►
Description
Public Works, Finance & Safety Committee Meeting - 01-19-2020
A
A
B
B
D
E
C
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
Anyone
opposed
signify
by
saying,
nay,
motion
carries
the
regular
agenda
is
item.
A
approval
of
amendment
number
two
with
meet
and
hunt
for
the
aty
terminal
project
number
1927
for
an
increase
of
twenty
eight
thousand
three
hundred
forty
two
dollars:
fifty
cents
for
a
new
contract
amount
of
three
million
two
hundred
sixty
two
thousand
eighty
four
dollars
and
fifty
cents.
A
F
Yes,
thank
you
mayor
I'll
start
off
by
saying
we
do
have
a
pretty
heavy
agenda
here
on
the
public
works
finance
safety
committee
tonight,
but
rest
assured,
council
will
take,
however,
much
time
we
need
on
each
item.
If
we
happen
to
not
get
through
them
all
every
one
of
these
items
are
on
the
consent
agenda,
so
we
could
certainly
pull
some
off
of
the
regular
council
meeting
if
we
have
to
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
here,
if
we
don't
get
to
every
item.
F
F
F
So
now
it's
being
change
ordered
in
now
that
the
design
has
been
complete
and
we're
out
for
they
have
bit
out
the
construction
which
has
since
commenced
as
well
so
long
story
short,
is
that
we've
got
a
amendment
to
their
design
or
excuse
me,
their
construction
administration
services
to
the
tune
of
a
little
over
28
thousand
dollars,
and
this
will
cover
soil
observations
and
testing
and
other
construction
testing
and
material
inspection
and
testing
on
the
the
construction
of
the
new
terminal
project.
We
do
have
our
consultant
meet
and
hunt
mitch.
A
All
those
opposed
signify
by
saying
nay
motion
carries
item
b.
Is
authorization
for
the
public
works
director?
Slash
city
engineer
to
administratively
approve
individual
change;
orders
up
to
twenty
thousand
dollars
each
to
be
spent
from
the
budgeted
contingency
funds
for
the
aty
terminal
project
project
number
1927.
A
F
Thank
you
mayor.
There
are
a
few
components
to
this
that
I'd
like
to
highlight
one
that
this
idea
was
fostered
in
part
through
conversations
and
recommendations
from
our
consultant,
mead
and
hunt
through
their
tenure
of
experience
on
airport
projects
and
other
communities,
one
of
the
one
of
the
not
necessarily
issues
but
one
of
the
tasks,
and
that
we're
trying
to
accomplish
with
this
authorization
is
to
keep
a
timely
progression
of
the
work
on
site
and
keep
it
within
the
terms
that
we've
signed
up
for
with
our
contractor.
F
When
change
orders
arise
on
the
construction
of
the
new
terminal,
our
contract
requires
that
we
respond
in
a
timely
manner
and
actually
specifically
within
10
days,
for
some
of
those
requests
to
our
general
contractor,
which
is
great
construction,
and
in
order
to
do
that,
what
this
action
would
do
is
give
some
latitude
for
myself.
The
city
and
junior
public
works
director
to
administratively
approve
a
certain
level
of
change
orders.
F
B
F
G
Yeah
great
question,
so
each
individual
change
order
is,
you
know,
if
fits
between
the
the
eligibility
requirements
of
the
faa,
that
we've
already
processed
or
that
we've
already
gotten
acceptance
through.
So
you
know
typically
on
on
sort
of
a
standard,
building-wide
change
order,
those
would
be
75
percent.
You
know
rough
74.75
eligible,
but
in
some
instances
they
may
very
well
be
100
eligible.
G
The
faa
looks
at
each
individual
change
that
comes
in
on
kind
of
a
spreadsheet
basis.
They
would
like
to
see
them
they're
brought
to
them
on
a
cumulative
basis
like
like
we're
proposing
to
the
council
as
well.
What
we
would
do
is
we
would
have.
We
would
lay
out
the
justification
of
the
change
order,
why
we
feel
that
it's
justified
for
funds
and
then
our
determined
eligibility
number
towards
that
specific
change
order.
As
heath
had
mentioned,
you
know
some
change.
Orders
may
be
100
eligible.
B
F
G
Yeah
it
is,
it
tends
to
be.
You
know,
we've
already
sort
of
you
know
considered.
A
couple
of
you
know
potential
changes
here
at
watertown,
and
you
know
what
we
would
say
is
that
that,
in
all
likelihood
on
a
monthly
basis,
we
would
get
together
between
you
know,
heath
and
todd
and
myself
and
and
review
what
what
the
monthly
changes
would
be.
If,
if
there's
only
one
you
know
potentially
we
we
roll
that
into
the
following
month.
G
Usually
it's
it's
right
around
the
the
dollar
amount
and
what
what
we
feel
like
is.
We
feel
like
that.
Four
hundred
thousand
dollar
contingency
value
is
is
well
over
what
we
would
need
to
take
all
changes,
including
owner,
requested
modifications,
but
in
terms
of
like
a
a
general
quantity
of
change
orders,
you
know
it's.
G
A
Those
opposed
signify,
say,
nay,
motion,
carries.
Item
c,
is
approval
of
a
professional
services
agreement,
amendment
for
the
design
bidding
services
and
project
administration
associated
with
the
third
avenue
roadway
improvements,
project
number
1706
with
infrastructure
design
group
inc
in
the
amount
of
forty
thousand
three
hundred
dollars,
bringing
the
total
contract
amount
to
one
hundred
nineteen
thousand
five
hundred
dollars.
B
F
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
mayor.
This
is
an
amendment
with
our
design
services
with
idg,
and
we
do
have
vanessa
victor
on
the
line
with
us
today,
along
with
justin
peterson,
the
assistant
city
engineer
for
questions
here
at
the
end,
but
generally
speaking,
what
this
pertains
to
is
we
entered
into
a
design
contract
with
idg,
quite
some
time
back
for
the
design
of
the
third
avenue
bridge
the
structure
itself.
F
Now,
since
we've
gotten
into
the
scoping
of
that
work,
we've
expanded
the
scope,
all
the
more
to
include
reconstructing
the
entire
street
from
kenpesco
boulevard,
all
the
way
east
to
third
street.
So
that's
caused
their
scope
of
services
to
be
expanded.
It's
gone
from
a
simple
mill:
an
overlay
for
that
portion
to
a
full
reconstruct
the
other
component
to
this
is
adding
in
a
milling
overlay
and
sidewalk
and
ada
compliance
from
kompesca
boulevard
west
to
highway
20,
all
of
which
again
was
found
to
be
of
necessity
during
the
scoping
of
the
of
the
project.
F
B
A
F
F
F
A
F
A
The
next
item
is
d
authorization
for
the
mayor
to
sign
all
necessary
documents
related
to
the
professional
services
agreement
for
environmental
monitoring
and
reporting
for
the
watertown
regional
landfill
with
houston
engineering,
inc
hei
in
the
amount
of
fifty
seven
thousand
four
hundred
fifty
five
dollars
for
three
years
motion
by
holleen
and
a
second
bylaw
go
ahead.
He
tell
us
about
this
one
please.
F
A
All
those
opposed
signify
by
saying
nay
motion
carries
item
e.
Is
approval
of
construction
change
order
number
one
final,
with
donek
inc
for
the
2020
pmp,
a
milling
and
ac
mat
construction
project
number
2002
for
an
increase
of
1
659.8
cents,
bringing
the
total
contract
cost
to
nine
hundred
forty
five
thousand
five
hundred
ninety
four
dollars:
eight
cents,
a
motion
by
bill
hauer
and
the
second
by
holleen
and
heath.
Won't
you
tell
us
about
this.
Please.
F
Yeah,
thank
you
mayor.
This
is
a
close
out
of
one
of
our
2020
projects.
This
is
the
milling
overlay
from
2020
that
was
performed
by
donek,
incorporated
and
included
a
a
series
of
locations
throughout
town
where
the
streets
were
milled
and
overlaid
with
the
new
asphalt
mat,
and
this
is
what
we
would
typically
call
a
partial
mill,
an
overlay.
Usually
you
know
about
a
two
inch
mill
of
the
current
asphalt
surface
and
then
coming
in
and
just
simply
paving
that
two
inches
back
over
with
a
new
asphalt
mat.
F
F
They
weren't
bad
enough
that
we
had
to
reject
the
work,
but
they
were
bad
enough
to
where
we
wanted
to
apply
a
price
reduction
on
the
asphalt
that
we
received
and
so
justin
reviewed
the
dot
specs
that
we
use
on
our
projects
to
see
what
kind
of
an
appropriate
reduction
would
be
for
the
lower
density
parameter
that
wasn't
met.
So
that
was
one
of
the
reasons.
This
change
order
came
in
fairly.
Small
is
because
there's
some
reductions
in
the
overall
final
change
over
here
for
some
of
the
work
that
didn't
quite
meet
specification.
F
A
None
all
right
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye.
Those
opposed
signify
by
saying
nay
motion
carries
item
f
is
rescind
the
temporary
suspension
of
resolution.
20-48
utility
rate
increase
specifically
for
dakota
tube
inc,
reinstating
all
appropriate
charges
and
user
rates
retroactive
to
the
implementation
date
of
said
resolution
have
a
motion
by
hoyer
and
a
second
by
vilhauer
and
heath
want
to
tell
us
about
this.
Please.
F
Yes,
mayor,
thank
you.
This
is
on
the
heels
of
the,
I
believe,
is
right.
At
the
last
meeting
here
we
took
action
to
withhold
or
temporary,
postpone
the
implementation
of
the
new
wastewater
rates
for
one
of
our
businesses,
specific
business
in
town
that
happens
to
be
one
of
our
highest
significant
industrial
users
for
the
wastewater
system.
F
This
particular
significant
industrial
user.
I
believe,
contributed
about
one
percent
of
our
overall
wastewater
treatment
flows
and
it
takes
typically
for
community
to
consider
any
shift
in
a
rate
up
to
a
five,
maybe
ten
percent
contributing
factor
from
any
one
user
before
they
start
shifting
their
rate
structure
for
that
one
user.
So
again,
we
don't
feel
that
we're
outside
the
bounds
of
what
you
normally
see
in
other
communities,
with
the
way
we
set
this
rate
up.
F
That
information
has
subsequently
been
passed
on
to
the
business
owner
through
a
one-on-one
meeting
with
them
and
and
with
staff
and
explained
this
process
and
some
of
the
details
that
went
into
the
rate
establishment
as
subsequent
to
that
meeting.
It's
its
staff's
recommendation
and
the
the
committee's
recommendation
to
keep
the
rate,
as
was
designed
through
our
new
rate
study,
and
go
ahead
and
implement
it
effective
per
the
resolution
20-48
when
all
new
wastewater
rates
became
effective.
F
Our
consultant
ryan
graf
is
online
along
with
mike
berger
and
then
engineering
staff,
justin
and
marcy
as
well,
and
any
one
of
us
be
glad
to
help
answer
any
questions
that
anybody
might
have.
Oh,
I
also
don't,
I
believe
the
property
owner
was
going
to
be
online
too.
If
anybody
had
any
questions
for
him
or
if
he'd
like
to
speak
this
evening,.
F
A
E
I'll
just
make
a
comment,
because
I
was
one
that,
along
with
the
councilwoman
manty,
brought
this
forward
last
time
after
meeting
with
the
staff
and
the
consultants
last
week.
I
I
have
to
agree
with
this
when
looking
at
it
only
being
a
one
percent
of
our
total
discharge
versus
ryan's
comment
or
consultant's
comments
about
it.
You
know,
unless
we
see
a
five
to
ten
percent
customer,
we
should
not
be
using.
You
know
a
a
different
rate.
E
B
E
E
I
explained
to
mr
steinbauer
that
you
know
we
we
are.
We
are
a
policy
setting
group
as
council
members.
We
are.
We
have
to
rely
upon
what
our
consultants
and
staff
are
telling
us
and
he
understood
that,
but
again
had
some
concerns
that
there
were
mistakes
or
things
that
he
disagreed
with
that
you
know,
but
but
I
do
support
reinstating
the
previous
new
charges.
B
A
B
F
F
F
F
You'll,
see
19th
street
here
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
map
and
highway
81
towards
the
left
hand,
side
and
212
running
east
and
west
across
the
middle
now
phase
two
of
the
highway
212
reconstruct
project
is
meant
to
be
broken
into
two
different
phases:
phase.
One
of
that
project
will
require
a
detour
route,
as
highlighted
which
will
include
4th
avenue.
South
and
13th
street
east
they'll
also
have
a
business
detour
that
a
portion
of
that
will
be
on
city
street
jensen
avenue.
F
The
other
portion
will
be
on
private
property
through
the
mall
parking
lot.
Roughly
speaking,
and
they
will,
they
will
enter
into
a
private
detour
agreement
with
the
mall
property
owners
for
that
segment
of
this
route
and
then
phase
two
of
of
this
project
from
13th
street
east
to
19th
they're
planning
to
construct
that
what
we
would
say
under
traffic
they'll
have
head-to-head
traffic
on
one
side
of
the
road
while
they're
constructing
the
other
half
and
then
flip-flop
the
traffic
and
the
construction
halfway
through
the
project.
F
So
4th,
13th
and
jensen
along
with
the
south
bypass,
are
what
this
detour
route
would
include
and
the
city
would
be
signing
off
on
now
when
we
execute
this
agreement.
What
we
do
is
the
d.o.t
does
an
assessment
of
the
streets
along
with
the
street
superintendent
and
engineering
staff,
so
that
we're
all
on
the
same
page
of
what
the
current
condition
of
the
streets
look
like
and
then,
if
any
damages
that
look
like
they're
due
to
the
additional
traffic
would
occur
as
a
result
of
the
construction
project.
F
The
d.o.t
then
asked
their
their
contractor
to
perform
any
repairs
to
our
streets
as
we
do
necessary,
which
I'll
note
they
that
we
did
find
necessary
on
the
last
phase
and
they
did
perform
some
correction
measures
on
our
streets
under
that
phase.
So
all
that
being
said,
justin
peterson
is
on
the
line
with
us
here.
The
assistant
city
engineer,
who's,
helping
facilitate
these
agreements.
E
E
F
F
F
G
F
Construction,
I
would,
I
would
anticipate
that
they
would
be
able
to
get
that
done
within
one
construction
season.
Phase
one
was
done
under
one
construction
season
that
it
turned
kind
of
ugly
on
them
with
the
high
water
and
the
bridge
and
the
work
that
we
had
to
do
with
the
structure,
but
still,
generally
speaking,
would
have
been
done
under
one
construction
season.
So
I
suspect
the
same
for
this
one,
so
starting
early
2022
and
ending
sometime
at
the
end
of
that
year,
we
don't
have
any
bridge
issues
with.
F
No
that's
a
good
question.
I
would
only
be
speculating,
but
there
might
have
been
different
challenges
with
the
the
alignment
and
property
ownership
and
configurations
and
utility
work
and
all
those
things
combined
that
maybe
made
it
a
full-blown
closure.
The
simplest
route
to
go,
but
I'd
just
be
speculating.
That's
a
good
question.
I
did
not
ask
the
dot
of.
I
don't
know
justin
if
you
know
either.
B
A
F
Madam
air,
yes,
if
I
could
add
another
little
nugget
of
information
related
to
that
project,
I
did
just
receive
an
email
where
they're
having
a
pre-construction
meeting
for
the
storm
sewer
work,
that's
related
to
highway
212
phase,
two
that
is
occurring
here
in
2021,
so
the
community
will
see
some
construction
on
highway
212.
But
it's
in
relation
specifically
to
storm
sewer
improvements
that
the
d.o.t
is
installing
ahead
of
the
the
big
project.
That's
coming
in
2022.
F
A
Yeah,
the
preparation
so
they're
doing
the
receiving
pipes
so
that
when
they
do
the
construction
with
the
road
they'll
have
something
to
connect
to
it's
pretty
complicated
but
a
very
much
needed
project.
Any
other
questions
we
already
voted.
Do
we
okay
item?
H?
Is
authorization
for
the
mayor
to
sign
an
addendum
to
the
development
agreement
for
east
park?
Second
edition.
F
F
What
we
discovered
was
that
there
was
a
requirement
in
the
development
agreement
that
required
all
sidewalks
to
be
installed
with
the
public
improvements
within
that
commercial
subdivision
we've
since
circled
back
with
the
developers,
there's
two
developers
at
hand
here
for
two
different
components
of
the
same
area
and
that's
why
there's
another
action
item
on
the
agenda
subsequent
to
this
one,
but
they
both
are
pretty
much
addressing
it
in
the
same
manner.
What
what
we
proposed
back
to
the
developers
and
that
staff
has
helped
facilitate
here
is
an
amendment
to
their
development
agreement.
F
That
would
not
require
them
to
install
all
sidewalks
at
this
time
and
instead
allow
them
to
pass
the
sidewalk
responsibility
onto
the
subsequent
lot
buyers
or
the
subsequent
developers
of
the
lots,
which
is
what
we've
seen
happen
at
travs
outfitters.
For
example,
one
of
the
developed
lots
in
the
subdivision
and
we'll
also
see
with
the
new
hotel,
that's
being
built
where
they
where
they
will
be
building
their
sidewalk
adjacent
to
their
lot.
F
I
was
trying
to
think
in
summary,
the
other
one
was
in
relation
to
the
sidewalk
ramps.
We
did
require
those
to
still
be
installed
by
the
developer,
so
that
the
ramps
and
the
detectable
warning
panels
and
and
things
of
that
nature
are
put
in
with
the
curb
and
gutter
requirements,
so
that
they're
done
so
in
an
engineered
fashion,
so
that
the
slopes
and
things
like
that
are
all
installed
appropriately.
F
So
that
still
would
be
a
requirement
of
the
developers
to
install
all
handicap
ramps
for
the
for
the
sidewalk
at
the
appropriate
intersections
at
the
locations
shown
on
the
approved
plans
and
seems
like
I'm
forgetting
another
detail
here.
But
urban
planner
brandy,
hant
has
helped
facilitate
these
amendments
and
she's
online
to
help
answer
any
questions
and
or
help
talk
through
any
of
the
discussion
that
we've
had
with
the
developers.
For
that
matter.
C
So,
along
with
this,
addendum,
would
allow
the
developers
to
pass
off
the
responsibility
of
installing
the
sidewalks
to
the
the
successors
of
interest
of
those
lots.
But
then
also
the
city
will
still
reserve
the
right
to
to
call
in
a
sidewalk
at
any
time,
and
then
also
we
have
the
language
specifically
stating
that
all
the
remaining
sidewalks
shall
be
installed
by
the
developer
on
or
before
five
years,
because
not
only
for
east
park.
C
When
the
linear
feet
of
uninstalled
sidewalk
is
30
percent
or
less
of
the
total
linear
feet
of
sidewalk
required
on
each
side
and
that's
kind
of
a
mouthful,
but
it
just
so
then
within
say
it
develops
up
to
30
percent
the
sidewalks
are
installed.
It
just
gives
us
that
right
to
have
a
complete
side,
work,
sidewalk
net
network,
that
we
don't
have
to
necessarily
wait.
The
five
years.
F
Yes,
thank
you
for
that
brandy.
Essentially,
it
includes
a
requirement
for
the
developer
to
install
sidewalk
at
either
a
five-year
time
span.
All
that
needs
to
be
installed
or
at
a
point
when
it's
70
percent
developed
and
there's
only
30
percent,
remaining
theory
being
we'd
like
to
see
those
gaps
closed
rather
than
waiting
for
those
lots
to
sell.
F
D
I
guess
I
would
just
say
as
long
as
we
have
that
backstop-
and
this
is
exclusively
for
commercial
development.
I
think
that's
the
only
way
that
really
works,
so
it
helps
too
that
willow
creek
already
has
the
sidewalk
to
get
people
out
there
at
least,
and
once
we
get
that
commercial
park
great.
So
I'm
good
work,
I'm
putting
a
backstop
on
it
that
fills
in
a
lot
of
those
gaps.
So
thank
you.
E
Okay
question:
I've
got
is,
I
know,
we've
talked
about
this,
so
I
don't
want
to
muddy
the
waters,
but
originally
it
was
three
years
from
the
day
from
2017
to
get
the
sidewalks
installed.
Now
we're
granting
them
essentially
an
additional,
almost
five
years
to
get
the
project
done.
Are
we
okay
being
that
lenient
in
our
time
allowance?
Now
I
guess
I'm
just
asking
if,
if
that
five
years
is
a
is
amenable
to
all
of
us,.
C
I
think,
as
a
policy
we
would
want
to,
you
know,
stick
to
the
five
years,
and
but
now
these
guys
and
actually
this
development
agreement
allowed
them
three
years
to
install
the
public
infrastructure
which
isn't
typical
to
our
our
policy
now
and
actually
per
ordinance
that
they
have
to
have
it
installed
within
two
years.
So,
technically
the
this
development
is
getting
eight
years,
but
going
forward.
We
would
just
want
to
stick
to
the
five.
F
F
All
of
that
with
the
sidewalks
was
supposed
to
be
accomplished
within
three
years,
and
I
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
that
it's
not
out
of
the
ordinary
on
our
other
development
agreements
to
see
the
sidewalk
be
passed
on
in
some
cases,
without
a
hard
deadline
to
have
it
complete,
because
it
does
simply
go
with
the
sale
of
the
lots
and,
however,
amount
of
time
that
takes
to
accomplish.
So
I
do
like
the
fact
that
we
at
least
have
a
hard
deadline
in
here.
If
that
helps
the
discussion,
any.
A
B
C
A
Do
you
think
we
should
change
our
ordinance?
Why?
Because
how
are
we
gonna?
Remember
that
it's
different
from
our
ordinance
is
it?
Is
that
something
that
the
the
council
is
interested
in
discussing
our
ordinance
says
everything
all
the
public
improvements
have
to
be
done
within
two
years,
and
this
would
give
them
five
years
for
just
the
sidewalk,
but
everything
else
is
two
years,
and
only
in
commercial
zones.
D
D
A
A
A
F
A
B
A
A
F
A
B
F
In
the
next
meeting
or
the
next
couple
meetings-
and
I'm
okay
with
that
from
a
staffing
standpoint,
because
we
do
have
that
12-month
window,
if
they
for
some
reason,
don't
get
all
the
corner
ramps
installed,
we
can
hold
off
and
would
not
issue
a
resolution
of
acceptance
until
that
work
is
done
just
like.
If
there's
any
warranty,
issues
that
might
come
up
on
the
project.
We'd
have
those
addressed
to
before.
The
resolution
of
acceptance
is
brought
forward.
F
F
A
D
F
E
G
B
B
F
D
A
A
F
I
would
agree
mayor-
and
I
appreciate
those
sentiments
from
the
council
as
well-
that's
something
that
staff
and
I
are
keenly
aware
of
on
new
processes
and
new
subdivisions
that
we're
part
of
from
from
start
to
finish.
Those
are
definitely
things
that
we
will
have
on
the
radar
to
check
off
all
along
the
way
again.
The
hard
stop
here,
I
would
reiterate,
is
our
resolution
of
acceptance
it
if
they
don't
have
those
done.
We've
got
that
as
the
hard
stop
to
say
we're
not
issuing
the
resolution
of
acceptance
until
those
ramps
are
in.
F
B
B
B
B
A
Right
just
a
little
bit
complicated
for
the
staff
to
coordinate
all
that
we'll
have
a
second
acceptance
of
the
ramps
after
and
then
should
put
pretty
boldly
on
the
certificate
of
acceptance
that
it
does
not
include
the
ramps
which
haven't
met
their
one-year
requirement
until
and
then
you
can
fill
in
the
date,
but
they
aren't
going
to
build
them
now.
They'll
build
them
in
the
spring,
so
they
would
fail
immediately
unless
they
did
all
kinds
of
gyrations
to
keep
them
warm.
C
That's
me:
I'm
I
was
creating
other
meetings,
so
I'm
I'm
logged
in
under
a
conference
I'll
switch
that
for
the
council
meeting,
but
two,
so
the
developer
kathy
morris
had
emailed
and
said
that
her
and
as
well
as
coho
john
holman
would
plan
to
get
those
ramps
installed
in
the
spring.
So
really,
maybe
there
isn't
a
huge
time
difference
where
if
we
just
wait
to
bring
the
acceptance
and
after
those
are
installed.
A
A
Well,
I
think
the
council
was
willing
to
consider
it.
I
you
know,
can
see
it
from
both
directions.
They've
they've
already
installed
the
road.
They
forgot
to
install
the
sidewalk
part
of
it
like
ramps
when
they
did
it
and
they
asked
for
acceptance
and
by
then
it
was
too
late
to
put
ramps
in
councilman
hoyer.
Well,.
D
F
Yeah
we
could
gladly
take
that
information
back
to
the
developer
and
essentially
pose
that
option
to
them.
You
know
either
wait,
do
it
all
in
the
spring
or
have
two
separate
warranties
one
for
ninety
percent
of
the
public
improvements
that
would
start
as
soon
as
we
bring
this
certificate
of
completion
back
and
then
a
second
one
for
the
curb
ramps
once
they're
accomplished
in
the
spring.
You
know,
summer
time,
whenever
they're
complete
start
a
new
warranty
for
that,
and
you
know
brandy's
right.
F
The
the
spring
when
they
get
them
installed
is
not
too
far
off
here
and
maybe
they'll
be
amicable
to
go
ahead
and
go
that
route
staff
would
be
happy
to
facilitate
it
either
way.
I
I
don't
like
setting
a
precedent
for
taking
components
out
of
the
certificate
of
completion
and
putting
them
in
the
warranty
period.
But
again,
under
these
circumstances,
with
this
project,
I
felt
it
was
worthy
of
the
ask
that
the
developer
had
presented
to
us
and
thought
we'd
carry
it
on
to
the
council.