CC_Minutes_2017_0410 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, April 10, 2017 Page 3 Etten moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolut ion No. 11407 (Attachment A) ent itled, “Resolution Rejecting Bids – 2017 Utility Projects.” Roll Call Ayes: McGehee, Willmus, Laliberte, Etten and Roe. Nays: None. j. Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse Community Building Professional Se r- vices Agreement for Plans and Specifications City Manager Trudgeon briefly highlighted this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) and related attachments dated April 10, 2017. Councilmember McGehee stated that she remained in favor of receiving a cost benefit analysis before proceeding in addition to her previously stated concerns in selecting this architect without benefit of bids or putting out a Request for Pro- posals (RFP) for an architect to prepare designs and specifications, opining that the city was not yet ready to take this step. Mayor Roe opined that any cost benefit analysis would be a City Council dec i- sion. Specific to an RFP, City Manager Trudgeon noted that the city had chosen this firm as part of the previous Park Renewal Program process, including preliminary work done by them as part of this process; and clarified that the city was not r e- quired by state law to go out to bid. Mr. Trudgeon noted that the bid from Hagen, Christensen & McIlwain (HCM) was within reason at 8% of the project cost for preparation of plans and specifications; with those costs typ ically falling between 7% and 10% of total project costs. Based on the good faith of HCM’s past work and anticipating that same level of service in the future, Mr. Trudg eon reported that this prompted staff’s recommendation in an effort to keep the project moving and recognizing timing impacts on golf course seasonal operations. Councilmember McGehee opined that issues that have come up around existing park buildings had proven significant and not yet discussed; and noted that this was also a separate building from those developed as part of the Park Renewal Program and therefore not asked to function in the same way. Councilmember McGehee stated that she was uncomfortable with an expenditure of $146,200 for architectural plans, along with not being happy about no mention of sustainability, energy efficiencies, or possible orientation for solar energy consider ations. Coun- cilmember McGehee opined that not consider ing those options for other park buildings was a shortcoming and should be included here. She further opined that taxpayer monies should not be expended at this stage without a long -range sus- tainability plan in hand.