My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CCP 09152025
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2025
>
CCP 09152025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/21/2025 2:48:55 PM
Creation date
10/21/2025 2:48:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
9/15/2025
Meeting Type
Work Session
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
243
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 />36 <br />37 Based on the scoring from the group, staff shortlisted the top three scoring firms (LHB, <br />38 BKV, HCM) for interviews. All staff had these three firms as the top three firms (although <br />39 there was some variance in preference order). The top three firms’ proposals clearly <br />40 separated themselves from the rest of the proposals based on knowledge of the project, <br />41 similar project experience, scope and project costs. The top three firms are all very capable <br />42 of completing the work at a fair value. <br />43 <br />44 On September 9, 2025, each of the three shortlisted firms provided a brief presentation and <br />45 were interviewed by staff to clarify questions with the proposals. Based on the interviews <br />46 and the proposals, the top scoring firm that staff recommends for selection is LHB. Their <br />47 proposal documents they have done numerous projects in scale and scope similar to the <br />48 Civic Campus project such as the St. Louis County Transportation Building, Burnsville Bus <br />49 Garage Modernization, and the Ramsey County Environmental Center. They have <br />50 experience in all aspects of the project including public works, dance studios and license <br />51 passport centers. The project manager, lead architect and the entire team have extensive <br />52 experience with large scale projects, including remodel and expansion projects, and <br />53 construction manager at risk projects. The cost of services and hours provided for the <br />54 scope of work were the best value for the top three firms. Although they did not complete <br />55 the previous civic campus studies (BKV & Kodet), staff if confident they will be able to move <br />56 the project forward and offer a fresh perspective to the project. <br />57 <br />58 If approved, staff will work with the selected consultant to finalize the scope and agreement. <br />59 It is anticipated that the final agreement will be on the October 13, 2025 consent agenda for <br />60 final City Council approval. <br />61 <br />62 Policy Objectives <br />63 The construction of a new Maintenance Operations Center and License and Passport <br />64 Center (along with the City Dance Studio) will allow the City to continue to provide needed <br />65 and valuable services to the residents and businesses of the community in a more efficient <br />66 manner. The new facilities will ensure that the City's roads, utilities, vehicles, and <br />67 equipment are maintained at the desired level and that valuable services such as <br />68 recreational programming and driver’s license and passport processing are conveniently <br />69 available to community residents. <br />70 <br />71 Equity Impact Summary <br />72 The new Maintenance Operations Center and License Center will provide a benefit to the <br />73 residents, businesses, and visitors to Roseville. The new facilities will allow for more <br />74 efficient services to be provided for residents, customers, and users of city parks and <br />75 infrastructure. With perhaps the exception of adjacent neighborhoods, it does not appear <br />76 that the construction and operation of the new facilities will disproportionately impact any <br />77 segment of the population. As with all City projects, staff will continue to identify potential <br />78 unintended consequences and identify potential alternatives to disproportionally impactful <br />79 action. <br />80 <br />81 Budget Implications <br />82 Based on the recommended consultant, LHB, the fees for the project would be $630,911 <br />83 for the LPCDS and $2,000,509 for the MOC for a total of $2,631,420. This reflects over <br />84 17,000 hours of work from schematic design through construction over the next three years <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />Qbhf!4:!pg!354 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.