CC_Minutes_2015_1116 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, November 16, 2015 Page 31 Culver advised that there were several items that had more risk involved (e.g. $75,000 allotment for a signal system) without more detailed review of its final design and fluctuations with the current bidding climate that could also increase that rislc and costs. Mr. Culver noted that the potential to group some of those improvements with another proj ect was also possible. Mr. Culver noted that the applicant had showed this estimate to a regular contractor and they felt it was still in the general ballpark. Mr. Culver stated that he had no grave concerns over that $400,000 estimate; however, based on past experience in unknowns (e.g. Wal- Mart project) and possible private utilities or other items not showing up until constniction time, he remained hesitant to cap those costs at this time. Related to the compete cost of iinprovements, Mayor Roe questioned how those cost shares could be addressed after an agreement was in place (e.g. traffic sig- nal). While Mayor Roe noted that since this is not just a city road and usually costs were shared associated with traffic signal improvements, and further noted that there were other agencies involved that were not subject to the agreement be- tween the City of Roseville and JLL. Under those circumstances, Mayor Roe asked if there was any term of this PUD Amendment Agreement that could be re- considered by mutual agreeinent of both parties in the future. City Attorney Gaughan responded that this was certainly possible, as was current- ly being done through this ainendment to PUD Agreement #3608. Mayor Roe opined that he anticipated parties may be willing to take another loolc at the Agreement depending on how things worked out. Mr. Moston advised that one thing JLL was touching on was the idea of a cost es- timate versus the scope of the project. Mr. Moston advised that JLL's concern comes inore from that scope involving those things and costs not under the con- trol of JLL and their scope of final designs and additions. Mr. Moston reiterated JLL's willingness to contribute to this project and see it benefit their property and the Roseville community. However, Mr. Moston noted their concern remained having some financial controls over that scope versus estimate, thus their willing- ness to include a contingency for unforeseen costs. Councilmeinber Willmus expressed appreciation for the developer's perspective. However, all things considered, Councilmeinber Willmus opined that the most prtident action on the part of the City Council would be to approve the PUD Agreeinent Amendment as presented; and should there be extenuating circuin- stances down the road, further amendment could be considered at that time. Willinus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11272 (Attachment G) entitled, "A Resolution Approving Planned Unit Development #15-019 (At- tachment F) related to Improvements at Rosedale Center;" amendecl to �educe de- sign standaNc� rec�uirements for window and dooa� openings (RCA page 4, lines