CR 93-146 Approve Contract RCM Design Services
"'- " - .'
/ \
, i Y
U 0
.~ e"":
c;.",
, , +
, 0 ~
' .. P K \ ~ !
August 31, 1993 Council Report: 93-146
APPROVE CONTRACT WITH R.C.M. FOR DESIGN SERVICES
FOR THE NINE MILE CREEK IMPROVEMENTS
Proposed Action.
staff recommends adoption of the following motion: "Move to approve the
desiqn service contract with R.C.M. for the structure imQrovements alonq'
Nine Mile Creek in the amount of $56.000."
Approval of this motion will allow RCM to immediately begin the design of
the structure improvements along Nine Mile Creek. Advance design of these
improvements is necessary in order to meet the schedule requirements of
t~is project.
Overview.
Over the last year the city has been working with the Nine Mile Creek
Watershed District in an attempt to reduce flooding along the creek. The
city's overall goal has been to gain the necessary approvals to construct
."~\new structures along the creek to lower the 100 year flood plain elevation.
~ Through various meetings with the Watershed District the city has gained
their approval and support for the project. The city has also recently
gained approval from the necessary state agencies, and is now ready to
begin the public hearing process with the Watershed District. In order for
the plans to be substantially complete for the public hearing, and fully
complete for construction this winter, the design phase must begin now.
primary Issues to Consider
o Why do the improvements need to be constructed?
o Why is the city taking the lead role in this project?
o What risks are involved in the city designing the project?
o How will the design fees be funded?
supporting Information.
o Analysis of Issues
o Action Plan
o RCM Proposal Letter
. .
-.f,~C~' '5
';( ^T^, ,'~ July 1, 1993
ACTION PLAN
. I
NINE MILE CREEK IMPROVEMENTS
HOPKINS, MINNESOTA
.
March 29. 1993
0 RCM to submit "Impact Statement" to city describing impacts of
project specifically with regard to the cities of Edina and
Minnetonka.
March 31. 1993
0 City meets with Minnetonka and Edina staff members to review
project, discuss impacts, and concerns.
April 1 - April 12. 1993
0 RCM to work with staff of Minnetonka and Edina resolving any
potential problems identified in the March 31 meeting. RCM
begins revisions to "Impact statement" based on comments from
Minnetonka and Edina.
April 12. 1993
0 City Attorney has petition form completed identifying
. improvements and maintenance needs.
April 16. 1993
0 City sends informational letter to Council and city Managers of
Edina and Minnetonka, briefly describing project and any issues
that have been discussed and possibly resolved with their staff.
0 'Provide detailed history ofuallmeetings to emphasize discussion
with W.S.D. and staff members.
0 Letter further informs these cities that Hopkins will be
petitioning the 9-Mile Creek Watershed District on April 21, 1993
to allow these improvements to be completed.
April 20. 1993
0 Council approves petition that will be submitted to Nine Mile
Creek Watershed District.
April 21. 1993
~
0 City submits petition to Watershed District (W. S. D. ) including
maintenance improvements.
.' 0 W..S.D. accepts petition and orders their engineer to prepare a
feasibility report. (Report will be prepared with the assistance
of RCM).
~
'" ,.'
""- , )<
July 1., 1993
Page 2
July 1993
0 city meets with Hopkins residents to inform them of project. .
0 city notifies legislators that project will be reviewed by BWSR
sometime in July, and that their assistance would be appreciated.
July 21.. 1993
0 W.S.D. accepts feasibility report and directs staff engineer to
request BWSR to prepare an advisory report to the feasibility
report.
0 City submits letter to BWSR stating importance of project -
Legislators also.
Auqust 2, 1993
0 RCM begins preliminary design at this time to insure plans are
complete for the October 27 public hearing. The City of Hopkins
desires to have detailed information at this meeting so that all
questions can be answered.
0 RCM begins field survey, 4-5 days.
Auqust 15. 1993
0 soil borings complete .
September 15. 1993 -
-
-
-
0 W.S.D. accepts advisory report from BWSR including comments from
staff engineer on BWSR report.
0 W.S.D. schedules public hearing date.
September 24. 1993
0 Preliminary design 60% complete.
Se-ptember 30, 1993
0 City starts Obtaining necessary easements.
0 RCM submits necessary permits.
October 15. 1993
)
0 Final design complete.
0 Prepare plans for October 27th public hearing.
.
" ,
,
~_. ".,
July 1, 1993
Page 3
October 27. 1993
:. 0 Public hearing held at Hopkins City Hall, no action taken by the
W.S.D.
0 Need supporters to show up.
November 17. 1993
0 written order, similar to a resolution, is approved by the W.S.D.
Order summarizes public hearing comments and benefits of project.
0 W.S.D. approves final plans and specs.
0 W.S.D. approves cooperative agreement with city outlining funding
reimbursement for project since city is taking lead, and paying
for project up front.
0 Authorize bids.
November 19. 24. and 26. 1993
0 Project is advertised in Sailor November 24, 1993.
0 Project is advertised in Construction Bulletin November 19, 26,
and possibly December 3, 1993.
. December 17. 1993
0 Bid Opening.
December 21. 1993
0 Bid Awarded.
December 28. 1993 .,
,.,,0 Project begins.
March 18. 1994
0 Project completed.
)
.
....,~ ,-i
council Report: 93-146
Page 2
-e Anal vsis of Issues
o Why do the. improvements need to be constructed?
The improvements are necessary in order to reduce the flooding that is
now occurring in the industrial area around Thermotech. The
.improvements will also allow industrial users in this area the option
of expanding due to the lowering of the 100 year flood plain
elevation.
o Why is the city taking the lead role in this project?
It is common for the city to initially take the lead role in a process
such as this, and follow up the petition with numerous meetings with
the Watershed District. However, in most cases, the Watershed
District's engineer takes the lead role from this point.
In our situation it is necessary for Hopkins to continue with the
lead. This is due to the Watershed District's present commitment to
other projects, and the fact that if they followed normal procedures
the would not be able to begin the design until after the public
hearing process. If this procedure was followed, the improvements
would not be able to be constructed until the 94-95 winter season.
One of the main goals of this project was to complete the improvements
during the 93-94 winter season thereby allowing Thermotech to expand
e next year.
o What risks are involved in the city designing the project?
The main risk involved in the city designing the project would be if
the project was stopped for some reason, and was not constructed. If
this occurred, the city would under no circumstances be eligible for
reimbursement of any design fees.
o How will the design fees be funded?
The fee's will initially be funded from the P.I.R. fund. Staff is
hoping that the city will be able to have the Watershed District
reimburse us for these costs as well as most all construction costs.
If for some reason the Watershed District only reimburses the city for
construction costs and not design fees, the P.I.R. fund would then
have to be reimbursed from another city fund such as the storm sewer
fund.
.
./'
. August 26, 1993
Mr. Lee Gustafson, P.E.
DirectorofPublic-Works-~ - - -- - -_._._~ --- ------~
City of Hopkins
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
RE: Professional Engineering Services
Nine Mile Creek Culvert Improvements
Hopkins, Minnesota
RCM Project No. 10162.04
Dear Lee:
We are pleased to submit this proposal to provide you with design and bidding phase
professional engineering selVices for the culvert improvements to Nine Mile Creek.
Z1rgDDTI The location of the culvert improvements are at the Soo Line Railroadrrhermotech
site, 11th Avenue South and at 7th Street South. It is anticipated that construction
of these culverts will occur during the winter of 1993/94.
rieke Our proposed scope of selVices include the gathering of site data, incorporating the
carroll
_Uller requirements of the City staff, preparing the drawings and specifications, submitting
l~s()ciates, inc.
en~eers the documents to the appropriate agencies for permits,providing a construction cost
arc itects estimate and probable construction schedule, distributing bidding documents,
land surveyors addressing questions during the bidding phase, attending the bid opening, distributing
equal opportunity the bid tabulation, and recommending award of the contract.
employer
In addition to the above selVices, we will attend public information meetings to
explain the project to affected residents and attend the necessary City Council
meetings and public hearings as required.
We proposed to provide the above selVices at our hourly rates not to exceed $56,000.
This amount represents approximately 7% of the estimated construction cost of
$850,000. We will not exceed the above fee without prior authorization from the
City.
We hope this proposal meets with your approval and look forward to working with
you on this project.
SJjlf:lY'(\." .....,i~"
~jm iJl /~} !
J ('; . .J). . ~
: ,(- '; 'J
Peter J. Carlson, P.E.
.' MuniGipal Department Manager
RIEKE CARROLL MULLER ASSOCIATES, INC.
10901 red circle drive
box 130
minnetonka. minnesota 55343
612-935-6901