Laserfiche WebLink
<br />D'~AFT <br /> <br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - Octobcr 10,2000 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant movcd and Councilmcmber Aplikowski seconded a motion <br />to approve the Consent Calcndar and authorize execution of all necessary <br />documents contained therein, with the r()llowing amendment: <br /> <br />Item E. The addition of Ray Krepps to the list of election judges for the gcneral <br />election. <br /> <br />The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br /> <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br /> <br />Mayor Probst invited those present to come forward and address thc Council on any items not <br />already on the agenda. <br /> <br />There were no public comments. <br /> <br />UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS <br /> <br />A. Resolution #00-34, Receiving a Revised Feasibility Report in the Matter of the 2001 <br />Street Improvement Project <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Stafford stated that the Council had requested a revised fcasibility report from the City <br />Engineer with regard to the 2001 Street Improvement Project following recommendations from <br />Staff, the Lake Josephine Hills Association and the Ingerson Neighborhood Review Group. He <br />added the revised report contains a basic outline of proposed costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Stafford stated that staff recommends the Council's approval of Resolution #00-34 which <br />receives the revised report and schedules a public hearing to be held Novcmber 13, 2000. He <br />addcd that the public hearing will be an opportunity for the Council to receive comments from <br />residents and discuss the merits of the project. He noted that Mr. Brown was available at the <br />meeting for comments or questions. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst reiteratcd that this item is not a public hearing and the Council will not reccive <br />residents' testimony in this matter. He added the Council will decide whether or not to receive <br />the feasibility report and whether to schcdule a public hearing. He noted this will give the <br />Council an opportunity to review the report and offer comments. <br /> <br />Council member Grant asked why the contingency amount was changed from 10% to 15%. Mr. <br />Brown stated the rate was adjusted to account for inflation rather than increasing unit prices on <br />all individual items. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant stated he would prefer that individual prices bc adjusted to reflect the <br />increases that apply to them. He added it is more appropriate to increase unit priccs than to <br />e increase the contingency fee. Mr. Brow'll concurred. <br />