4C, Draft Minutes 12-17-12 Special

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—DECEMBER 17, 2012 5 Councilmember Holden recommended the Feasibility Report refer to the project being completed in phases. Public Works Director Maurer suggested the wording within the Resolution not be changed, but that staff be directed to establish phases in the report. MOTION: Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Werner seconded a motion to adopt Resolution #2012-054 — Ordering the Feasibility Report for the B-2 District and authorizing staff to enter into a contract with Bolton & Menk for completion of the Feasibility Report, directing staff to include phasing in the project. Councilmember Holmes referred to the estimated costs and asked why engineering was broken into two expenses. Mr. Thomas stated this covered the Feasibility Study and final design expenses. He then discussed the cost summary within the Implementation Plan noting the Feasibility Study and final design costs were included in the $1.8 million. Councilmember Holden questioned why the contingency percentage was set at 15% and not 10%, as has been done in the past. Mr. Thomas indicated the contingency percentage varied based on projects. He anticipated this percentage would be reduced as the planning process continued. Councilmember Holden inquired if City staff would be assisting with any of the engineering work. Public Works Director Maurer discussed the work that would be completed by City staff. He commented that overhead costs and contingencies would be adjusted as time went on. He explained that some of the construction costs would be funded by the County. He indicated that he would be meeting with the County in the near future to review the Implementation Plan and to gain their support on the project. It was his understanding the County supported the project but was not interested in managing the details. Councilmember Holden questioned why a 15% contingency was necessary. Public Works Director Maurer commented this was necessary due to the fact that detailed survey work was needed as there were unknowns on the City's part. As further information on the project was gained, the contingency percentage could be reduced. The motion carried (5-0). C. Planning Case 12-019—Master and Final PUD at 1201 County Road E City Planner Beekman stated the applicant was requesting Master and Final PUD to redevelop the property at 1201 County Road E into 75 rental units. The history of the property was noted.