09-09-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 4 September 9, 1996 Mounds View City Council Mr. Cohnark explained that for every dollar that is collected from Tax Increment Financing they apply it to the taxes in the school district and the state reduces the general education revenue for that. He does not know specifically what that revenue would be. C. Consideration of Approval of New Fencing for the Silver View and City Hall Athletic Fields. Mr. Whiting noted that a discussion was held between council and staff at a work session in regard to adding new outfield fencing for Silver View and City Hall Park athletic fields. Three bids were received. The low bidder was Town & Country Fence in the amount of $25,716.00. Staff is requesting Council approval to remove the current fencing and replace them with new 10 foot high fencing at Silver View Park and City Hall Park. The project would be funded with Park Improvement Funds, monies received as Park Dedication fees. MOTION/SECOND: QuickBlanchard to award the bid for fence replacement to Town & Country Fence in the amount of $25,716.00. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried D. Surface Water Abandonment for Pedestrian Bridge Construction. Mr. Ulrich, Director of Public Works, explained that at the last council work session, Rocky Keen and Steve Campbell were present to discuss eight options for the removal of the storm water pond for the proposed pedestrian bridge. The options ranged in cost from $20,000 to $223,000. After some discussion amongst the staff, it was felt either option # 1 or #2 would be the most economical and preferable way of removing the storm water pond; this was also felt to be the best options by BRW who indicated that Option #2 would be the preferable option. They indicated, however that they would like approximately $3,000 added to the $27,000 to include some decorative rock and structure around the protruded corrugated metal pipes to provide a more aesthetically pleasing situation. Staffrequested Council authorization to proceed with a meeting with the two engineering firms to discuss what type of arrangements can be made in regard to designing, etc. of the project. Ms. Trude asked if Option #2 will reduce the cost of the bridge. Mr. Ulrich explained that if the pond were to stay and was reconstructed to function, it would cost approximately $40,000. (This cost would not be incurred if the council authorized Option #2.) Ms. Hankner asked if this cost would be in addition to the $180,000 which has already been committed for the project. If so, she wondered where the additional money would come from. Mr. Ulrich stated it is proposed to come from the Surface Water Management Fund. Mr. Quick asked if the city had an alternative way of designing the bridge. Mr. Ulrich stated the alternate method would be utilizing a switch back design. If this were approved, Option #2 would not be necessary.