My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PK PACKET 01292001
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Parks and Environmental Commission Packets
>
2001
>
PK PACKET 01292001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/7/2019 9:04:18 AM
Creation date
8/7/2019 9:04:18 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Parks Commission Meeting Minutes <br />January 8, 2001 <br />Page 3 <br />t not meant to hurt anyone's feelings. Mr. Hartman explained there needs to be some resolution of <br />2 feelings between the Commission, staff, and the consultants. <br />3 Jindra stated she would like to see the communication increased between the Commission and staff <br />4 to resolve hard feelings and keep all issues in the open. Zurbey concurred. <br />5 Jindra indicated she would like to have someone involved throughout this entire process and to have <br />6 access to the site. She noted this was the reasoning behind asking for Mr. Anderson and a Park <br />7 Commission liaison. Mr. Hubmer indicated this would not be a problem. He stated he is not looking <br />8 to snub the Park Commission and would like to continue to serve the City and Park Commissioners. <br />9 Mr. Hubmer stated the hard feelings started from his work on the pavilion and lack of comments <br />10 from the Commission. He indicated he was unaware of the negative feelings of the Commission as <br />I I he only referred to the meeting minutes for direction from the Commission. Mr. Hubmer reported <br />12 he does not want to work against the Commission within any aspect of Central Park. <br />13 Koehntop stated there was agreement to have a Park Commission liaison at the construction <br />14 meetings on a weekly basis to listen and update the Commission on the issues. <br />15 Wagner volunteered for the position and indicated he worked on several projects in the past with the <br />16 City. Jindra indicated she was not ready to appoint a liaison at this time, but stated she wants the <br />17 Commission to come to a greater consensus on this issue. <br />18 The Park Commission came to a consensus to have a liaison from the Park Commission to the <br />19 weekly construction meetings. They noted this position would be to have an extra set of "eyes and <br />20 ears" for this project and to report back to the Commission of the upcoming events and issues. <br />21 Zurbey indicated he would like Mr. Hubmer to keep the project roughly $1.6 million and to keep the <br />22 Park Commission aware of options or tradeoffs for savings within this project. Mr. Hubmer stated <br />23 he would keep on top of these tradeoffs and keep the Commission aware of their options. He <br />24 explained that because the Commission meets once a month he would like subcommittee members <br />25 to report to Mr. Hartman of their suggestions and questions throughout the month. <br />26 Jenson asked how the Park Commission subcommittees would work. Mr. Hubmer stated he would <br />27 pass along the first set of plans to the Commission members upon receipt from BRW, for review <br />28 within the subcommittees before the next Park Commission meeting. He noted after review the <br />29 subcommittee's comments and suggestions could be forwarded to staff and then brought to BRW's <br />30 attention. <br />31 Mr. Hubmer asked how the chalk line for the ball fields was done in the past. He questioned if the <br />32 Commission would be in favor of flexible stakes in the ground for alignment. Mr. Hartman noted <br />33 the chalk lines were measured each time in the past, but the flexible stakes would be a great addition. <br />law <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.