CC PACKET 03242009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 10, 2009 Page 3 Councilmember Roth inquired about the drainage requirements included in the project. Ms. Garbarini explained the drainage requirements come from the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). 6 Councilmember Roth inquired about the cost increase due to the RCWD drainage requirements. 7 Ms. Garbarini replied that she requested the apparent low bid contractor to forward some of 8 those numbers to her, but due to the project being bid as a lump sum and bid to the general 9 through specification sections it is hard to pull things like this out. In this bidding climate she 10 would have expected numbers to come in a little lower, and she would expect that the perforated I 1 pipe, geo-textile fabric and special soil being brought in brought the numbers up a bit. 12 13 Mayor Pro Tem Stille stated he is aware of a residential contractor that wanted to bid on this 14 project but withdrew primarily for reasons in relation to drainage and conditions imposed by 15 RCWD. The contractor did not feel that he was qualified to take on this project. Ms. Garbarini 16 replied there were a few plan holders that pulled out and did not submit a bid. Some of them 17 withdrew due to the number of general contractors they were bidding against, and others because 18 they were more experienced in residential construction. Commercial construction has a higher 19 square footage cost, specifically with regard to the finishes, which need to stand up to a lot of 20 abuse. She explained there are other things to consider such as the mechanical system and the 21 mechanical fixtures, and commercial grade fixtures add a lot of cost. The mechanical engineer on 22 this project was specifically concerned about getting a residential contractor that may not be 23 familiar with the requirements of this type of construction. 24 25 Mayor Pro Tem Stille requested information on the reason that the water deck was included in 26 the project and the increased use of these features by Minneapolis. Ms. Garbarini stated the 27 splash deck was initially introduced into the project at the first open house in 2005 when 28 residents talked about the wading pool that previously existed in the park. There were a lot of 29 comments from parents with kids that thought it would be great to have that kind of amenity 30 back in the park. The option of a wading pool was explored, and the splash deck was included in 31 the project, which does not require as much maintenance and is not as costly. Ms. Garbarini 32 explained that many municipalities are going towards splash deck systems because they do not 33 have to necessarily treat the water and deal with issues involved in chemical treatment. Close 34 Landscaping Architecture does a lot of work for Minneapolis Parks. Many of the parks in 35 Minneapolis have wading pools or splash decks; the new pools all include splash decks. 36 37 nQs. Stacie le vilvang, Ehlers & Associates, provided an overview of the General Obligation (GO) 38 Abatement Portion of the $5,425,000 GO Bond Series 2009. The Abatement Portion of the GO 39 Bonds will fund improvements to Emerald Park. The remaining portion of the $5,425,000 GO 40 Bond Series 2009 will assist in the funding of the 2009 road reconstruction projects and 41 refinancing of the 2000A and 2000B bonds. Ms. Kvilvang advised that he Emerald Park 42 improvement funding will vary from $1.1 million to $1.3 million, depending on whether the 43 splash deck is included in the project. If the splash deck is not included in the project there will 44 be a 12 year term on the bond issue; if the splash deck is included there will be a 15 year term on 45 the bond issue. She advised that with or without the splash deck the debt service is identical, the 46 full 9;13'7,000 will be used each year.