Minutes - Council - 05/11/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Elvig, Kurak, Cook, Strommen, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Abstain: CouncilmemberPearson. Further discussion: Mayor Gamec directed staff to provide the Council with information regarding the policy of Councilmembers abstaining from this type of project. City Attorney Goodrich explained the court has said residents sit on the City Council and if Councilmembers cannot vote for some of these things they could never be acted on. Case #10: Order Bids for Elmcrest Park Improvements City Project #04-20 Assistant Public Works Director Olson explained Elmcrest Park is located in the northeast quadrant of the City. There has been a lot of discussion regarding improvements and the availability of fimds. The Finance Director has put together a list of funding sources. The costs of the 2003-4 Elmcrest Park Parking Lot, the 2004 CF Elmcrest Park Trail along TH 47, and the 2004 CIP Quicksilver Extension to Elmcrest Park comes to a total of $699,000. He reviewed the budget map of the proposed improvements. The proposed improvements include the main driveway across the park to 163''d Lane, the street connection to the north to Quicksilver Street, the east parking lot and associated trails and a trail connection through the southeast comer of the park to 160th Lane. All of the storm sewer will be installed as part of this phase. He advised the estimated cost for this work is $584,200. This will provide 180 parking stalls. Assistant Public Works Director Olson reviewed the moderate map of the improvements. These improvements add the southwest parking lot and trails to the budget proposal. The estimated cost for this work is $766,700. This will provide an additional 120 parking stalls. He advised there is also an option of completing all of the work, which will provide 400 parking stalls. He advised staff recommends soliciting bids for the work using the moderate proposal as the base bid and the additional work bid as an alternate. Councilmember Kurak asked if the project would be paid from the Park Dedication Fund. Assistant Public Works Director Olson responded in the affirmative. He explained in most instances those funds are coming from a combination of park dedication and trail fees that have been accumulated in the past. Staff suggests that the Oak Park District is directly to the east of this district and its soul recreational facility in the area is provided by Elm Creek Park. Councihnember Cook stated he really thinks they should move on the whole project and not phase it for several reasons. If it is phased and both phases are done this year it will affect two seasons of usc in the park. In his experience when something is phased there will be a higher bid on a smaller project than on a full project, even if there is not an increase in cost. He stated if the money is available and they know things are moving along, and the City will see other park dedication money come in this year fi'om development, they would get a bigger bang for the buck by doing thc entire project and would be wasting money paying for an extra phase. Assistant Public Works Director Olson explained an alternate bid is being proposed. City Council/May 11, 2004 Page 17 of 36