Laserfiche WebLink
V • <br /> <br />PARK BOARD MINUTES <br />Meeting of February 21, 1968 <br />PRESENT; Gunderman; Hansen; Hagemeyer; Morris; Weissman; Oon Brauer ~ Charles <br />Hefty of Brauer and Associates; 0. !.. Moen; league of Women Voters <br />Representative; and R. W. Schaefer <br />Mr. Brauer present8d a letter of recommendation on the proposals for park site <br />development. <br />Base Bid. Qronosal1._par Site~renaration <br />Motion by Morris, seconded by Weissman, to recommend to the Council that the base <br />bid on Proposal 1 be awardeid to Bill Wear Excavating as the low responsible bidder. <br />Aii Ayes -Carried. <br />use Bid,~,,,,~1"op ~~! tZ Park Ps~ina and 5urfacina <br />Motion by Morris, seconded by Gunderman, to recommend to the Council that the base <br />bid on Proposal tl be awarded to Hennepin Blacktop Service as the low responsibie <br />bidder. <br />Ali Ayes -Carried. <br />~,~e Bi d Prooosa I 11 ! ,, Perk E i eat ca i <br />Motion by Morris, seconded by Hagemeyer to recommend to the Councii that the base <br />bid on Proposal il! be awarded to Gopher Electric as the low responsible bidder. <br />Ali Ayes -Carried. <br />~,~,gr an to No i to Prooosa 1 Flo- 1 ..A~.djt i onaZ,~od Sunnvs i d~, Par <br />Motion by Weissman, seconded by Hagemeyer, to recommend to the Council that <br />Alternate No. I to Proposal No. 1 be accepted. <br />All Ayes -Carried. <br />Alternate No. 1 to Pro_ nosel,~o 11. Concrete Bumper Storrs <br />Motion by Hansen, seconded by Morris, to recommend to the Council that the <br />Alternate No. 1 to Proposal No. il, concrete bumper stops be rejected. <br />Ail Ayes - Carried. <br />Alternate No 2tto Proposal Noz,ll. Surav Pools <br />Motion by Hansen, seconded by Weissman, to recommend to the Council that the <br />Alternate No. 2 to Proposal No, li, spray pools be accepted. <br />Gunderman spoke in opposition to the motion. He listed the following reasons for <br />opposing: <br />1. Spray pools were not included as part of the original plan; they <br />were listed as a future item. <br />2. The construction of swimming pools in the Brea have eliminated the <br />need for this facility at present. <br />3. The maintenance on spray pools exceeds their valve. <br />4. Spray pools are not a proven tacility as only one, and possibly two, <br />communities in the metropolitan area have them. <br />5. Land costs have increased since the original estimates for the park <br />program. Monies should not be spend for "extras" where they are not <br />immediately necessary. <br />