04-05-83 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE EIMO CITY COUDTCTL MEETING, APR.IL 5, 1.983 -10- 11. ENCINEER''S REPORT: A. Final Plan - Reid Park 'Imp'rovements - Engineer Bohrer presented t;ie final grading plan for -Reid 'Park, and noted that the plan had been reviewed by the Park Commission. He ,then reviewed the Master Plan for the park and recommended 5 improvements,rather than the 6 proposed in the Master Plan,, be developed based on the topography of the area, The five improvements were: parking lot, ballfields, walking paths, Bennis courts, and sliding hill. This is a phased improvement plan, with all improvements done with the earth on -site. He reviewed the construction plan for the parking lot. A culvert is planned to prevent erosion created by the cul-de-sac on 31st St. Phase I proposes construction and blacktopping of the parking lot and brushing and graveling of the trails. The Park Commission recommended that the first ballfield he graded, and asked the Engineer to prepare a cost estimate. Bohrer outlined the walkway areas he proposed to be blacktopped. B. Bal.lfield Grading - Reid Park - Bohrer reported that the PAC expressed interest xn gracTing one ballfield in Phase I. His cost extimate to grade, seed and mulch the area was $7,000, $2500 was budgeted for this work. This work is not eligible for LAWCON funding, The Capital Projects Fund would have to be used to subsidize the cost difference. Bohrer recommended that the ballfield be bid as an alternate improvement when bidding Phase I.work., M/S/P Morgan/Fraser to adopt R-83-28 a Resolution authorizing the .letting of bids for Phase I Improvements in Reid Park with and alternate bid for grading one ballfield. Carried 5-0. C. Waste to Energy Plant - Bohrer reported that the Project Board and the'Admin strative Committee took no action on the City's request for Project Planninq Funds. HDR, Project Engineers, continue to plan on providing their own utilities. Bohrer and Whittaker both indicated that it is time that the City make a formal request that the Project Board consider this issue. In doing their own cost study, HDR may be giving the bottom line for what the County''s share is going to be. Bohrer reviewed the proposed improvements - cost for this proposal is $1,000,000. Preliminary cost for the entire Section 32 is $4,000,000. Bohrer indicated this would be an opportunity for Section 32 property owners and the City to make the Board aware that HD.R''s cost is about 1/4 of the total improvement cost for the entire area. Bohrer offered the following suggestions: 1. The City formalize its budget request in writing and submit it directly to the Project Board, 2. Take the position that all utilities servicing the plant will be publicly owned and maintained facilities. 3. Since the planning necessary to provide public utilities has been necessitated by the W/E Project, the City's position is that this project should also provide the budget for the utility work or agree to a pass - through plan, etc. M/S/P Fraser/Mazzara instructing the City Administrator and City Engineer to prepare a letter to the Project Board outlining the City's Budget request for the W/E Project Planning. Carried 5-0.