Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council <br />Monday, March 19, 2012 <br />Page 12 <br />Tina Bell, the Project Manager, spoke on behalf of URS. We are expecting our bids in at <br />the end of this week. We will be opening those bids at the time they come in. We should <br />by the.following week have gone through all of them to know who the project is awarded <br />to. <br />Mr. Delguyd replied, very good. So you are essentially saying that we should know who <br />their contractor is? <br />Ms. Calta replied, correct. <br />Mr. Delguyd asked, my understanding is that not to exceed $175,000 is the number in our <br />budget. We budgeted for it. It's inclusive of a$125-130,000 base price and two <br />contingencies in there for sewer and drainage? <br />Mr. Wynne replied, I don't know what the contingencies were. I think it had to do with the <br />borings, didn't it? <br />Mr. Cappello replied, the contingencies were potential subgrade issues. That was <br />approximately $32-33,000. The base price was about $124,000. <br />Mr. Delguyd asked, are we actually approving two possible issues? I don't want to put in <br />$175,000 and if there are no real boring issues - <br />Council President Buckholtz replied, typically again, you brought up the term you are the <br />newest Councilman here, once we do a not to exceed, we pick a number that's worse case <br />scenario and we go from there. There's no harm. We have a big celebration when we come <br />in at $90,000 or something. We don't have to have a second vote on that. I would ask the <br />Law Director, do you have anything further? <br />Ms. Calta replied, if I may, just one more comment as to the substantial commitments that <br />Mr. Marquardt mentioned that he believes the Law Director saw as small changes back in <br />September of 2010. I just wanted to say that back then these were not deemed to be <br />substantial changes given where the project stood at that time. <br />With regard to the traffic light, I don't want to be repetitive, but I do want to get on the <br />record that the financial commitment relating to the traffic control signal at this time is <br />determined to be zero because the traffic does not warrant a control signal being installed. <br />If and when it would meet that criteria, there would need to be a traffic study, they are <br />called warrants, that determines that it meets the checklist of items for that signal. But the <br />traffic is not anticipated to meet that level at this time or when the Library is constructed <br />and fully operational. If at some point the back parcel is developed, it is anticipated at that <br />time that the traffic control signal would meet those warrants and would be required. <br />As far as the roadway, I will just bring it back to what was being discussed at that time was <br />not thought to be substantial. At that point in time there were discussions that there could