My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PK PACKET 04092001
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Parks and Environmental Commission Packets
>
2001
>
PK PACKET 04092001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/7/2019 9:22:38 AM
Creation date
8/7/2019 9:22:38 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 />March 12, 2001 <br />Page 3 <br />Mr. Hubmer indicated the Council may chose to phase the park project if the final expenses are <br />still too great. <br />Gebhardt asked, if the park was phased, would construction damage the previously completed <br />fieldwork. Mr. Kost noted he felt there would be minimal destruction of the fields because <br />construction fences would be erected and noted the environmental work could also be put off <br />through phasing. <br />Jindra noted this park was established to meet needs of the entire community. She indicated if <br />the park was phased out, only the fields would be completed within the first few years. She <br />asked if this was really what the Park Commission wanted to present to the Council. <br />Ganley agreed stating it may be beneficial to complete the entire project in today's dollars <br />without putting it off to the future with inflation. <br />Hodson indicated the Commission could offer this up to residential comments and see if there <br />was a strong desire to complete the park in whole or in phases. <br />Skrivseth asked if the current wading pool and building would continue to exist if this area was <br />going to be phased into the plan in five years. Mr. Kost stated this area could be used right up <br />until the area was reconstructed. <br />Mr. Hubmer questioned if the play areas and wading pool area could be bid as alternates. Mr. <br />Kost stated this could easily be completed. <br />Jensen asked how the line item for the wading pool could have jumped by $100,000 and if other <br />items would be increasing significantly. Mr. Kost stated this was only an estimate at this time <br />from the market value for these items. He indicated that after the park was sent out for bid the <br />Commission would learn the true market values of each item. <br />Jensen stated he would like to meet with Mr. Kost in a subcommittee to define the growth items <br />and where the Commission members can analyze these lines items before going before the <br />Council. Ganley stated he would be willing to volunteer for this subcommittee as well. <br />Jindra asked if the Commission would like to meet again, after this item was reviewed by the <br />subcommittee and before the next Council meeting. Anderson noted he felt this item could be <br />wrapped up with the subcommittee to provide answers to the Council. <br />Gebhardt asked if the lights were needed on each and every field. She wondered if decreasing <br />the number of lit fields would eliminate the usefulness of the fields. Ganley indicated the <br />lighting would allow for greater use of the fields for both baseball/softball and soccer. Jensen <br />noted there was a great demand for field use as heard from the residents and Councilmembers. <br />Jindra reported a subcommittee consisting of Jensen, Ganley and Anderson would meet with Mr. <br />Kost to answer any financial questions before the next Council meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.