Laserfiche WebLink
7 <br /> :'2):::r7-: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Agenda Section <br /> STAFF REPORT 96-1745ws <br /> ©11Report Number: <br /> • WORKSESSION MEETING DATE <br /> e if,_.`,,;;.7 June 3. 1996 Report Date: 5/29/96 <br /> •A !cam <br /> ^°6'rPjS-Partne'S���s <br /> Item Description: Discussion Regarding Surface Water Pond, Relating to the Pedestrian Bridge <br /> Administrator's Review/Recommendation:'jc <br /> -No Comments to supplement this report <br /> -Comments attached. X <br /> Explanation/Summary(attach supplement sheets as necessary) <br /> Summary: <br /> Staff met with the consultant from BRW and Paster Enterprises last week to discuss the pedestrian bridge. At <br /> this time Sabri from BRW presented plans for the construction of the bridge within the surface water pond. It <br /> was noted that it will be necessary to reconstruct the pond to enable the bridge ramp to be built within the <br /> pond. At that time it was unknown what the additional expense would be for the reconstruction of the pond. <br /> A short discussion occurred about the project and the obstacles involving the pond at it's current location, the <br /> construction of the bridge and past discussion of the relocation of the pond to City property. <br /> It was Sabri's and staffs comments about the increased expense to reconstruct the pond, and the fact that <br /> EH had submitted a proposal to relocate the pond that lead to the conclusion that the overall long term <br /> enefit of moving the pond would be most efficient. The City would forever be responsible for the <br /> maintenance of the pond. There is an unknown amount of liability assumed by the City for potential accidents <br /> related to people falling or jumping into the pond from the ramp. The need for fencing on the interior of the <br /> ramp would be eliminated. And lastly, the landscaping possibilities are greatly increased without the <br /> intrusiveness of the pond. <br /> On Tuesday, I spoke with Sabri to inquire about the reconstruction costs of the pond. Due to the percolating <br /> design of the pond, the reconstruction costs would be approximately $40,000.00. As you might recall the <br /> conservative estimates from SEH went from a low of$10,000 to a high of$32,500 to relocate the pond to <br /> City property behind the Public Works Facility. The expense of the engineering study which includes <br /> permitting applications to the appropriate regulatory agencies is $6,900.00. The proposal does not include <br /> design and construction services for the relocated pond. <br /> Adding the numbers together, assuming the high end of SEH's estimate, the cost for relocating verses <br /> reconstruction of the pond at it's current location are very comparable. Relocating the pond would in staff s <br /> opinion better serve the long term interests of the bridge location and the maintenance of either pond. It is <br /> staffs recommendation that the surface water pond located adjacent to the Bridgeman's site be relocated to <br /> City property. <br /> RECOMMENDATION: <br /> Council authorize staff to sign agreement letter with SEH to complete an engineering analysis to relocate the <br /> 0.irface water pond for $6,900.00 to be funded from the Surface Water Management Fund 420-4122-303. <br /> Michael Ulrich. Director of Public Works <br />