Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-02/06/2017COUNCIL WORK SESSION February 6, 2017 4:30 p.m. Harold E. Getty Council Chambers Members present: Jacobs, Morrissey, Powers, Lind, Amos, Schmitt, and Welper. Absent: Jacobs Moved by Welper seconded by Amos that the Agenda, as proposed, be approved. Objective: Discussion of 4th Street Bridge Canopy. Eric Thorson, City Engineer, provided an overview of the project, and noted that the timeframe is narrowing to get the best pricing for this project. Mike Haven, AECOM, explained that in May, AECOM prepared plans to repair 4th Street bridge to repair concrete and paint the canopy. The paint on the structure is over 20 years old and in need of repainting. The second major item was the concrete rail as rebar is currently exposed. Haven provided an overview of the original scope of the project along with pictures of the current state of the structure. Haven explained that the bid came in at $2.57 million and was rejected because only one bid was received and the amount was high. Council then rejected the bid and AECOM contacted additional construction companies to generate additional interest in the project an increased the working days on the proposed plans, and took core samples of the concrete barrier to analyze and found that patching would be an option rather than full replacement, which would reduce labor costs. Haven provided an overview of the proposed Option 2 changes to the project and explained that the estimated construction cost is reduced to $1.5 million. He then provided an overview of the proposed Option 3 changes to the project which include removing the canopy and installing new rails and lights, the estimated construction cost is then reduced to $850,000. Mayor Hart asked about the process for replacing the windows as well as the cost. Mike Haven explained the estimate to replace the windows would be approximately $150,000 - $200,000. The higher amount would include UV Protection to protect the windows from yellowing in the future. Mr. Schmitt questioned why the original bid was rejected. Mike Haven explained it was because the amount was high. Mr. Schmitt questioned if the difference between the second and third option and requested a side by side comparison. Mike Haven explained that the biggest difference would be that the deck would not be replaced and the canopy would be disposed. Mr. Morrissey questioned if the second option would keep the canopy as is, with improvements. Mike Haven explained that the windows would remain; the rails would be patched and made to look uniform. Mr. Morrissey clarified that the estimate was $1.5 million, and could possibly increase. Mike Haven explained it could increase or decrease. Mr. Morrissey reviewed his understanding of the second option and current approved funds. Mr. Lind questioned if option three has been presented to Black Hawk Gaming Association. Eric Thorson explained that Gaming has stated that if the original concept changes then it would need to be resubmitted for approval but they are open to looking at different options within the scope. Page 2 Mr. Morrissey questioned if Option 2 came in under estimate would there be a possibility to make changes to the windows. Havens confirmed but it would depend on project costs. Mr. Morrissey questioned the time frame of the project. Mike confirmed that time is very important right now. Mayor Hart questioned how fast council would need to move forward. Eric Thorson explained an alternate bid could be prepared to replace the windows, which shouldn't add much time. The city does need to act as soon as possible to take advantage of the bidding climate and get the best price. Mr. Lind questioned if option two and three could be bid at the same time. Mayor Hart explained that it may require the city to go back to Gaming to see if they will support the changes. Mike added that it would require consensus from the public as well. Eric Thorson added that there are a number of different enhancements that could be selected from and public input would be important. Mayor Hart clarified that we are not limited by making a choice on a particular option, as we could revisit it and add more. With no further business before the Council, it was moved by Schmitt seconded by Powers that the meeting be adjourned at 4:55 p.m. Ayes: Six. Motion carried. Lelley Felchl City Clerk