Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 of 3 <br /> 1. Per the direction of the City Council at their June 3, 2008 regular meeting, a June 9, 2008 <br /> letter was sent to Mr. Smith. This letter stated that all punch list items must be completed by <br /> June 30, 2008 and all financial obligations due to the City must be paid by June 30, 2008, or <br /> the City will find Mr. Smith in default and immediately proceed with the default remedies as <br /> indicated in the Developer Agreement. <br /> 2. The City hired Landecker to observe construction in the field. <br /> 3. Landecker sent a June 26, 2008 letter to the City certifying that the public improvements <br /> have been completed in substantial conformance with the plans and specifications. <br /> 4. However, Landecker also sent a June 26, 2008 letter to Mr. Smith, copying the City, <br /> indicating Landecker was providing a written notice that the recent bituminous patch next to <br /> the lift station was unacceptable and needed to be re-done as warranty work. <br /> 5. There is also a lack of vegetation coverage in places, one specific location being around as <br /> well as across the road from the lift station. The construction contract and State Statute does <br /> require a General Storm Water Permit. That Permit requires 70% vegetation coverage. Mr. <br /> Smith does not have this met, nor is their a Notice of Termination filed yet. <br /> 6. In my opinion, as your City Engineer, Mr. Smith still having warranty work to complete as <br /> well as no Notice of Termination indicates, at a minimum, he has not met the June 30, <br /> 2008 completion date and he is in default of the Developer Agreement. <br /> 7. I do not know if Mr. Smith has met all financial obligations due to the City by June 30, 2008. <br /> 7. It is suggested the City direct the City Attorney to proceed with default remedies indicated in <br /> the Developer Agreement. <br /> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ <br /> Please note a few things with this approach: <br /> a. I do not know if the City has to officially accept all of the improvements prior to Mr. Smith's <br /> bonding company addressing the remaining items. My first take is that the City would not <br /> officially accept them until everything is done - i.e. Mr. Smith, or his bonding company, will still <br /> be responsible for these improvements until completed. <br /> b. Normally, there is a one-year correction period (some call it a warranty or guarantee <br /> period). With the delays and now this situation, I am not confident we will be able to enforce <br /> this one-year correction period. <br /> c. Relative to possible major construction issues, these remaining items may be viewed by Mr. <br /> Smith's bonding company has minor construction items. While they may not do this, I would <br /> not be surprised if they balk a little at bituminous patch and vegetation completion requests. <br /> d. Proceeding with default remedies will require some time, effort, resources, and money of <br /> your City Attorney, City Engineer, and others. I think they will, but I will defer to the City <br /> Attorney on whether such costs will be reimbursed via the bond. <br /> The other alternative is to continue trying to work with and encourage Mr. Smith to address <br /> these items before the City takes over all improvements. <br /> TimH <br /> 7/1/2008 <br />