Laserfiche WebLink
l • <br /> 77 <br /> February 24,1982 <br />• COUNCIL HELL NO.822-66 <br /> UGC/In-READ/NG) <br /> AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Mayor,or his designee, <br /> to let or enter contracts not requiring competitive <br />• bidding on behalf of the City of Everett. 4 <br /> VG <br /> COUNCIL BILL NO.872-67 <br /> SECOND READING: <br /> AN ORDINANCE providing for the vacation of the alley <br /> East of Colby,39th Street to 40th Street. <br /> The meeting then recessed until 4.30 p.m.for an Executive Session. <br /> The meeting reconvened into Executive Session and after which then <br /> reconvenened into regular session,with President Pope presiding and all <br /> Councilmen in attendance. <br /> It <br /> CHANCE ORDER-(CB 822-78) <br /> . . <br /> Mary Haglund,of the-Public Works Department,explained this change <br /> order.was to construct a 6.4 million gallon concrete clearwell <br /> (reservoir)for the filtration facility rather than•a 5 million gallon <br /> earth fill clearwell.. This would reduce maintenance and operation . <br /> costs in the long run. This change order would require aPProxiMutelE <br /> $15,000 in additional engineering costs. He explained that the <br /> original project-design included an 8 million gallon concrete'clearwell, <br /> but,in an effort to reduce overall costs for the project was redtmed <br /> to a 5 million gallon one per recommendation of a value engineering <br /> analysis. <br /> . . <br /> Councilman Michelson objected to the additional$15,000 for a <br /> design change. <br /> '1'"=Pr"tnti4trM,=t.:e1:11=X:;rNII.M:rThe <br /> 0.:crete.e'e .. <br /> Hruce Jones,City Attorney,stated the agreement between the PUD <br /> ) <br /> and City said that e.stantial changes to the project had to be <br /> approved by them. The question was whether or nor they felt this <br /> was a substantial change and whether or not they would approve it. <br /> Staff recommendation was to-proceed with this,if possible. <br /> Bill Hulbert,of the P.N.S.,stated they have not yet arranged for <br /> financing yet. He has also not had an opportunity to discuss with <br /> P.U.D.Commissioners whether this is,in fact,a substantial change. <br /> However,-he felt tIMs change would only benefit the City of Everett <br /> in the long term. It did,in his opinion,constitute a substantial <br /> change,thus necessitating PIM Commission approval. <br /> - =7".=7,:l!:;to=ZMnfter:Zgattr:=111!-1 <br />.-1 • • <br /> • <br /> • <br /> • <br /> • <br />