the services were for a one-year term (calendar year 2004) and <br />the library was now requesting these services on an on-going basis. <br /> <br />. She stated as discussed at the work session, the proposed new agreement was essentially the <br />same as the existing agreement. The primary change is in the duration of the agreement and <br />terms for termination. The Library has agreed to this language, which provides for a two-year <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.