Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Council Meeting <br />419-99 <br />Page 15 <br />Council President Marquardt showed a pamphlet about y2k and asked if there was any status on <br />it. <br />1VIr. Brett asked if we could provide a report at the Caucus. <br />Chief Mohr said from a Village standpoint we are very comfortable. <br />Dr. Parker said Mr. Samac had noted Progressive will be moving people in there in May. He <br />asked if we are preparing for the increase in traffic flow. Perhaps we should contact Progressive <br />to find out how many people are mo-ving in and how many additional cars will be going in. <br />Sgt. Dearden said Chief Mohr just advised him that a traffic meeting is scheduled for tomorrow <br />with Progressive. <br />Mr. Samac said initially they are looking to start occupying the building the first of May. It will <br />probably take close to 15-30 days to construct their cubicles and get their computers set up. <br />They are looking at bringing in about 100 or less people initially. Mr. Samac said their best <br />guess is that it will take anywhere from 20-30 days to finish the various floors of the building <br />and move people in 100 at time. It should be a fairly smooth transition. <br />Council President Marquardt asked Ken Mulbach if he had something. <br />and give a more detailed brealcdown. We did that. (He distributed a handout.) <br />base bid for basic security lighting of the pool. It will not accommodate swimming per the Ohio <br />Department of Health Code for night swimming. When we bid this job, we bid an alternate of <br />swimming. We made the recommendation to take the alterna.te--that was for a 50' pole--there are <br />six poles altogether, one has 12 fixtures on -it, the other lia.d 8 fxtures on it. It is a baseball-field <br />type sports light which gives you the proper illumination for night swimming_ The cost for that <br />was $47,575. We went around and around with that and it was turned down. We then talked to <br />Night Vision (we're using their lighting in the parking lot) and got the prices (as quoted in the <br />previous paragraph.) Mr. Muhlbach said we talked to the contractor doing the job and met with <br />the lighting suppliers and manufacturers. In response to our request, they have come up with--if <br />we wish to do a decorative light on the deck (he showed a picture). The deck lights in the bid <br />would run about $20,000 additional in lieu of NigY?t Vision's $76,000 additional. Then, the other <br />option to include night swimmuig at this time is to go with a 30' pole with an architectural <br />floodlight on top of the pole along with the decorative light for $88,000 in lieu of Night Vision's <br />$136,000. These could be done in the green to match. Now that Bill is on board, he has brought <br />this-up--he feels it is a necessity for pool operations. We looked at options of running conduit <br />. Mulbach said the last time they attended a Council meeting they discussed the night <br />swimming issue. Night Vision had submitted some prices; it was about $76,000 to do deck <br />lighting--with night swimming it was about $136,000. We were asked to look at other options <br />MMrr. Muhlbach said the contract, as it is, includes the ten 20' pole -shoebox fixrtures as part of the