Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION <br />JANUARY 3, 2013 <br />HOUSE The Director noted that money has been budgeted for replacement of <br />PROJECT this 30 -year old warming house with a new facility that better fits the way <br />the facility is being used today. The new warming house is proposed to <br />have sewer and water so that a drinking fountain and restroom facilities <br />can be added. The Director reported that the City Engineer has located <br />existing sewer and water lines in the area. Based on those locations, there <br />should be no problem constructing a new warming house a little south of <br />the existing warming house. A grinder pump will likely be necessary as <br />part of the sewer extension. <br />The Director indicated that he would determine the status of property <br />acquisition discussions with St. John's Church from the City <br />Administrator. He noted that while the warming house can likely be <br />placed on City property, the pleasure rink is located on property owned by <br />the Church. The Director felt the City should own this property rather <br />than lease it from the Church. <br />The Director indicated that once he determines the status of property <br />acquisition discussions, he would hire an architect to begin designing the <br />new warming house. Sanders noted that the acquisition would not have to <br />be complete before building construction could commence. <br />The Director indicated that once the exact location of the warming house <br />is identified and the building design is completed, he would present that <br />information to the Commission. <br />NADEAU The Director reported that the City has budgeted for the upgrade of <br />PARK the Nadeau Park playground for 2013. The Commission has reviewed <br />UPGRADES various playground design styles as well as toured playgrounds in the <br />Metro area to see the types of current equipment and designs available <br />and in use. <br />Sanders presented two options that were developed by a playground <br />architect based on the Commission input that was provided. Option 1 was <br />a more traditional type of structure while Option 2 was more modern in <br />appearance. Estimated cost of Option 1 was $42,900 and Option 2 <br />$39,700. <br />The Commission discussed both options in detail. Vang noted that Option <br />1 had more surface area. Fahey felt that Option 1 provided elements for a <br />variety of age levels, while Option 2 seemed to be for older children. <br />2 <br />