Loading...
110602 EDA Min . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2002 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS TIME: 6:10 P.M. or Immediately following Canvassing Board Meeting MINUTES 1. CONVENE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING President Love called the meeting to order at 6:05 P.M. A. Roll Call Present: President Love; Boardmembers Garfunkel, Lizee, Turgeon, and Zerby; Executive Director Dawson B. Review Agenda Without objection from the Board, President Love proceeded with the Agenda for the evening. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. EDA Minutes of October 14, 2002 Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, approval of the Minutes of the EDA Meeting of October 14, 2002. Motion passed 5/0. 3. NEW BUSINESS A. Approve Payment of Claims Executive Director Dawson presented the claims, noting that the boards of the Excelsior Fire District and South Lake Minnetonka Police Department had reconnnended that they be paid Garfunkel moved, Turgeon seconded, approval of the Payment of Claims presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. Accept Bids and Award Contracts for Public Safety Facility (Resolution No. 02-007 and Resolution No. 02-008) Executive Director Dawson related that bids for Bid Package No.1, EFD West/SLMPD Station, had been opened on October 24. There were three "bid divisions" within the bid package: (1) excavation; (2) site utilities; and (3) concrete foundation/retaining walls. Companies could bid on these divisions separately or in any combination. SHOREWOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES November 6, 2002 Page 2 of3 . Bids were higher than anticipated. Since the bid opening, the "100% detail design" drawings had been completed, and the architectural and construction services finns were able to perform more refined estimates of project costs. These estimates indicated the project as currently specified would likely be over budget by five to ten percent. The project team had spent the time since conducting value engineering and identifying potential cost reduction. The goal of the work was to determine whether the size of the building would need to be changed, as the bid for the foundation should not be awarded at this time if the rest of the building to be constructed on it would exceed the project budget. Several changes had been reconnnended by the project team and, after lengthy discussion at their November 4 meeting, accepted by the EFD and SLMPD boards. The project could proceed at the current size. The major exterior changes would be the substitution of an asphalt shingle roof for the metal roof, and the substitution of less-detailed surfaces for exposed foundation and retaining walls than the form-lined concrete that had been approved. These changes would require an amendment to the CUP for the site, and these reviews were scheduled for the November 19 Planning Commission meeting and November 25 City Council meeting. . There was extended discussion on the course of action and rationale made by the project team and the governing boards. President Love emphasized that because changes were being made to the interior of the building, that did not imply that there had been any "fat" in the proposed building; rather, they were changes that would retain functionality. Executive Director Dawson noted that the metal roof would be an "add alternate", so that if overall bids came in favorably, the roof could be metal rather than the asphalt shingle that would now be pursued. He related that no one preferred the asphalt roof; rather, in the options available, this change was the most effective alternative to put the project back within budget. President Love noted that changing to an asphalt shingle roof would result in increased maintenance costs, as the roof would need to be re-shingled several times. The additional nmds needed would be placed in a capital maintenance fund, the revenue for which would be part of the annual operating contributions required of each member city. Executive Director Dawson reviewed the bids, noting that there was a recommendation to award the bid for Divisions 1 and 2 to one firm, as its combination bid was far superior in terms of price. Staff recommended that the EDA award the contract for Divisions 1 and 2 to Doboszenski & Sons, Inc., and Division 3 to Northland Concrete and Masonry Company, per their respective bids opened on October 24, 2002. Staff further reconnnended that these contracts be assigned to Kraus-Anderson Construction Company. MOTION: Turgeon moved, and Zerby seconded, to adopt Resolution Nos. 02-007 and 02-008, awarding the contracts to the firms specified and assigning the contracts to Kraus-Anderson Construction Company. Motion passed, 5/0. 4. OTHER BUSINESS President Love related that there was a matter relating to interim approval of drainage plans that had been identified as problematic by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. He said that he would be appearing at the MCWD's meeting on November 7 to clarify matters and gain the interim approval needed to keep the project on the schedule that was critical to accomplish over the next month. . . . . SHOREWOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES November 6, 2002 Page 3 of 3 5. ADJOURN Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, to adjourn the Shorewood EDA Meeting of November 6, 2002, at 6:33 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Craig W. Dawson Recorder ATTEST: