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 4 <br />1 Zurbey asked how the subcommittees would be able to respond to all the questions of the community <br />2 and staff. Mr. Hubmer indicated the subcommittees would have to work through Mr. Hartman to <br />3 reach BRW with all questions and concerns. <br />4 Mr. Hubmer noted he would need direction from the Commission on the pavilion and concession <br />5 stand. He stated the north end of the park was still in flux. Mr. Hubmer encouraged the Commission <br />6 to take their time with designing and placing the pavilion within the park. Mr. Hubmer indicated <br />7 the shape, size and location of these footprints would need to be noted before BRW could finalize <br />8 the park layout plans and commence bidding. <br />9 Mr. Hartman asked for a final date on having the size and footprint of the pavilion and concession <br />10 stand. Mr. Hubmer indicated he would need this information by the February meeting. <br />11 Zurbey indicated he did not feel it would be possible to have this information by February. Mr. <br />12 Hartman stated he felt this would be possible if the subcommittees were to meet several times <br />13 between now and the February meeting. He indicated if the subcommittees meet and have <br />14 presentations at the next meeting, the rest of the park would not be held up any further. <br />15 Mr. Hartman asked if the buildings would be under a separate contract or within the bid of the entire <br />16 park. Mr. Hubmer stated the Park Commission would be better served with the buildings as a <br />17 separate contract to allow the Commission time to resolve the pavilion and concession stand issues. <br />18 He noted the Park Commission would not be spending any more money if the project was done in <br />19 conjunction with the park or completed separately. <br />20 Mr. Hubmer indicated the City has allotted $180,000 for the building construction and engineering. <br />21 He noted if the City chooses not to use BRW for the pavilion and concession stand those funds <br />22 would be allocated to the firm the Park Commission chooses. <br />23 Mr. Hubmer reviewed the Phase I Environmental plans with the Park Commission. He noted the <br />24 MPCA has been alerted him of borings from this site which were questionable. Mr. Hubmer stated <br />25 the City would be entering in the VIC program with the MPCA to clean up the Central Park site if <br />26 needed. He noted the site has been capped at this time with four feet of clay to allow for the use of <br />27 the ball fields. <br />28 Jenson asked how deep the borings were at Central Park. Mr. Hubmer indicated the borings were <br />29 approximately 25 feet at the Central Park site. He noted the Phase II Environmental study would <br />30 greater define the area of contamination and the actions that the City would need to take. <br />31 Jindra asked if the sledding hill would be kept intact. Mr. Hubmer stated there would be a ten foot <br />32 vertical change and a five foot section would be eliminated on one side of the hill. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.