Laserfiche WebLink
Meeting Minutes 02-04-09 <br />complicated then it will need to go to the committee. If there is conflict between Staff and the Committee <br />Project Manager then it will have to go to City Council. Council Member Broussard's concern is delaying <br />projects that need to be completed in a timely manner such as a contractor can't just be put on hold for a few <br />weeks. Committee Member Haiden stated that if it takes an additional 2 weeks to get it done right it would be <br />better than waiting three months to get it corrected or re-done, such as with the Merry-Go-Round. <br />Mr. Statz, City Engineer commented that Hidden Spring Park had similar issues and we should have established <br />early on in the process that Vice-Chairperson Amundsen, for instance, be the point person as he was the <br />committee member most involved in the park. When dealing with contractors it is often difficult to postpone <br />decisions as they have their schedules and time is money. Council Member Paar said some of the problems <br />with Hidden Spring Park were not foreseeable, like we didn't know the spring was not going work. Council <br />Member Lee responded, but that is one of the reasons we paid for engineering services, was to make sure the <br />spring worked. Council Member Paar suggested maybe the solution was as simple as a checklist? Vice- <br />Chairperson Amundsen said there was a checklist for Hidden Spring Park and there are still things not <br />completed on that list. Mr. Statz stated there was a Contractor List and a City List, the committee signed off on <br />the Contractor List; it is the City List that still has things not completed. Council Member Lee stated the City <br />paid a premium fee to get the park done by Fete des Lacs 2007 and it is still not technically done. Mr. Statz <br />reminded the Council & Committee that Bonestroo, as of yet, has not submitted a final bill and won't until the <br />project is completed. We don't however have a policy or procedure in place specifically geared towards these <br />types of problems with park projects and one should certainly be developed. Committee Member Haiden said a <br />checklist is good for a final, but he would like to suggest a project requirement document like what is used in <br />the private sector with specific project requirements and project descriptions. It would be used as a sort of a <br />contract with all participants having a perfect understanding of what needs to be done. Council Member Paar <br />added that a page for adrawing/design would also be advantageous and to keep the document from being too <br />long it should be more of an outline. The goal would be to communicate the critically important details. Mr. <br />Larson and Mr. Palzer will work on a checklist. The committee will better define the Project Requirement <br />Document. <br />Chairperson Seeley stated she has looked back over projects that have been completed during the time she has <br />been involved on the Parks & Recreation Committee and what were the common denominators in projects that <br />went well. One project that went really well, for instance, was the play structure at Laurie LaMotte Memorial <br />Park. Most of the work for this project was completed by Public Works. Mr. Tedd Peterson, Public Works was <br />on the Parks & Recreation Committee at the time and the committee had a more direct line of communication <br />with Public Works. The committee also met directly with the three vendors submitting bids at a committee <br />meeting and also met on site. <br />Some discussion was had as to how contractors were selected to which Mr. Statz replied it was the lowest <br />bidder and everything was bid as one project. What would possibly be beneficial is to have separate contractors <br />for specific areas of expertise and not lump everything together. There would be more options in bids if the <br />project is less than $50,000, but we still have the fiscal responsibility to take lowest bid. If we hire outside <br />contractors delays mean money. Mr. Palzer said that the best projects were done by Public Works, second by <br />volunteers, lastly contractors. Council Member Lee reiterated that doing it wrong means more money also. <br />It was suggested projects be viewed by Public Works for input in the planning phase. Council Member Lee <br />stated this is usually done, but we do not typically talk about drain the for instance, at the Parks & Recreation <br />Committee level. The Public Works Staff knows the ground and below and the information would be <br />2 of 3 <br />