Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Wagner said that the EPA Study was a limited effort with limited funds and <br />accomplished what it set out to do, to change the dynamics of the water flowing into <br />this area. He felt that with the re-contouring of the land, a hydrological test was <br />needed. Mr. Wagner then asked Mayor Adams to elaborate on Mr. Glickert’s motion <br />and what the reason was as to why he could not make the motion. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams said that Mr. Glickert could not make a motion to “reconsider” for two <br />reasons, one Mr. Glickert did not vote in favor of the driving range and second a <br />reconsider motion had to be done at the same meeting that the motion was passed. <br />He stated that the motion to “rescind” is not an infinite item, as then everything <br />Council passed could be rescinded, i.e. if Council voted to approve contract to <br />repaint a building, the motion could not be made to rescind after it had been painted, <br />or one could not rescind a previously approved liquor license for the same reason. <br />Contracts have been signed to move this project forward. Equipment has been <br />ordered and some items are being manufactured according to specifications of the <br />contract. Therefore, the City would be in breach of a contract at this point if it were <br />cancelled. The City would now be liable for any damages sought by the company <br />with the contract and the City would also loose the grant money and any cost <br />associated with its cancellation. <br /> <br />Ms. Ricci asked if there was a water pooling problem previously and Mayor Adams <br />said the area has always been wet. The only complaint was the mosquito <br />population from the water running into Ruth Park Woods that then goes into the <br />creek. Ms. Ricci asked if a hydrologic test had been ordered previously. Ms. Feier <br />said that the area had always been a drainage area and will continue to be a <br />drainage area. She said the project had not substantially changed the contour of the <br />land so it would continue to flow into this area. Presently the grant will pay for <br />project costs but not study costs. Ms. Ricci asked what the value of a hydrologic test <br />would be. Mayor Adams said that the area had always been wet and had not <br />changed with or without the mowing of the area, it is only less visible with the rock <br />added during the EPA study. Ms. Feier said that she did not know of any value on <br />the front end. Ms Feier said that if there would be a problem, there would be a <br />mitigation solution which could be worked on it after the problem became apparent. <br /> <br />Ms. Drey was allowed to speak again upon Council’s approval of a change in the <br />point or order. <br /> <br />Ms. Drey stated that the contract signed by the City in January 2007, for the driving <br />range stated that it is understood that it would be the owner’s responsibility to <br />arrange for and pay for the preparation of an acceptable hydrological study, a storm <br />water management plan and drainage plan for the entire driving range project. She <br />felt the contract required a hydrologic study. Ms. Drey felt that this study needed to <br />be done before the damage is done. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams announced the Returning Artist Reception, March 7 at 7:00 p.m. at <br />the Centennial Commons and the next Council meeting on March 24 to be preceded <br />by a study session dealing with the impacts on the budget. <br /> <br />The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. <br />Joyce Pumm, City Clerk <br /> <br />