[1. MINUTES]
[2. BID OPENINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND AWARDS]
[00:00:49]
>> GOOD MORNING. I CALL THE MARCH 19, 2025, BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS IN SAFETY MEETING TO ORDER. FIRST IS THE MINUTES FROM MARCH FIVE OF 2025 REGULAR MEETING. DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> I WILL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES. ITEM 2 BIT OPENINGS AND RECLAMATION AWARDS TO A BIT OPENING FOR 22-ENG-11 141ST STREET FROM WEST ROAD TO SPRINGHILL ROAD AND BRAD PEASE?
>> I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF HIM. >> THANK YOU. >> THIS WILL BE BID TOTALS AND THIS WILL BE $1,875,000. NUMBER TWO WAS ALL-STAR PAVING INC. FOR 1,000,882 395 04 AND NUMBER THREE WAS WE ARE VERY COMPANY INC. $2,134,000 AND NUMBER 4 WAS CALUMET SILICA AND CONTRACTORS
>> THE NEXT ONE IS A BIT OPENING FOR CITY SUPPORT SERVICES >> GOOD MORNING.
>> WAS IT IS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL? CORRECT? >> ONE SECOND. THIS ISN'T A BIT OPENINGS. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS ANNOUNCE WHO MADE THE PROPOSALS.
THERE IS NO NEGOTIATION. SO ALL WE NEED TO DO IS ANNOUNCE WHO SUBMITTED THE PROPOSALS. YOU DON'T NEED TO
[3. TABLED ITEMS]
ANNOUNCE ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT FOR THE NAMES. >> OKAY. THERE WERE TWO
[4. CONTRACTS]
SUBMITTALS. ONE WAS LETTER AND V GEO SPADE LINK AND THE OTHER ONE WAS POWER ENGINEERS INC.[00:05:03]
>> THANK YOU. >> AND THEN A LATER DATE AFTERWARDS.
>> THAT WAS GOOD. >> THERE WERE TABLED ITEMS AND HERE CONSENTING ENCROACH 41 N.
RANGE LYNN ROAD AND DOES IT REMAIN TABLED? >> THERE WERE STILL SOME SO
APPROVAL FOR SOMETIME. >> THANK YOU. >> CONTRACTS 4 A REQUEST FOR PURCHASES OF GOODS AND SERVICES FIELDS OUTDOOR ADVENTURES LLP , $72,125, AMMUNITION. MAJOR
JILLSON? >> I AM HERE FOR THE CHIEF. >> GOOD.
>> I ASSUME THIS IS FOR YEARLY TRAINING? >> TO MAKE SURE WE MAINTAIN OPERATIONAL ABILITY TO CONDUCT TRAINING THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND ALSO TO STAY AHEAD OF SUPPLY
CHAIN ISSUES THAT COULD COME UP. >> THANK YOU.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION. NO DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION
PASSES. THANK YOU. >> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RUNDELL ERNSTBERGER ASSOCIATES, INC. $218,500 24-ENG-19 MAIN STREET FROM FOURTH AVENUE TO RICHLAND.
>> THIS IS FOR PRELIMINARY SCOPING FEES FOR TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY FOR THE 24 ENG PROJECT
WHICH IS THE MAIN STREET PROJECT ALONG MAIN STREET. >> QUESTIONS?
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE.
>> MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. >> REQUEST FOR PURCHASES OF GOODS AND SERVICES UNITED CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC 7000 $837,000 -- $7837 IT'S A MULTIUSE PATH CHANGE ORDER NUMBER FIVE. HELLO. THIS IS FOR REPAIR ALONG HAVERSTICK ROAD. IT IS A CHANGE ORDER.
>> MOVED . >> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR?
>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES. >> 4 D REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF
GOODS AND SERVICES $206,987 , GENETEE SERVERS. >> THIS IS A CONTRACT WE LIKE TO PUT IN PLACE TO INCREASE RECORDING CAPACITY FOR THE SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS FOR THE
CITY. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE.
>> MOTION PASSES. >> THE NEXT ONE IS A REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES SCSU INC., $55,646.38 , 126 STREET AND COAL CREEK FIBER INSTALLATION. ADDITIONAL
SERVICES AMENDMENT. >> THIS TO RELOCATE A FIBER OPTIC LINE THE CITY OWNS UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE ON 126 STREET AND HAMILTON COUNTY HAS A BRIDGE CONTRACT AND THIS IS IN
CONFLICT SO WE'RE RELOCATING IT OUT OF THIS NEW ONE. >> QUESTIONS.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> MOTION PASSES.
>> REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES; CC&T CONSTRUCTION, INC.; ($55,840.00); SIDEWALK
REPLACEMENT ADDITIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT. >> GOOD MORNING. THIS CONTRACT IS TO REPLACE THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING AT THIRD AVENUE AND CITY CENTER DRIVE.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> MOTION PASSES.
>> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES $115,000 -- $115,570 , ANNUAL
FLOWERS ADDITIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT. >> THIS IS TO INSTALL ANNUALS
FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR OF 2025 IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS. >> OUT OF CURIOSITY, ARE THESE IN THE POTS WE SEE, OR ARE THESE IN ROUNDABOUTS FOR ALL OF THEM?
>> IT WILL BE THE INSTALL ONLY SO IT IS IN ROUNDABOUTS, PLANTERS AND HERE AT CITY HALL
AND ALL OVER. >> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
[00:10:04]
>> MOTION PASSES. >> LETTER H REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES , $54,597.84 CUFF LOWER INSTALLATION ADDITIONAL SERVICES AMENDMENT.
>> THIS CONTRACT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE PREVIOUS ONE BECAUSE THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE MAINTENANCE FOR CERTAIN LOCATIONS SO AT THE PALLADIUM AND THE DESIGN CENTER AND IN
[5. REQUEST TO USE CITY STREETS/PROPERTY]
SOME PLANTERS ALONG MAIN STREET WHERE THEY WOMAN STAYING -- MAINTAIN THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> MOTION PASSES. >> LETTER I REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF GOODS AND SERVICES, K PS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION $5940, 24 ST 09 STREET APARTMENT BUILDING UPGRADES CHANGE ORDER
NUMBER ONE. >> THIS IS TO ADD SIDING AND TRIM.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.
>>> IT IS A REQUEST TO USE CITY STREETS AND PROPERTY WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE. LETTER A REQUEST TO YOU CITY HALL PARKING LOT THE FREEWHEELIN COMMUNITY SPRING BIKE APRIL FIVE, 20
2510:30 A.M. TO 2:00 P.M. >> MOVED TO APPROVE. SECOND I WILL SECOND.
>> MOTION PASSES. B REQUEST TO USE CLOSE CITY STREETS MAY SEVEN, 2025, 8:00 A.M. TO 8:00
P.M., >> I AM MATT MCBROOM. THEY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION AND IMPROVED AND APPROVED IN PART AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO WORK THROUGH WHATEVER THE CONCERNS ARE GET THE APPLICATION FULLY APPROVED AND IF THE PROBLEM IS THE TIMING , THEY CAN REVISE THAT FROM 3:00 TO 8:00 OR WORK WITH WHATEVER THE CONSTRAINTS ARE BUT THEY WEREN'T SURE WHAT THE ISSUE WAS LIKE I SAID IT WAS APPROVED IN PART. SO JUST TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE OR
REVISE THE APPLICATION. >> MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO US WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE.
>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. THIS IS RELATIVELY UNCOMMON BUT WE DID HAVE A SITUATION LIKE THIS PLAY OUT RECENTLY SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SAY ISN'T ENTIRELY DIRECTED AT YOU BUT PUBLIC CONSUMPTION. I AM THE ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF CARMEL . THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. THE PROCESS BY WHICH EVENTS ARE APPROVED IS MULTIFACETED . I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS BUT FOR THE SAKE OF ANYONE ELSE LISTENING WHO MAY HAVE QUESTIONS, POLICE, FIRE, ENGINEERING SO THAT KIND OF THING, YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS. WHEN ENGINEERING LOOKS AT A CLOSURE, WE TRY TO LOOK AT WHAT THAT CLOSURES IMPACT LOOKS LIKE TO THE ROAD NETWORK AND EVEN MORE SO TO THE POINT, WE CAN'T REROUTE TRAFFIC THROUGH PRIVATE PROPERTY. THAT ISSUE IS IN LARGE PART PRIVATE PROPERTY ISN'T BUILT TO CITY STANDARDS, ROADS, ET CETERA. THERE IS LIABILITY. WE HAVE TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AT IT. I THINK WE ARE ALL AWARE THAT EVERY TIME WE CLOSE A ROAD THERE IS THIS AND WE WORK WITH PETITIONERS AND COME UP WITH A REASONABLE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. IN THIS CASE CLOSING THE ROAD DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE STUDIO, THE CONSEQUENCES YOU DON'T ACTUALLY JUST CLOSE THE ROAD BUT YOU HAVE TO CLOSE IT ALL THE WAY AT FIRST TO THE NORTH AND YOU COULD CLOSE IT AT PHELPS TO THE SOUTH AND MAINTAIN THE ROAD NETWORK AND YOU WILL BE LANDLOCKED BUSINESSES IN THAT CORRIDOR OF THE CLOSURE. SOME PEOPLE MAY LOOK AND SAY YOU CAN DRIVE TO THE PARKING LOTS BUT IT GOES THROUGH YOU CAN'T ROUTE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY. WE WOULD SUGGEST IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE THAT PETITIONER COULD CLOSE THE DIAGONAL PARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND TAKE THOSE AND CONE THOSE OFF. WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT REROUTING THE CLOSURE, IF YOU WILL TO PHELPS TO THE SOUTH ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING AND TRY TO LIMIT THE CLOSURE ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING AND THAT WAY YOU CAN MAINTAIN ACCESS TO THOSE BUSINESSES OVER THERE AND IT IS A SIMILAR SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE CREATED A CHOKE BUT THE IMPACT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS. SO THIS WOULD BE WHAT WE WOULD FEEL LIKE IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE TO A SOLUTION TO THE OUTLINE PROBLEM
[00:15:05]
AT HAND. ALTERNATIVELY, WE WOULD SAY DON'T CLOSE ANY OF THE ROAD, BUT THIS IS A COMPROMISETHAT WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN LIVE WITH. >> YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS
CLOSING PHELPS FROM VETERANS EAST? >> YES. YOU COULD LIMIT THE CLOSURE ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING AND STOPPED SHORT OF THE PARKING LOT THERE. THAT WOULD MAINTAIN ACCESS TO ALL OF THE BUSINESSES THERE. AND MY SUSPICION IS IN THE STUDIO PEOPLE WOULDN'T MIND TAKING SOME LIABILITY TO PEOPLE DOING A THREE POINT TURN IN THEIR PARKING LOT TO THE REROUTE BACK IF SOMEBODY MADE THE WRONG DIRECTION BUT IT IS DIFFERENT THAN TO THE NORTH THEN WHEN YOU HAVE LANDLOCKED ILLNESSES AND NOT ALLOWED TO TURN AROUND. I HOPE THAT IS A FAIRLY
COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE . >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE ORIGINAL REQUEST IS TO CLOSE
VETERANS WAY? >> THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS LIMITED TO VETERANS WAY DIRECT THE IN FRONT OF THE STUDIO , STUDIO M. YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU HAVE TO CLOSE THE ROAD FROM FIRST ALL THE WAY DOWN TO PHELPS IF YOU WANTED TO CLOSE DOWN THE ROAD IN FRONT OF STUDIO M. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS? BEFORE I STEP AWAY? >> JOSH?
>> YES, SIR? >> YOU MENTION TWO THINGS THAT RAISE A CONCERN WITH ME. ONE IS REGARDING AND MAINTAINING ACCESS TO THE BUSINESSES THERE. IN YOUR OPINION, IS THE SOLUTION, THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAME UP WITH, IS THAT A SUFFICIET ENOUGH THING THAT THE BUSINESSES
WOULDN'T BE HARMED DETRIMENTALLY? >> YES. THAT IS MY ASSESSMENT.
>> THE SECOND THING IS, WITH THAT, WITH THAT CLOSURE, WOULD THAT IN ANY WAY BE DETRIMENTAL
TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY? >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO, SIR.
>> EVEN WITH MAKING THREE POINT TURNS? >> THE LIMITED LIABILITY OF THIS IS WHY MADE THE RECOMMENDATION. PHELPS IS LIKE TREATING IT LIKE A DRIVEWAY SO YOU CAN PULL INTO THE THREE BUSINESSES WHICH IS ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR IN THE GRID NETWORK VERSUS CLOSING DOWN VETERANS WHICH IS KIND OF A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND YOU HAVE KIND OF CREATED WHAT I THINK IS
A LIABILITY AND COMP. >> SIR, FROM WHAT YOU HEARD JUST NOW, DO YOU BELIEVE THE CITY HAS
ANY TYPE OF LIABILITY ISSUE, IF THAT WERE ACCEPTABLE? >> I DON'T THINK SO EXCEPT FOR ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION IF I MAY. THE AFOREMENTIONED TERM WOULD HAPPEN ON -- TURN IT WOULD
HAPPEN ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES? >> IN THE CASE WHERE YOU REPOSITIONED THE CLOSER -- CLOSURE ON PHELPS, I THINK WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS YOU ARE ALLOWING PEOPLE PULLING INTO THE BUSINESSES AND IF SOMEBODY HAD TO DO THE THREE POINT TURN, IT WOULD BE ON THE STUDIO PROPERTY
AND NOT ON ANY OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY. >> UNDERSTOOD. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE IF THE BOARD WERE TO APPROVE IT, MAKE IT A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL THAT IF THE STUDIOS PROPERTY WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS CLOSURE THAT THE PETITION OBTAINS PERMISSION FROM THE STUDIO TO DO ANY U-TURN OR ANY OTHER TURN OR USE IT IN ANY WAY.
>> CAN I ASK YOU THAT PERHAPS THIS MAY A SUEDE SOMETHING WITH REGARD TO WHAT YOU SAID. IF THEY WERE TO GIVE THAT PERMISSION BEFORE HAND FROM THE STUDIO INSTEAD OF POST, WOULD THAT BE A SOLUTION TO THAT? NOT A SOLUTION. WOULD YOU SUGGEST OR SHOULD WE SUGGEST THAT THEY GET
THAT PRIOR TO? >> ABSOLUTELY. IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS MAY BE A COMMENT?
>> I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THIS. STUDIO M IS A LANDLORD AND WE ACTUALLY MODELED THIS EVENT AFTER AND THEY HOSTED A SIMILAR EVENT AND USE THEIR APPLICATION AND SUBMITTED IT AND THEY CLOSED VETERANS WAY LAST YEAR FOR A SIMILAR EVENT. THEY WILL BE ON BOARD AND WE CAN GET THE PERMISSION. THEY KNOW WE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION AND THEY HELPED US THROUGH THE
PROCESS. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> IN THIS CASE I DON'T THINK
WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH A PROPOSED SOLUTION. >> BUT TO THE PETITIONERS POINT, WE COULD GET BEHIND CLOSURE OF THE NORTHBOUND LANE OF VETERANS AND THE DIAGONAL PARKING WITH
[00:20:12]
MAINTAINING ACCESS IN THE SOUTHBOUND? DO YOU FOLLOW? >> YES. I DO UNDERSTAND. YES. IF
WE COULD DO THAT. ONE LANE? >> I KNOW. I KNOW. >> I THINK WE HAVE WORKED WITH PETITIONER TO COME UP WITH A REASONABLE THIRD SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM. SO WHAT ENGINEERING IS APPROVING RIGHT NOW, IF IT IS A PETITIONER TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS IF YOU WILL WITH THE CLOSURE OF THE NORTHBOUND LANE FROM PHELPS NORTH OF THE BUILDING ENDING AT THE RIVE OF THE INDIANA DESIGN ROUTE AND THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO MAINTAIN ACCESS IN THE CORRIDOR
AND STILL MAINTAIN THE CONNECTIVITY IN THE REGION. >> I AM A VISUAL TYPE PERSON. IS POSSIBLE YOU CAN PUT WHAT YOU JUST SHOWED YOU UP SO -- FOR HE AND I ?
>> I CAN BRING IT OVER TO YOU. >> THAT IS INCLUSIVE OF THE PARKING BUT IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT
OF THE BUILDING? >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS THIS BUILDING WHICH IS ANOTHER NAME. IT IS CALLED THE STUDIO.
>> THIS IS THE BUILDING AND JUST FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE MRS. NORTHBOUND VETERANS WAY AND THIS IS THE FIRE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND THIS IS THE INDIANA DESIGN CENTER AND DOES EVERYBODY HAVE A CONCEPT OF WHERE WE ARE AT AND THIS IS WEST PHELPS WAY OF THIS RIGHT HERE IS CALLED VETERANS WAY. WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING RIGHT HERE IS THIS ACTUALLY DOES A GOOD JOB OF EXPLAINING THAT. WHAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IS THE NORTHBOUND LANE. AND WHAT IT DOES IS THIS IS STILL A BIT OF INCONVENIENCE AND I DON'T KNOW AND MAYBE WE CAN DISCUSS THIS PART OF THIS.
THREE DAYS SEEMS MORE REASONABLE AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT IN THIS ALLOWS TRAFFIC TO COME NORTH ON PHELPS -- NORTH ON VETERANS AND DETOUR OUT ON TO PHELPS AND THIS ALLOWS TRAFFIC TO COME SOUTHBOUND TO CONNECT FROM ALL OF THE AREA BUSINESSES HERE INCLUDING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ET CETERA AND DO YOU FOLLOW THIS? ALL WE ARE DOING AT THIS POINT WOULD BE CLOSING THE NORTHBOUND LANE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE STUDIO BUILDING AND MAINTAINING THIS SOUTHBOUND. AND THEN OF COURSE THEY WILL TAKE OVER THE DIAGONAL PARKING SPOTS AS WELL AND YOU WILL MAINTAIN THOSE AND THIS IS A LIMITED CLOSURE AND THIS IS A GREAT COMPROMISE. THIS IS PROBABLY REALLY THE BEST OF ALL THREE SOLUTIONS. I WOULD WAGER TO SAY THAT LEGAL COUNSEL WOULD ALSO SAY IT IS THE LEAST IMPACTFUL AND LESS LIABLE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS THE WORD.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SHOULD WE TABLE THAT ITEM SO THEY CAN MAKE THE CHANGES TO THE REQUEST
AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD THE NEXT TIME? >> I THINK THE REQUEST IS REASONABLY WELL-DEFINED AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT IS BUT WE ARE WORKING ON THAT TODAY AND THEY
CAN UPDATE LATER AS FAR AS ANY EXHIBITS GO. >> I THINK I CAN MAKE AN ATTEMPT FOR THAT. BUT I DO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE UNDER THE CONDITIONS THAT NORTHBOUND VETERANS WAY GETS BLOCKED FROM 3:00 TO 8:00 P.M. FROM PHELPS DRIVE TO THIS ENTRANCE TO THE
NORTH. >> THAT IS INCLUSIVE OF DIAGONAL PARKING IN FRONT OF THE
BUILDING? >> YES. >> ON THE LIMITED DATE OF THE
PETITIONER? >> YES. >> OKAY. YES. I SECOND THAT.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ? ALL RIGHT. >> MOVED TO APPROVE? >> ALL IN FAVOR?
>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.
>> 5C REQUEST USE PALLADIUM EAST PATIO, SPECIAL REQUEST USE ELECTRICITY, WEDDING CEREMONY
[00:25:08]
MAY 17, 2025 5:00 P.M. TO SIX QUART 140 P.M. -- 6:40 P.M. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES.
>> NEXT ONE REQUEST USE CARTER GREEN AND PALLADIUM EAST PATIO, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED JULY 17 OF
2024, REQUEST FOR PARKING ONLY, MAY 17, 2025. >> MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> THE MOTION CARRIES. >> FIVE EE REQUEST TO USE SPECIFIC SQUARE FOUNTAIN AND AREA AND CITIC SQUARE GAZEBO AND LAWN A SPECIAL REQUEST TO USE ELECTRICITY AND FOUNTAIN RESTROOMS, GAZEBO CONCERTS, MAY 28, JUNE FOUR, JULY 11 -- JUNE 11, JUNE 18, JUNE 25, JULY NINE, JULY 16, JULY 23, JULY 30, AUGUST SIX, AUGUST 13, AUGUST 20, AUGUST 27, SEPTEMBER THREE, AND SEPTEMBER 10, 2025, SEPTEMBER 17 AND SEPTEMBER 24
2025 RAIN DATES. >> MOVED TO APPROVE. SECOND >> MOTION CARRIES.
>> REQUEST USE MIDTOWN PLAZA FOR FREE FAMILY-FRIENDLY MOVIES JUNE THREE, 2025 TO SEPTEMBER 30 2025
TUESDAYS AND THURSDAYS 6:00 TO 8:00 P.M. >> MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> MOTION CARRIES.
[6. OTHER]
>> REQUEST TO USE A CLOSE CITY STREETS FOR THE FREEDOM RUN AND WALK JULY FOUR, 2025.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> MOTION CARRIES.
>> REQUEST USE CITY STREETS ANNUAL KELLIE S KEGS N EGGS AUGUST NINE.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES.
>> REQUEST TO USE MOAN ON AND MAIN PLAZA AND USER CLOSE CITY STREETS, FOR THE SPECIAL REQUEST USE ELECTRICITY, CARMEL INTERNATIONAL ARTS FESTIVAL, SEPTEMBER 28, 2025.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES.
>> SIX A REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BP W RESOLUTION NUMBER 04-28 -17-01 96 STREET STATIC WHY
REPLACEMENT. >> HELLO. OUR STAFF REVIEWED THIS WAIVER AND THESE ARE
TYPICAL MAINTENANCE OF THE EXISTING SERVICES ACROSS TOWN. >> THANK YOU.
>> ANY MOTIONS? MOVED TO APPROVE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES. HERE REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BP W RESOLUTION NUMBER 04 28 -17-013 10 FIRST STREET NORTHEAST.
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? >> MOTION CARRIES.
>> 6C REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BP W RESOLUTION NUMBER 04-28 -17-01, 1640 W. MAIN STREET .
[7. ADD-ONS]
>> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES.
>> 6D REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF BP W RESOLUTION NUMBER 04-28-17-01, COMMUNITY DRIVE AND 146 STREET.
>> THIS IS FOR AN AREA NOT SERVED BY UTILITIES BUT TO SERVE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER INAUDIBLE - LOW VOLUME ] AND IT WILL BE REMOVED ONCE THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED.
>> THANK YOU. >> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> SECOND.
>> ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES. >> MR. CHAIRMAN? I MOVED THAT WE ADD ON TWO ITEMS TO OUR AGENDA.
THE FIRST ONE IS AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. THE OTHER IS A CHANGE ORDER FORM.
>> I WILL SECOND THAT. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES. >> GOOD MORNING. THE FIRST ADD ON IS A CONTRACT AWARD TO RILEY CONSTRUCTION AND THIS IS A REGISTRATION OR REFORMATION CONTRACT PREVIOUSLY DONE LAST YEAR AND YOU'RE VERY WELL AWARE OF THIS AND WE DID IT TWICE IN THE FIRST TIME IT WAS TOO HIGH AN ABOVE BUDGET SO WE HAD TO BID IT A SECOND TIME WITH THE SECOND BID CONSIDERABLY LOWER AND THIS WAS THE LOWEST BIDDER AND THAT AMOUNT OF CONTRACT IS
[00:30:08]
$939,658.97. WE APOLOGIZE BUT WE DIDN'T GET THIS IN TIME AND WE MISS THE DEADLINE BY 24 HOURSAND WE HAVE THE SIGNATURE. ANY QUESTIONS? >> MOVED TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION CARRIES. >> THE SECOND ITEM IS WITH Y
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.