Laserfiche WebLink
228 <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta pointed out that item 6b, Water Efficient <br /> Irrigation and Landscape Design Ordinance has been continued to the -- <br /> January 19, 1992 City Council meeting. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked that item 8i, Council comments to Staff on <br /> any items for inclusion in discussions regarding School District <br /> Impact Fee Agreement be continued to the January 5, 1993 City <br /> Council meeting. He explained that the Committee on the School <br /> District's impact fees was intending to meet before January 5, <br /> 1993. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta suggested that Council continue this item <br /> indefinitely because Council may have a workshop meeting to discuss <br /> this item at that time. <br /> <br /> Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, asked that the School Board <br /> voluntarily incorporate a compliance with the City's Transportation <br /> Systems Management Ordinance. <br /> <br /> 4. CONSENT CALENDAR <br /> <br /> Robert Cordtz, 262 W. Angela, addressed the Council on Item <br /> 4d. He requested Council not to accept Well No. 8 because there <br /> are no estimated final costs available until January 1993 and the <br /> cost sharing agreement has never been consummated. The City has <br /> drilled a new well at the cost of $800,000 and has a production of <br /> probably 3800 gallons per minute. When you split that 65/35 with <br /> Dublin, the City ends up with practically what the City could have <br /> gotten out of Well No. 7, so the well should not be approved. <br /> <br /> Steve Cuzenza, Deputy Director of Utilities, explained that <br /> this item is a construction contract and all of the items within <br /> that contract have been satisfactorily completed. Therefore, it is <br /> not an issue of whether or not the construction contract is valid. <br /> All of the items have been completed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarvet understood that the well is required for the <br /> City's use and should there be excess capacity, the City would <br /> share it with DSRSD on a basis that it would share full cost of the <br /> operation of that well. <br /> <br /> Mr. Elliott indicated that is correct. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if this item needed to be approved this <br /> evening. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta stated that the item did not have to be approved <br /> this evening but she felt that there was an expectation that it be <br /> approved. The issues that Mr. Cordtz raised are unrelated to the <br /> construction contract. <br /> <br /> 12/15/92 2 <br /> <br /> <br />