My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-12-2006
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
CCP 06-12-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:21:36 PM
Creation date
11/15/2006 10:10:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - May 22,2006 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Option 5: Table the item to the next Council meting to allow staff time to discuss the changes to <br />the contract with the Contractor, in an attempt to reduce project cots, <br /> <br />Ms. Giga stated that in both instances, it should be noted that the low bidder has no obligation to <br />the City to offer lower prices for alternate materials. The low bidder was over $300,000 lower <br />than lhe next lowest bidder, and with re-advertising the project, value engineering opportunities <br />may not result in a reduction in project costs, <br /> <br />She stated that the consulting engineer, URS, has been in contact with the low bidder and they <br />are willing to consider some proposed changes. <br /> <br />Ms, Giga requested Council to discuss the options and provide staff with direction on how to <br />proceed, <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked where the stonn sewer fund balance would be in 2007, Mr. <br />Siddiqui responded that in the scenario he worked on was if they were to take on this project, <br />they would be in a deficit of almost $200,000 at the beginning of next year, If they were not to <br />do this project they would be $400,000 in the positive, He noted this project would cost <br />$605,000 for storm sewer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked if they did this project next year, what the fund balance would be, <br />Mr. Siddiqui responded they would be looking at the same situation. <br /> <br />. Councihnember Larson stated if they put this project off until next year, it did not appear there <br />would be any significant difference, The only difference was that if they did it this year, there <br />would be a larger negative balance this year that they would recover next year. He stated that did <br />not seem to him to be a significant consideration as to whether they went forward or not. He <br />stated they either did the project his year, or next year with the same difference, <br /> <br />Mayor Aplikowski suggesled they tablc this until next month, She agreed this was not a strong <br />enough reason to not do this because they did not gain that much by putting it off. <br /> <br />Conncilmember Holden asked whal kind of changes could decrease the cost. Ms. Giga <br />responded some of the pipe material included in the project was more expensive and there would <br />be alternatives using other pipe that may be less expensive, <br /> <br />Conncilmember Grant stated it appeared they were over budget by $437,000 and whal would <br />they forego in the current capital budget to makc this up, Ms. Wolfe responded they have not <br />had an opportunity to scrutinize this in great detail because the bid just came in last week, but <br />two of the largest overages were in the storm sewcr fund and water main fund. She noted options <br />were limited for lhese funds because there were no major projects in the next two years, She <br />stated the third fund affected was the capital fund. She indicated that lwo other purchases for this <br />year would probably not be brought forward this year which may cover some of the cost overage. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.