Agenda Packets - 2001/03/26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Item No: 10F Meeting Date: March 26, 2001 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 5537, a Resolution Awarding and Authorizing Execution of a Contract for the Highway 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Corridor Study Date of Report: March 21, 2001 Background: At the March 12, 2001 meeting, the Council directed staff to obtain additional information from the consultant regarding the costs associated with taking the final product of this study and creating construction grade plans and drawings which would be used to bid out the actual construction of the project. The Council should be aware that the RFP did not include a requirement for the provision of engineered drawings. Discussion: I spoke with two of the final three consultants, both of whom offered similar responses. Generally speaking, the cost to provide engineered specifications for the approved final plan would be based on a percentage of the anticipated total project cost. Thus, if the final plan called for a complete reconstruction of the roadway, replacing it with a more urban type roadway with trailways, street lighting, pathway lighting, decorative streetscape improvements and landscaping; and if the cost of these improvements were projected to be 5 million dollars, the fee to create the engineered construction drawings could range from 8% to 12% of the 5 million dollars, or, $400,000 to $600,000. That fee is however negotiable to a point, and the City could seek another RFP to do the engineered plans if it were not satisfied with the selected consultant’s estimate. In the last staff report, it was incorrectly reported that one firm did offer to provide engineered drawings, which accounted for their higher fee. I spoke with that consultant who indicated there must have been a miscommunication, in that it was meant that their final plan would have sufficient detail to allow for subsequent engineered construction drawings. Recommendation: Given this information, Staff would still recommend selection of the firm of URS/BRW to perform the work as outlined in the Highway 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization project. Resolution 5537 is attached for the Council’s consideration which authorizes execution of a contract with URS/BRW at a base fee of $75,000 and expected additional expenses