Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3) We deleted city participation in the mobilization andfield office. These items were not <br />contemplated by the MOU and infact were specifically allocated to the County in Exhibit C of <br />the MOU <br /> <br />Response: We have modified the cost split for mobilization and field office such that the City <br />will only be responsible for its share of these items for work that is not eligible for federal <br />funding such as streetscaping and new water and sewer construction. <br /> <br />4) We deleted city participation in traffic control for the same reason as mobilization. <br /> <br />Response: We have modified the cost split for traffic control such that the City will only be <br />responsible for its share of this item for work that is not eligible for federal funding such as <br />streetscaping and new water and sewer construction. <br /> <br />5) We have inserted language that says that the value of City contributed land or easements <br />in excess of remnant property purchased by the City, will be applied to the city share of the <br />project cost. <br /> <br />Response: We have added section "IX. RIGHT OF WAY" to the IPA with the wording from <br />the MOD. <br /> <br />6) Because the City's share is so high, we have offered an alternative schedule for payment <br />of the City's share. <br /> <br />Response: The IP A has been modified to incorporate the requested alternative payment <br />schedule. <br /> <br />7) We deleted the engineering reimbursement for considering alternative designs on CSAH <br />54. If you expected to be reimbursed, you should have indicated that at the time those <br />discussions were taking place. <br /> <br />Response: All revisions to CSAH 54 have been discussed at the Project Management Team <br />meetings. The design iterations on the west side were a direct result of the office park <br />development there and on the east side were a direct result of the proposed Northern Lights <br />Boulevard. Both required changes from the MOD Exhibit A layout and are City costs. <br /> <br />8) We inserted in section V B that the City would receive credits of $300,000 and $150,000 <br />for providing alternative pond locations (andfor efficiencies created by construction of <br />"Backage Road") The changes to pond locations only happened because of the City's <br />insistence, thus saving the county at least double the proposed credit. <br /> <br />Response: Item III. B. 4. has been deleted from the IPA. The County will pay for all design <br />costs to relocate the ponds from the north side of CSAH 14 (Rehbein property). We thank the <br />City for being a good project partner and recommending this design but cannot credit the City <br /> <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />