The Clearfield City Council previously decided that the best location for its proposed recreation complex was Fisher Park, west of Clearfield High and south of 700 South. However, Councilman Don Ormsby is now questioning whether that is indeed the best site for the $6.5 million facility. He also cast the lone negative vote against a bonding proposal contract with Smith Capital Markets.
Ormsby said the new complex, which will take up about five acres of land just west of the current city swimming pool, will also wipe out some baseball diamonds - something that Clearfield already has in short supply."Mark my words, the recreation commission will come back and say they need a new ball park," he said of the aftermath of the new recreation complex.
"I'm in favor of a recreation complex," Ormsby said. "I'm not in favor of how it is being handled."
Ormsby is also concerned about the heavy traffic that 1000 East already has in front of the high school and that a new apartment complex being built in the area - plus the proposed complex - will only add to this congestion.
Mayor Neldon Hamblin said the council needs to consider at all the good and bad points of the site location.
Councilwoman Diane Layton said the city could probably rearrange things in Fisher Park and get more ball diamonds in there. She also believes the council has already made a firm decision by choosing Fisher Park.
City manager Jack Bippes agrees and said it could cost the city an extra $26,000 to change site location now because of commitments made to the architects. He said the city is probably saving $500,000 by using land it already owns for the complex.
Councilman Martin Eliason is also in favor of the Fisher Park site because it has easy I-15 access and is close to two schools, making it more attractive to use by youths of the city.
Ormsby also said the city may be biting off more than it can chew with the recreation complex proposal - especially if it fails in the election. He's not convinced the city won't be stuck with some hidden costs too if the proposal fails.