Minutes - Council - 11/22/2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Drainage and Utility Easement on Lot 1, Block 1, COR Two Northstar and Declaring Terms of Same. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Strommen, Councilmembers LeTourneau, Shryock, Johns, Kuzma, Riley, and Williams. Voting No: None. 7.03: Considering Awarding Contract for Demolition of Former Municipal Center Campus Asst. City Administrator/Economic Development Manager Brama reviewed the staff report and recommendation from the project manager, Hakanson Anderson, to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. Councilmember Riley asked for more details on the contingency. Asst. City Administrator/Economic Development Manager Brama stated that staff is suggesting the contingency, noting that the intent is to avoid having to come back to the Council with change orders because of the delay in the project when the item needs to be placed on a Council agenda. He noted that because the total cost of the project is low and the City is aware of the asbestos on the site, the risk factor is higher than typical and that is why the contingency is suggested. Councilmember Riley stated that a contractor has already been onsite doing phase one demolition and a project manager has been hired to identify the steps in the project and costs and therefore he would be hesitant to have a contingency. Councilmember LeTourneau stated that the contingency is $15,000 and does not seem to be that much to mitigate risk. He stated that the City has been through many demolitions that they thought would be easy but have discovered to be larger. He noted that the demolition of this building allows construction for new homes to begin with the new construction season and therefore would be in favor of the contingency. Mayor Strommen agreed that this would mitigate risk on the project timeline as well as the time needed for staff to develop the cases to come before the Council. She stated that she would be comfortable with the contingency. Councilmember Riley stated that the letter could be interpreted as identifying a timeline from November through May and suggested that the timeline be tightened up. He asked that staff work with the contractor to minimize the time the contractor will be on site, using the explanation that the contractor could complete the project within one month of that six-month timeline. Councilmember Kuzma stated that he is in favor of honoring the contract for the stated amount and stated that he would prefer a change order to come back before the Council even if that delays the project. City Council / November 22, 2016 Page 7 of 10