Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glenarden Council adds emergency repairs; debate centers on driveway aprons and a $19,000 HVAC quote
Summary
Council adopted an amended agenda adding two emergency resolutions — sidewalk/curb work and rooftop RTU duct replacement — and spent the session clarifying whether homeowners or the city pay for driveway aprons and pressing staff for more bids and documentation on a $19,000 HVAC/duct repair quote.
Glenarden City Council on Monday added two emergency resolutions to the agenda — one to remove and replace sidewalks, curbs and gutters at specified locations on Pulk Court and Tyler Street and another (R 36-2026) to replace the rooftop duct installation system on two RTUs at the municipal center — then immediately dug into questions about who pays for driveway aprons and whether the ductwork procurement had followed proper bidding rules.
The agenda amendment passed by announced consent; councilmembers then sought clarity about a homeowner’s question over whether the city or the homeowner is responsible for driveway aprons. “Section 142-19 of the city code is called maintenance,” Mr. Green told the council, reading the ordinance language and saying, “It shall be the duty and obligation of the owner of the property abutting a sidewalk and a public rightway to maintain the abutting sidewalk, driveway apron and sod.” He added that the city is responsible for curbs, gutters and city streets and that he would provide the county language requested by Councilwoman Jones before the item returns for a vote on the 22nd.
Councilmembers pressed staff separately about R 36-2026 and a related HVAC repair quote. Staff described ongoing temporary patches to ductwork and said the conduit and insulation had corroded and needed replacement; a Fuji quote to replace insulation on an RTU was cited at about $19,000. Several councilmembers said they were not comfortable moving forward on a sole-source quote without additional bids or more documentation. “This is a $19,000 contract. We need to get more than just that,” Councilman Herring said, adding that he expected three bids for a contract of that size and asked why the city had not called the original roofing contractor to check whether any patching might have affected a warranty.
Staff told the council the quote dated from March and that pictures existed; they said they would circulate photos and the RFP history. Mr. Stewart said the duct had been patched repeatedly and that the patching was not a long‑term solution. Councilwoman Jones and others urged more than one bid and additional inspection by the contractor and by staff before approving emergency procurement.
The council did not take final votes on either resolution in the work session; staff was asked to provide the county code language on aprons, the documentation and photos supporting the HVAC recommendation, and procurement history and alternatives for presentation at the next scheduled vote.
The council also placed a closed‑session discussion of the public works director’s salary on the agenda and voted to retire into executive session later in the meeting.
