Laserfiche WebLink
I CITY OF ST. ANTHONY <br /> 2 PARKS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES <br /> 3 May 1,2001 <br /> 4 5:30 P.M. <br /> 5 Conference Room <br /> 6 I. CALL TO ORDER. <br /> 7 Chair Jindra called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. and welcomed everyone in attendance. <br /> 8 II. ROLL CALL. <br /> 9 Present: Chair Carol Jindra,Vice Chair Doug Koehntop,Commissioners Dan <br /> 10 Ganley, Julie Gebhardt, Colleen Hallada, Jan Jenson, and George <br /> 11 Wagner. <br /> 12 Absent: Community Services Representative Diane Skrivseth. <br /> 13 Also Present: Public Works Director Jay Hartman; Representative from Sports <br /> 14 Boosters George Zurbey; Representative from School Board Denise <br /> 15 Dunn; Independent Contractor Maury Anderson; Bob Kost, and <br /> 16 Auggie Wong, of BRW. <br /> 17 III. APPROVAL APRIL 9, 2001 MEETING MINUTES. <br /> 18 Page 2, line 43 Tower Park to read, "Central Park". <br /> 19 <br /> 20 Motion by Commissioner Wagner,second by Commissioner Koehntop,to approve the April 9,2001 <br /> 21 Parks Commission Meeting Minutes as corrected above. <br /> 22 . Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 23 IV. PRESENT AND DISCUSS FINAL BID TABULATIONS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT <br /> 24 OF CENTRAL PARK-BOB KOST,BRW-WILL BE PRESENT. <br /> 25 Bob Kost indicated that there were about 25 interested contractors, and that he was expecting <br /> 26 more than three bids to be submitted. He stated that at a meeting last week, only three parties <br /> 27 showed up, all of which were general contractors. Mr. Kost indicated that all three bids came in <br /> 28 today within thirty minutes of each other, and that they all came in higher than anticipated. <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Mr. Kost stated that all three bidders made numerical mistakes in their bids, which was very <br /> 31 disappointing. He also informed the Commission that the document that they were reviewing <br /> 32 tonight was put together today, and may have an error, or more. <br /> 33 Mr. Kost reviewed the three bids with the Commission. It was determined that Veit and <br /> 34 Company was the lowest bidder who came in at approximately 19% above the Engineers <br /> 35 Estimate. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Mr. Kost reviewed the nine alternates of the Plan and compared the individual bids against each <br /> 38 other. When they reviewed Alternate six, Mr. Kost indicated that, while they were out to bid, <br />