Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View EDA October 28, 2013 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> <br />name for this site to be called Mounds View’s Crossroad Pointe. She recommended this name be 1 <br />used going forward to assist in branding the location. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Economic Development Specialist Steinmetz reviewed the RFQ process noting four firms had 4 <br />submitted proposals for land development planning services. She explained that after careful 5 <br />evaluation of the four submitted proposals by staff, HKgi best met the objectives of the RFQ. It 6 <br />was noted these proposals were reviewed by the EDA at their October 14th meeting and the EDA 7 <br />requested further information before making a decision. Staff recommended the EDA consider 8 <br />Resolution 13-EDA-282 accepting the proposal from HKgi for land development planning 9 <br />services for the property located on the southwest corner of County Road 10 and County Road 10 <br />H2. 11 <br /> 12 <br />President Flaherty requested further information on the evaluation process followed by staff. 13 <br /> 14 <br />Economic Development Specialist Steinmetz discussed the evaluation process followed by her 15 <br />and Executive Director Ericson, noting HKgi specialized in consultant planning services and had 16 <br />best met the objectives within the RFQ. For this reason, staff was still recommending HKgi for 17 <br />the land development planning services, even though this company did not come in with the 18 <br />lowest bid. 19 <br /> 20 <br />Commissioner Mueller asked if Stantec’s bid came in the lowest due to the work completed in 21 <br />2006 for this site. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Stuart Krahn, Stantec, explained the Stantec bid was reasonably priced due to the past study 24 <br />completed for this site. He stated Stantec had a level of familiarity with the site. He indicated all 25 <br />of the planning work for the new study would be completed in house. 26 <br /> 27 <br />Commissioner Mueller questioned Stantec’s favorite part of the redevelopment planning process. 28 <br /> 29 <br />Mr. Krahn described what his role would be for the project and explained he enjoyed being the 30 <br />creative process of configuring new sites. 31 <br /> 32 <br />President Flaherty further discussed each of the four firms that had submitted proposals, noting 33 <br />their strengths and weaknesses. He questioned why staff was recommending the EDA go another 34 <br />direction when Stantec already had experience with this site. 35 <br /> 36 <br />Executive Director Ericson stated each of the firms that responded to the RFQ would provide 37 <br />great planning services to the City. He indicated HKgi simply did a better job responding to the 38 <br />tasks and understands the City’s goals from a planning and economic developments standpoint. 39 <br />He commented that both he and Economic Development Specialist Steinmetz evaluated each of 40 <br />the proposals individually and scored HKgi with the same exact ranking. 41 <br /> 42