Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 02-20-2001 ':," . . . i" '......-...... ...'~ 'HILts FilE < ",. AGENDA.' . .'Cll"Y'~ W~ION . CITY BALL 'Iu""'~Y."U..\RY ~_.414t'p.M. ,- < ." .;9 '. " ,', . t ~." " !T- 4:45 P.M. E:dmQlflClier, 1. t ';;: ,,~: 4:45P.M.. 2.. ..~.._,.N ,TCAAP_.. h. ','---j"f - 5:15 P.M.' 3.D'-wirul-. - . ,'- .~1WI~ArcliliecturIiIA1fJlllice.F8er. ~ J',_, .- - , ,,' -,- ." 1 , ' --" :,:',:t~I; ::-:.'<~<' ~: '_: '- , , ' "","."" :'~-; :_<,:', .",',..,- " " -;{;\:':---,;-r':::\~f: ,.~*,~1vm'J ~...~.~....~~Jl,c."T:.; ;. -'t:~_'_,J~~_:_"',r:.}. ',,'." ": - .,::-::: '>,---', '2~:",';:':"'::;'" L ,!",'.'..~_~!td.~PIllo(PMP),SWf~' ,-, 7:00P.M. ,4. c~c~-""".... ",;-, 7:36P.M. MjtnIi'a-..' -;",-., ,~ , 5. '~Ibov!I_~~~upIIll1ellglhol""\iim "<-.) , );.; atr.".'\ftI8D -;.- ........l.ake ...... ~B1!IriMJC<,.".~ PIwIDe Cal)~ '. ,.: (et~_7I39" m.d.a& .lli~""I!"""" :-- -'\~ ,-:,:;."', .4:' '.::-,~} ...._~..,''-";". - Tentative Februarv Meetln2 Sebedule Meeting dates, times alId locations are subject to change. Please contact City Hall for the most current scbedule. l'ebruary 5 Special Council Meetillg? 7:30 P.M. February 7 Planning Commission . 7:30 P.M. February 12 ""CouncD Meeting , 7:30 P.M. 5f1" Anniversary Kick-Off Holiday Inn St. Paul North February 15 Operations & Finance 7:00 P.M. Committee February 19 Holiday February 20 CouncD Worksession 4:45 P.M. ("Tuesday) February 26 Council Meeting 7:30 P.M. February 27 Parks, Trails & Recreation 7:00 P.M. Committee February 28 Communications 7:00 A,M. Committee . Tentative Mareh MeetiB, ~ule Meeting dates, times and locations are ~ to change. Pleaseeontact City Hall for the most current lIChedule March 12 March 7 Pllmning Comm~ion 7:30P.M. March 15 March 19 March 26 March 27 March 28 COUDcD Meetilig 7:30P.M. Operations & Finance 7:00 P.M. Committee C6uncil Wor~R 4;45'P.M C6u~U MeetiDg 7:30 P.M. PaIb & Reet'l'lition 7:00 P.M, Committee Commuaications 7:00 A.M. Committee . 02/16/01 FRI 13:07 FAX 6516345137 TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST, TIME USAGE T PGS, SENT RESULT . . City of Arden Hilis @001 ********************* *** TX REPORT *** ********************* 4742 96286833 02116 13: 07 00'36 2 OK 02/16/01 FRI 13:09 FAX 6516345137 TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST. TIME USAGE T PGS. SENT RESULT . . City of Arden Hills Ii!I 001 *** ********************* *** TX REPORT ********************* 4743 97637060891 02/16 13: 08 00'51 2 OK 02/16/01 FRI 13:11 FAX 6516345137 TRANSMISSION OK TXlRX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST. TIME USAGE T PGS. SENT RESULT . . C1ty of Arden Hills ~001 ********************* *** TX REPORT *** ********************* 4744 96333846 02116 13: 10 01' 12 2 OK 02/16/01 FRI 13:12 FAX 6516345137 TRANSMISSION OK TXlRX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECT! ON ID ST, TIME USAGE T PGS. SENT RESULT . . City of Arden Hit1. Ig] 001 ********************* *** TX REPORT *** ********************* 4745 92282191 02116 13:12 00'33 2 OK 02/16/01 FRI 13:13 FAX 6516345137 TRANSMISSION OK TXlRX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST. TIME USAGE T PGS. SENT RESULT . . City of Arden Hills 141 001 ********************* *** TX REPORT *** ********************* 4746 94821262 02/16 13: 13 00'35 2 OK :.-.""_.."'i , . CITY OF ARDEN HiltS" 4364 WEST ROUND LAKE ROAD ARDEN HILLS, MN 55112-5794 December 28, 2000 Bill Harper, Chief of Staff Congresswoman-elect Betty McCollUm p, 0, Box 14131 St, Paul, MN 55114 Dear Mr. Harper: As we discussed on the phone last week, the City of Arden Hills would like to invite Congresswoman-elect Betty McCollum to a City Council meeting to discuss the significance of the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) for the City of Arden Hills and the Fourth District. To that end, enclosed within is a copy ofthe plan that was drafted with the oversight and influence of the deceased Congressman Vento. . The City of Arden Hills would like to use the Vento Plan as a backdrop in which to compare the re-use of TCAAP in light of the recent events that have taken place on the property (i.e., Army National Guard property licensure; Government Services Administration inquiry into property redevelopment; the Army clean up; and the recent inquiry by private concerns about the sale and re-use of the property), The City of Arden Hills would like to meet with Congresswoman McCollum at her earliest convenience to provide education, background and information for a dialogue on support, assistance and involvement in a major, comprehensive planning exercise on the entire TCAAP property, Please contact me with a date or dates and times that Representative McCollum is available to meet with the Arden Hills City Council. Our monthly Worksessions, which would be an appropriate venue, occur on the third Monday of each month (excluding holidays), beginning at 4:45 p,m, Thank you for your time and effort in facilitating this meeting between Representative McCollum and the Arden Hills City Council. Sincerely, cc: City Council . Enclosure: TCAAP Plan PHONE: (851) 833.5878 . FAX (851) 833.7839 . . . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 16,2001 TO: J~rwJl~ Mayor and City Council FROM: Joe Lynch, City Administrator SUBJECT: Architectural Alliance Request for Re-Bid and Construction Phase Administration Cost Adjustment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council authorize payment in an amount equal to $20,844,00 to Architectural AlIianee for the difference in designing and construction phase portions ofthe contract, due to the ehange in the scope of services, and the construction cost adjustments, on the construction of the new City Hall. Back\!:round In July of 1997, the City received a proposal letter from Architectural Alliance for services based on a building and site budget of$1,120,000. There was no fee agreed to at that time, but the following eost for services was outlined per the AlA eontract. . In Article 12 of Section 2.2 and 2.6 Schematic Design 15% Design Development Documents 20% Construetion Documents (which included 40% drawings and specifications) Bidding Assistance 5% Construction Phase Administration 20% In August of 1998, the building and site plan was adjusted for a building of 15,102 square feet at a proposed cost estimate of $2,151 ,913.00. In September of 1998, the agreed-upon fee was $99,800,00, based on a 10,000 square foot building at a eost ofthe building and site of $1,120,000. That was adjusted up to a $184,500, fee, based on the previously aforementioned size of the building and size estimate, In October of 1998, an amendment letter was signed by the City of Arden Hills and Arehitectural Alliance agreeing to a fee of$162,500,OO, based on the same size building (15,102 square feet) and site design plan, and a furnishings budget was established at $150,000, In December of 1998, Article 11,2,1 was amended to allow for the provision that if the City of Arden Hills inereased the size of the building, or the budget beyond the $1,187,750,00, the fee for basic serviee and site design would be adjusted as mutually agreed upon. . . . Memorandum, Architectural Allianee Request for Re-Bid and Construction Phase Administration Cost Adjustment Page Two February 16,2001 In April of2000, the estimated cost ofthe building rose to $2,942,000,00 for the same size building, based on adjustments that included utility work, expansion of the basement, and stone exterior. In March of that year, we were sent a letter by Arehitectural Alliance alerting us to the fact that they would be asking tor an increase in their fee, adjusted according to Article 11,2,1, At this time, it seems to come down to what Arehitectural Alliance should be paid, not if they should be paid, I've done the following calculations, based on the contract language, and my understanding of the relationship between the architect and owner. I've deducted out $315,000 from the $2,942,000 cost for the stone to bring it into alignment with the previously mentioned cost of$1,887,500,OO, 20% of8,6% of$2,627,000 $45,184.00 Minus 20% of 8.6% of $1 ,887,500, 32,465,00 Difference 12,719,00 Add baek the Re-bid Assistance Fee 8,125,00 New Total $20,844.00 Difference from requested Architectural Alliance $1.445.00 amount of $22,289,00, (This is basically 20% of8.6% difference between the $2,711.00,00 that Peter Vesterholt uses, and the $2,627,000 number that I use in comparing the construction phase and re-bid assistance without stone,) The architect and the City have agreed at this time, that the re-bid assistance fee should be the same amount, based on the faet that the scope of services shouldn't have expanded once the drawings and changes in building design had been completed, The architect was paid an additional $25,000 for the expansion ofthe basement, the inclusion of the windows, and the movemcnt of the oi1ices from the second floor to the main level. I will not be able to be in attendance at the meeting on February 20th, Mr. Post will be in attendance, and I will update him to allow him to answer any of your questions at the meeting, I will also contact you by phone on Friday to properly explain this before the meeting, ARCHITECTURAl ALLIANCE . February 9, 200] 400 eLl HO~. A VE r~ U L Sou T II Mr, Joe Lynch City Administrator Arden Hills City Hall Round Lake Business Center 4364 W, Round Lake Rd, Arden Hills, MN 55112-5794 M rJNEAPOLI3, M NNESOH ~54D3.3299 TELEPH 0 N:: 1612:1 871-57C3 FAX 161(1871 7212 Re: Professional Design Services Fee New City Hall Proiect Comm, No, 97]49 Dear Joe: . This is a follow up to our March 8, 2000 letter, our January 17,200 1 meeting, and our January 18, 200t letter regarding additional professional design fees for the New City Hall project. RiP.C111f>~t for Rebid Fee After the proiect was bid in 1999 (and before it was determined to ultimately rebid the project in 2000 when the land transfer had taken place), we discussed with the City Council the cost that the City would incur to rebid the proiect. In addition to the cost of inllation, these costs would consist of the design team's time to reissue the bidding documents, be available to answer calls from bidders, issue addenda, attend the bid- opening, etc, This phase equates to $8,]25 or 5% of the original $162,500 total basic services fee, In addition, the City would incur the costs to reprint the project for bidding in 2000 (approximately $12,5(0). There appears to be some confusion about the rebid issue, because the City requested that we revise certain parts of the proiect before we reissued the documents in 2000, However, the revisions made were drawing (scope) changes requested by the City (office relocations, addition of windows, enlargement of the basement, etc,) and as such they were an additional ($25,000) service which we were compensated for, These scope changes did not include our time to rebid the proiect. . The rebidding phase is analogous to the efforts of a realtor to sell the same house twice, The fact that there were scope changes incOlporated in the second bidding of the project did not change our work effort during . Mr. Joe Lynch Februal)' 9,2001 Page 2 of 3 the rebid phase of the project. Per our discussions, we have agreed that the fee to rebid the project tn 2000 shall be identical to the $8,125 fee we were paid in t999 even though the construction budget has changed since our fee was established in 1998 based on a $1 ,887,500 construction budget. Reouest for Adrlitional c.onstmc.tion Administration Fee Article 11,2. t of our contract stipulates that our basic services fee will be adjusted as murually agreed if the City agrees to change the construction budget. Our Basic Services fee of $162,500 was established in 1998 at 8,6% of an estimated construction budget of $1,887,750. The City has decided to proceed with a $2,942,000 constmction proiect. . In our March 8, 2000 letter, we indicated that we would request an adiustment of our fee based on the accepted constmction budget less the cost for the extension of the utilities and the ,~65,000 budget allocation for the basement. The basis for our fee request therefore is: Accepted Construction Budget: Less Utility Work Less Basement Allowance Fee Basis $2,942,000 (166,000) (65 000) $2,71 ],000 Technically, we believe that it is justified to request an adjustment of our entire basic services design fee based on the increased construction budget. If we used the same percentage that our current fee is based on, then our total basic services fee would be $233, 146 (8,6% of $2,711,00), an increase of $70,646 over the current $t62,5oo basic services fee, Although we are significantly 'in the hole" on the overall basic services fee for the project and greatly would appreciate an adjustment based on the actual constmction budget for all phases of the proiect, we realize that such an adjustment may not receive City approval. However, we do need to request an adjustment in basic services fee for the construction administration phase of the project, because we are administering a much larger constmction value than we are under contract to do. Ourwork effort is greater in many areas, including the need to coordinate and review shop drawings for the stone cladding of the new facility. The basic services fee for the constmction administration phase equates to 20% of the total fee, We are requesting the following adjustment based on the $2,711,000 adjusted construction value: . a. 20% of 8.6% of 2,711,000 b. Less 20% of 8.6% of 1,887,500 c, Additional Constmction Administration Phase Fee $46,629 (32..16.S:l $14,164 . Mr, Joe Lynch Februal)' 9, 200 I Page 3 of 3 Sllmmal)' of Current Fee RerJllestor; At this time we are requesting the following fees and fee adjustments: t. Rebid Fee 2. Additional Construction Administration Fee $8,t2S $14,t64 . Potential Additional Fee Requests As you are aware, there have been many proposed scope changes to the project since bids were taken. These changes include the potential inclusion of an office for the National Guard, a server room, change of room finishes in the community room, modifications to the front counter, and the potential enclosure of an office space on second floor. Whereas these scope change do not appear to be maior items, they do take time to design, administer, meet about, issue proposal requests to the contractor, etc, It is not the practice of Architectural Alliance to "nickel and dime" our clients for incidental client requested scope changes which are made during the course of a construction process. However, we must respect the potential requests from our consultants for scope changes and will forward those to you as we go through the process, I have also requested of our staff that they keep track of the time associated with these scope changes, because the time equates to fee that we can not bill for, and, thus, provides added value for the City, We vel)' much appreciate your consideration in this matter. Please call me if you have any questions, Thank You! Sincerely, f4wtU PETER VESTERHOLT, AlA Principal . cc: Ellsworth Elliott Sterner Cooper Dowell File H:IHQ PROJECTSI199711997149101IiceI020901L1.DOC . . . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 16, 2001 TO: Mayor and City Council \1' jl;~""--- Joe Lynch, City Administrator,(,l\Jt FROM: SUBJECT: TCAAP and Pavement Management Program (PMP) I wanted to take an opportunity to address both of these issues for your eonsideration in terms of expectations, prioritization and time commitment, TCAAP The timing may be right for the City to reconsider its prioritization and desire to reeruit consultants in planning Phase II of the TCAAP property, We've had a few things happen recently that prompt this, . Ramsey County, the City of Arden Hills and the Minnesota Army National Guard are probably going to proceed with the exploration of a joint cooperative Maintenance facility and property use for all three entities. . The City is going to be approached in March about the potential for development of a portion of the TCAAP property that has been identified for commercial/industrial development. . The Minnesota Army National Guard is seeking Jieensure of the remaining portions of the property, exeept that shown as designated in the City's re-use plan. . We recently heard from the Ramsey County that the Highways 96/1 0 interchange preliminary design work will be done sometime in the year 2000, and we have been requested to participate in discussions for early acquisition for right-of-way properties, Another impetus is that the City's Comprehensive Plan is now ready for aeceptance by the Metropolitan Council, and should serve as the beginning point for a position by the City on TCAAP, We keep referring to the Vento Re-Use Plan (which is now close to five years old) as the preferred plan or the deferred plan, and we should begin to promote the City's Comprehensive Plan as our beginning discussion point. Since my arrival, it's been talked about, thought about, and we've even gone so far as to consider bringing consultants on board, but without consensus. . . . Memorandum, TCAAP and Pavement Management Program Page Two February 16,2001 You may want to establish this as a priority for the City in 2001102, and attempt to hire a consultant to assist with the planning, and possibly consider making part of the Request for Proposals (RFP) the fact that the City has set aside only a certain amount of money for the planning process, and part of the ability for a firm to get the contraet would be for them to obtain additional funding to complete planning of the entire parcel. I don't know if this is an item for the Retreat agenda, as it could take up a great deal of the day, It may be something that you want to discuss and establish as a priority to provide direction to staff on establishment of time lines for an RFP, PMP Basically, the questions are the same as those raised regarding the TCAAP property, Those are: . Do you want to spend time at the Retreat on this issue? Is it one of your highest priorities for the year? If so, are you willing and able to make a commitment to having it regularly scheduled on a W orksession agenda, and attempting over the course of the year to make a decision on a document process for the management of the transportation infrastructure in the City? . . The discussion of the PMP has a simultaneous impact on the Stormwater Management Plan, and it's development, and will undoubtedly impaet our current Assessment Policy, You should take this into eonsideration in your deliberation regarding whieh direction this process should go. I believe we have determined that there will be no street improvement project this year, we should take this opportunity to work on it throughout the year, It is my hope that this will culminate in a public review process, and adoption of a plan, schedule and a process, Another idea for you to eonsider is the possibility of bringing someone in from outside the City, not an engineer or in the road construction business, to help us in the decision-making process with the development of a Pavement Management Plan, the coordination of the PMP with our Stormwater Management Plan, and all of the impending changes that may bring in our Assessment Policy, We would need to take an opportunity at each and every Worksession to set aside time - at least one hour - to meet with this individual, discuss the PMP aspects through a pre-detemlined time schedule, and resolve to work through the decision that is needed to bring about a resolution to a significant need in the City, Again, I will not be able to be in attendance at the February 20th Worksession due to a prior family eommitment, but will attempt to contact you prior to the meeting to get your thoughts and feedback, and will follow up with Terry Post from the meeting.