My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-28-1991 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1991
>
05-28-1991 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2024 2:10:25 PM
Creation date
6/14/2024 2:06:44 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
385
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
:-*v' <br />I <br />u <br />-r <br />rfc <br />‘tvj.r <br />■i’ ■ <br />'V,t- <br />,V,.: <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1991 <br />(#16)CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED <br />Bernhardson added that if both facilities were constructed <br />on the sewer plant property, it would be necessary to consider <br />the loss of funds resulting from the i Tabij.it/ to selx tnat <br />property. <br />Callahan said, “It .see.ms to me that it would be more cost <br />efficient ^o construct facilities on one site as opposed to two <br />different locations. In light of that, and the additional costs <br />for land acquisition and wells, I would think that the Highway 1 <br />site would be less expensive.” <br />Boarman said, "The initial costs approach a wash between the <br />sewer plant. Highway <2 and existing site. <br />Bernhardson iiterjected, "It was my understanding that it <br />would cost approximately $100,000 to $150,000 more to split the <br />facilities between this location aid the sewer plant site, than <br />to place everything on Highway 12." <br />Boarman stated that he considers that difference to approach <br />a wash. <br />Callahan asked Councilmembers for their opinions regarding <br />construction of one or more facilities on the sewer plant <br />property. <br />Butler indicated that all facilities should be located in <br />one place. <br />Goetten did n^'t think it wise to place the facilities in the <br />midst of a residential neighborhood. <br />Mayor Peterson and Jabbour stated that they would not object <br />to one of th facilities being placed on the sewer plant <br />property, but not both. <br />Butler asked Boarman if Council should select the existing <br />the plans and costs would be for a temporary facility <br />allow administrative functions to continue while a <br />facility is constructed. <br />Boarman replied, "We have included a rental factor of <br />$35,000 to $50,000 into the schedule of costs for the existing <br />site. That would allow a year of rental, heating and operations <br />at another site. We have fouTd it to be far more^ efficient to <br />rent space off-site during the construction period." <br />Butler asked wher*?, in light of the concerns involving the <br />City Hall's central location, such a temporary site might be. <br />Boai^nian stated that some cities have opted to rent retail <br />. o .
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.