CCP 08-14-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I ARD~ HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JUL Y 31, 1995 10 .- I would not be necessary. Staff felt this would meet the goals of the City and the goals of the developer. I Mr. Ringwald felt exploring options would be beneficial to both the City and the developer. Councilmember Aplikowski expressed sensitivity to wanting to develop the most and best on the - site. She expressed concern for the injector systems and the turn around radius for emergency vehicles. She also felt it beneficial for the City and developer to explore all options. . City Attorney Filla explained the City Council may deny the application, approve the application . or refer the application back to the Planning Commission with the consent of the applicant. MOTION: Keim moved and Aplikowski seconded a motion to refer the Planning Case 95-16, Balfany Preliminary Plat to the Planning Commission for further research with the . consent of the developer. The motion carried unanimously (3-0). Resolution 95-58. Accepting Bids and Authorizinl! Execution of Contract for the Perry Park I Redevelopment. -I Parks & Recreation Director,Walsh, reviewed the many problems currently existing at Perry Park such as: safety issue of overlapping ball fields, erosion, ADA inaccessibility, lack of adequate parking, and quality of ball fields. I Ms. Walsh indicated the redevelopment will address all the above concerns. The new park will contain three adult ball fields, and one little league field. The erosion will be addressed by catch - basins. The ADA requirements will be met. Additional parking will be constructed and per the request of neighbors and the Sheriffs department, the parking lot will be serviced with lighting. The - lighting will serve one field and the parking lot. City Engineer Stonehouse noted the bids have been received and the low bid is from Veit & I Company with a bid of $222,575.00. Mr. Stonehouse indicated he finds Veit & Company to be a responsible and competent contractor, and would recommend that they be awarded the contract for the Charles Perry Park improvements project. I Mr. Stonehouse discussed the alternates, he recommended the irrigation, sodding and lighting of one field with the availability of lighting a second field in the future. I Mr. Stonehouse recommended to award the contract to Veit & Company in the amount of $256,575 to include the installation of the irrigation system as proposed in Alternate 6.0 Additionally, if the . Council wishes to include field lighting in <me of the ball fields, MSA would recommend accepting both Alternate 7.0 and 7.1. This would result in a total contract award amount of$306,975.00 with -I I