HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-09-21 PACKET 07.B.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA
MEETING ITEM #
DATE 9/21/11
PREPARED BY Administration Ryan Schroeder
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT HEAD
COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
Consider the results of the Best Value Contracting Process to award the construction contract
for the New Public Safety /City Hall building.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution awarding the construction contract for New Public Safety /City Hall building
project to Graham Construction Services at a cost of $13,021,000.
BUDGET IMPLICATION
WJJ eT *N07_\t�iNlfi���
ACTUAL AMOUNT
ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION
DENIED
DATE
REVIEWED
❑ PLANNING
❑
❑ PUBLIC SAFETY
❑
❑ PUBLIC WORKS
❑
❑ PARKS AND RECREATION
❑
❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS
❑
❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY
❑
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
APPROVED
DENIED
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
® MEMO /LETTER: R Schroeder 9/15/11
® RESOLUTION:
❑ ORDINANCE:
❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION:
❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION:
® OTHER: Recommendation letter from Wold Architects; project budget sheet; AIA contract
with required Best Value addendum.
ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS /
G 9i
Cit Administrator Date
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER
H: \Council items \City Council Action Form.doc
City of
The City began the final phase of the Public Safety / City Hall (PSCH) Design /Bid process with
creation of the Best Value team on May 23, 2011. This group, as a subset of the Project
Team, created the decision tree and matrix for evaluation of project proposals from the
construction industry. The result of their work is that we received nine (9) proposals for
construction of the project on August 18, 2011. Seven (7) of these proposals were within the
construction cost parameters set by the team and therefore each of these seven (7) were
evaluated and ranked against the decision matrix through a blind process (meaning none of
the evaluators knew the identity of the proposers or the bid amount proposed on the project).
The evaluators provided their independent judgments regarding the project plan and schedule,
project challenges and solutions, value added options, general contractor experience,
construction team experience, and the interviews. Points for bid cost was input by Wold
separately, again through a preselected scoring matrix, to get to a final score and ranking.
From the seven (7) the team interviewed the highest scoring three proposers. Upon the award
of points for the interview process the proposers had each achieved point scores that
determined their ranking. Importantly, the team does not have the ability through the process
to amend points once submitted. This inability to reconsider points is imperative to ensure that
the process itself does not become flawed or subject to negative critique by contractors not
rising to the top of the ranking.
Graham Construction Services has achieved the highest point score through this process and
therefore they are the general contractor recommended to Council to construct the PSCH
project. Enclosed is a list of sample projects that they have completed within the Twin Cities.
We have also enclosed a list of their subcontractors as well as information regarding the
process and timeline that allowed for award of the Bid by Graham.
As a Best Value construction project the City is compelled to award the bid to that firm
receiving the highest point score (Graham) which is not necessarily the firm with the lowest bid
cost. However, in this case Graham did, in fact, submitted the lowest cost bid at $12,985,000.
The Best Value team had added two bid alternates which were the Veteran's Memorial and
hauling versus stockpiling excess soil. The Team is recommending the award of the contract
including only the Veteran's Memorial add in the amount of $36,000.
With the award of the project to Graham it is estimated at this time that the total project cost
will be within $15,708,501. That number includes yet to be determined FFE (furniture, fixtures,
and equipment) with a project budget of $830,000. Also included is a project contingency
budget that totals $625,000. The estimate also includes all building permit and SAC, testing,
legal, consultant, environmental, inspection, surveying, utilities and connection, moving and
similar fees and charges.
Enclosed is a resolution for Council consideration of the Bid Award.
Council Action: By motion adopt Resolution 11 -xx awarding the Contract for the Public Safety
City Hall project to Graham Construction Services.
RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -XX
RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE NEW PUBLIC SAFETY /CITY
HALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TO GRAHAM CONSTRUCTION SERVICES IN
THE AMOUNT OF $13,021,000.
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2011, nine proposals were received for the
construction of a New Public Safety /City Hall building, and
WHEREAS, the proposals were evaluated by a selection team from the City for
Best Value based upon a scoring system which evaluated each contractor based on
project approach, schedule, contractor and subcontractor experience, staff experience
and price; and
WHEREAS, after review of the evaluation team's scoring, three contractors were
selected to interview based on their total points score; and
WHEREAS, the evaluation team interviewed the three contractors on September
1, 2011, and scored those interviews, adding to each of the respective contractor's
scores; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of Best Value proposal process Graham
Construction Services had the highest total point value of all proposals and was
identified as the apparent Best Value Contractor, and
WHEREAS, at a pre -award meeting on September 14, 2011, Graham
Construction Services confirmed that all Challenges /Solutions identified during the bid
process by all contractors were included in their bid and that they were willing to move
forward with the project for the amount of their bid.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Cottage Grove, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, that the contract for the
Construction of the New Public Safety /City Hall building be awarded to Graham
Construction in the amount of $13,021,000.
Passed this 21st day of September, 2011.
Myron Bailey, Mayor
Attest:
Caron Stransky, City Clerk
p ip
architects
engineers
www.woldae.com
305 Saint Peter Street
Saint Paul, MN 55102
tel 651 227 7773
fax 651 223 5646
mail@woldae.com
September 21, 2011
Mayor Myron Bailey and City Councilmembers
City of Cottage Grove
7516 80th Street South
Cottage Grove, MN 55016
Re: City of Cottage Grove New Public Safety/ City Hall Building
Commission No. 102189
Dear Mayor Bailey and Councilmembers:
On August 18, 2011, proposals were received for the construction of the New Public Safety/ City Hail Building. A total
of nine proposals were received.
The proposals were evaluated by a selection team from the City of Cottage Grove for Best Value based upon a scoring
system that evaluated each contractors project approach, schedule, contractor and subcontractor experience, staff
experience and price. A tabulation of the evaluation teams scoring of the proposals is attached. Two of the nine
proposals were excluded from the review based on their submitted cost exceeding the published maximum awardable
dollar amount.
After a review of the evaluation teams scoring prior to interviews, three contractors were selected to move to the
interview stage based on total points prior to interview. On September 1, 2011 the evaluation team interviewed JE Dunn
Construction, Knutson Construction and Graham Construction Services. At the conclusion of the selection process,
Graham Construction Services received the most points and was identified as your apparent Best Value contractor.
On September 14, 2011, a Pre -award meeting was held with Graham Construction Services to confirm that all
Challenges/ Solutions identified during bidding by all proposing contractors were included in their bid and that they
were willing to move forward with the project for the amount of their bid.
The evaluation team is forwarding a recommendation that you award a contract to Graham Construction Services as
follows:
Base Bid $12,985,000
Alt. No. 2 —Veteran's Memorial Add $36.000
Total Contract Amount $13,021,000
Additional added value items are being reviewed by the Project Team at this time and will be forwarded to Council for
consideration at a future meeting. A revised Project Budget is also included for your review.
Sincerely,
WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS
ohn McNamara, AIA, LEED AP
Associate
Enclosures
cc: Jodi Nelson, Wold Architects
Minnesota SS /CI_Cottage Grove /102189 /septli
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado
designers and researchers for public environments
0
N
Q
CL
CL
3
d
Z
0
Vl
N
C_
G
O
O
F-
y
�
O
O
O
O
co
a'
M
M
N
O
y
°-
m E
s
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
N
W
6
4
4
6
V
N
7
V
M
O
M
M
CO
M
of
OJ
(D
(D
CO
W
N
C F
U
N
F
°
1
h
O
h
h
O
M
O
W
r
h
O
M
M
O
O
h
h
h
h
h
M
0
0
W
(7
O
M
O
M
(D
O
M
O
V
cD
ID
O
M
M
O
O
M
O
O
p
N o
M
M
+-
d'
M
d'
(D
n
h
M
M
M
co
M
co
h
M
m
U
m
U
N
W
W
U
-° N
N
W
O
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
¢oo
ooLDOOOO�n
o00
0
0
o0
n
N
O Q
n
()
[1
—0,0
O
'cF
N
M
.-
M
+-
N
N
M
d'
M
to
-;t
co
7
m
U
O
°
U
>
0
W
a
N
N
J
O � O
M
h
M
co
O
O
W
M
M
M
0
O
0
O
0
O
h
M
O
O
N
c
o
M
q
m
O
M
O
M
m
c .
O
M
M
O
M
O
.
m >
>
°—' m
n
M
O
O
M
Ih
0
�j
D j
O
M
O
h
m
O j
N
�-
M
h
N
0
0
d'
N
In
W
moo
U n
N
N
N.-
O
z
m m
y
a=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
m
m
0
o
m
0
0
m ��
o
ri
<ri
of
of
o
cfl
v
co
co
r
e
f
of
of
m
r
�
r
�
r
ai
ai
o
U
d
N
G
N
a
C
o
O
d
m
O
o
0
v
m
v
o
0
m
m
m
U
m
C
O
C
O
U
m
m
U
O
M
=
O
o
O
O
W
O
O
ti
U
CO
N
t o
C
w
G
m
r
W
N
N
U
n
U
m
o
C
m
L
EPr
�
U
fA
�
fA
EA
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
`m
`m
m
in
io
m
m
m
m
`m
m
m
m
m
m
m
`m
ro
ro
m
m
ro
m
m
>
>
>
>
m
m
m
m
m
m
m¢
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
¢
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
¢
¢
¢
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
CO
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
U
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
o
`o
w
w
w
ui
ui
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
O
o
oo
m
m
m
m
m
C
C
C
G
C
O
O
O
O
O
U
U
0
1
U
0
O
m
c
0
U
N
O
O
N
7
m
c
Q
n
m
m
q x
c m
0 0
n o
, p
M 9
N N
N O
m U
9 9
3 3
0 0
J J
4'
R
0
N
N
0
C
O
d
Q
M
M
LO
itl
O
h
W
h
O
O
F
N
N
O
c
O
O
O
(D
LO
O
Ln
O
O
O
C
�
U
C
C
N
O
N
O
O E
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
h
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
-- N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LO
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
W
V
N
(O
7'
(O
(V
(O
d'
N
C
V
co
N
(D
4
4
N
4
fA
O]
6�
c9
m
oa
U
m
H
o
O
n
M
O
n
n
M
CJ
n
0
0
0
O
n
O
N
n
m
o
m
m
m
m
O
O
(O
M
O
CO
(D
M
C)
ID
O
O
O
O
(D
O
(O
W
M
O
M
M
co
N
(D
n
W
d'
d'
n
(O
(D
of
m
N
m
(O
W
N
V
W
(D
O)
O)
O)
aJ
�y 0
o
a N
y
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<
.5
olnln0000
(
OOOOOO(r�
(o
i.noLD000Oo
N a
a
m
M
co
to
LO
M
G
M
M
V'
co
V
Ln
N
V
m
N
d'
N
t()
m
It
Ln
V
ro 0
n
J
N N
N
m e
c
O
O
O
O
O
O
h
M
n
n
O
n
n
0
C)
M
n
O
O
O
O
m
'�
9
0
0
0
0
O
LD
M
(D
(O
O
(O
(D
O
d'
M
(D
M
0
0
0
0
7
Q
N
N
N
6
O
M
N
(V
m
d'
d'
O
It
<i'
(O
M
't
O
O
O
co
O
(O
i6 O
O
r
r
r
N
r
r
N
N
r
N
r
C) M
N
C
N N
N
a 3
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
o
0
0
0
0°
(�
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
m
a.o
O °
O
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
ry
� O
C
n
N
O)
IA
N
N
N
N
(V
N
N
Ln
�
(O
(:
N
m °
(�.�
to
h
�
o(n
a`
N
G
N
c
'o
m
m
o
a
(6
v
U
�
C
O
p
O
O
O
U
o
O
U
m
c
m
m
U
a
v
('>
O
U
N
y
M
m
c
c
c
O
U
o
U
�
N
c
Y
U)
r
N
M
d'
t0
O
n
N
r
N
C)
'!
t0
c0
h
O
=:
N
(-
V
O
O
h
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ro
`m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
E
`m
m
m
m
m
at
as
ro
is
m
is
is
m
m
m �
m
iu
m
m
m
m
m
c
>
>
o
c
>
>
c
c
o
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
c
c
c
c
>
m
¢
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
¢
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
a
W
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
LL
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
C7
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
V
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
i
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
O
o
o
O
m
m
m
m
C
c
G
C
O
O
O
O
0
0
U
U
O
U
tV
C
O
U
L
O
_O
N
tV
G
O
n
x
N
O
U
a
O
-o o
3
0
J
c
O
it
Ln
N
m
0
a
9
3
0
J
m
U
d
3
d
z
0
y
N
�
C
O
a
a
W
O
N
O
ltl
O
W
O
°
F-
N
N
N
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<t
M
Ih
V
Cl)
cF
W
m
C
u?
U
C
C
N
O
h
xa
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
W
oQ
W
It
w
It
W
d'
It
�
U
0
F
o
W
oroo
° o
° o
° o
ID
wco
mm
C7
0
W
W
OJ
(O
(O
d'
co
<O
m
C7 00
67
U
�
N
0
W
W
X
a N
N
W
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
m
r
<
0
N
O a
d
d'
m
M
't
M
N
m
Q
ro0�
U
>
0
W
4
w
o
�
c
O
cc . °_
0
W
0
M
M
V
>
N�
a
CO
d'
w
r-
r
<t
N
W
ro 00
h
U U
N
p
Z
C
N N
N
C
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
a
CV
LO
to
U(
N
to
0,
m
o
CO
a`
N
G
ro
v
o
in
N
M
O
ch
U -
�
p
m
o
O
(O
U
co
N
m
i
O
p
N
m
N
U
a
U
M
m
�
0
W
r
N
m
V
N
O
h
0
N
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
N
ro
S
i
>
>
i
>
>
>
0
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
O
O
O
U
U
U
m
ro
ro
s
c
O
O
o
U
U
U
w x N
o $ n
Q p N
N N d
m o
° p c
9 9 N
O
J J �
N m
of Cottage Grove
Public Safety/ City Hall
Construction Costs
Schematic
Design
Contract
Design
Development
Documents
12/15/2010
4/5/2011
6/25/2011
General Conditions/ Contractor Overhead
Incl,
$
1,339,789
Concrete/ Steel/ Masonry
Incl.
$
2,760,272
Wood/ Finish Carpentry
Incl.
$
188,951
Moisture Protection
Incl.
$
595,705
Doors, Windows and Hardware
Incl.
$
697,165
Interior Wall/ Finishes/ Specialties
Incl.
$
1,068,670
Elevator
Incl.
$
52,140
Fire Protection
Incl.
$
149,600
Mechanical and Plumbing
Incl.
$
2,393,600
Electrical
Incl.
$
1,786,971
Landscaping and Site Amenities
Incl.
$
673,443
Site, Civil and Utilities
Incl.
$
1,333,914
Alt. No. 2 - Veteran's Memorial
Total Bid Award Amount
Wold Architects and
Subtotal $ 13,125,800 $ 13,040,220
1,336,385
2,981,164
226,841
560,713
775,081
998,933
49,770
175,875
2,605,313
2,171, 727
409,815
1,200,084
13,491,700
gineers
21, 2011
Bid Award
9/21/2011
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
Incl.
$ 12,985,000
$ 36,000
$ 13,021,000
Construction Contingency $ 634,200 $ 719,780 $ 500,000 $ 500,000
Total Construction Cost $ 13,760,000 $ 13,760,000 $ 13,991,700 $ 13,521,000
Project Costs $ 1,355,000 $ 1,355,000 $ 1,324,300 $ 1,307,491
(Fees, Testing, Contingencies)
Furniture and Equipment
$ 880,000
$ 880,000
$ 880,000
$ 880,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$ 15,995,000
$ 15,995,000
$ 16,196,000
$ 15,708,491
Watershed Grant
Xcel Rebates (Estimate)
TOTAL PROJECT COST
(after rebates)
$ (72,000.00)
$ (54,000.00)
$ 15,582,491
Commission No. 102189
TT
Document A101TM - 2007
Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Contractor where the basis of
payment is a Stipulated Sum
AGREEMENT made as of the Twenty-First day of September in the year Two
Thousand and Eleven
(In words, indicate day, month and year)
BETWEEN the Owner:
(Name, address and other information)
City of Cottage Grove
7516 80" Street South
Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016
and the Contractor:
(Name, address and other information)
Graham Construction Services, Inc.
2995 Lone Oak Circle
Suite 1
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
for the following Project:
(Name, location, and detailed description)
New Public Safety / City Hall
12800 Ravine Parkway South
Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016
The Architect:
(Name, address and other information)
Weld Architects and Engineers
305 St. Peter Street
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Telephone Number: 651 -227 -7773
Fax Number: 651- 223 -5646
The Owner and Contractor agree as follows.
ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS:
The author of this document has
added information headed for its
completion. The author may also
have revised the text of the original
AIA standard form. An Additions and
Deletions Report that notes added
information as well as revisions to the
standard form text is available from
the author and should be reviewed. A
vertical line in the left margin of this
document indicates where the author
has added necessary information
and where the author has added to or
deleted from the original AIA text.
This document has important legal
consequences. Consultation with an
attorney is encouraged with respect
to its completion or modification.
AIA Document A201 r —2007,
General Conditions of the Contract
for Construction, is adopted in this
document by reference. Do not use
with other general conditions unless
this document is modified.
Init AIA Document A101 T" —2007. Copyright C9 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967, 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA" Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and mtemadunal Tissues. Unauthorized ,)
reproduction or dial- ibotion of this AWA Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe chn and criminal penalties, and will be mosacuted to the
/ maximum extent possible under tho law. This document was produced byAlA software at 08:37:02 on 09115/2011 under Order No.9240190901 1which expires
on 0112412012, and is not for resale.
User Notes: 11701134963)
TABLE OF ARTICLES
1 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
2 THE WORK OF THIS CONTRACT
3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION
4 CONTRACT SUM
5 PAYMENTS
6 DISPUTE RESOLUTION
7 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION
8 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9 ENUMERATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
10 INSURANCE AND BONDS
ARTICLE 1 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
The Contract Documents consist of this Agreement, Conditions of the Contract (General, Supplementary and other
Conditions), Drawings, Specifications, Addenda issued prior to execution of this Agreement, other documents listed
in this Agreement and Modifications issued after execution of this Agreement, all of which form the Contract, and are
as fully a part of the Contract as if attached to this Agreement or repeated herein. The Contract represents the entire
and integrated agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes prior negotiations, representations or agreements,
either written or oral. An enumeration of the Contract Documents, other than a Modification, appears in Article 9.
ARTICLE 2 THE WORK OF THIS CONTRACT
The Contractor shall fully execute the Work described in the Contract Documents, except as specifically indicated in
the Contract Documents to be the responsibility of others.
ARTICLE 3 DATE OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION
§ 3.1 The date of commencement of the Work shall be the date of this Agreement unless a different date is stated
below or provision is made for the date to be fixed in a notice to proceed issued by the Owner.
(Insert the date of commencement if it differs from the date of this Agreement or, if applicable, state that the date will
be fixed in a notice to proceed.)
(Paragraph deleted)
§ 3.2 The Contract Time shall be measured from the date of commencement.
§ 3.3 The Contractor shall achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work as follows:
(Insert number of calendar days. Alternatively, a calendar date may be used when coordinated with the date of
commencement. If appropriate, insert requirements for earlier Substantial Completion of certain portions of the
Work)
September 28, 2011
(Table deleted)
, subject to adjustments of this Contract Time as provided in the Contract Documents.
AIA Document Attire — 2007. Copyright 91915,1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1956, 1951, 1963, 1951, 1W4, 19//, vmt, tnn'i. Teat and zuur oy I ne Amerman
IniL Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA" Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties, Unauthorized 2
reproduction o: distribution of this AIA'' Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties and will be prosecuted to the
t maximum extent possible under the l aw. This documentwas produced by AIA software at 08:37:02 on 0 911 512 011 under Order No .9240190901 lwhich expires
on 0112412012, and Is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
(Insert provisions, ifany, for liquidated damages relating tofailure to achieve Substantial Completion on time orfor
bonus payments for early completion of the Work.)
ARTICLE 4 CONTRACT SUM
§ 4.1 The Owner shall pay the Contractor the Contract Sum in current funds for the Contractor's performance of the
Contract. The Contract Sum shall be Thirteen Million, Twenty -One Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($
13,021,000.00 ), subject to additions and deductions as provided in the Contract Documents.
§ 41 The Contract Sum is based upon the following alternates, if any, which are described in the Contract Documents
and are hereby accepted by the Owner:
(State the numbers or other identification of accepted alternates. If the bidding or proposal documents permit the
Owner to accept other alternates subsequent to the execution ofthis Agreement, attach a schedule ofsuch other
alternates showing the amount for each and the date when that amount expires.)
Alternate No. 2— Veterans Garden Add $36,000
§ 4.3 Unit prices, if any:
(Identify and state the unit price; state quantity limitations, if any, to which the unit price will be applicable.)
Item Units and Limitations Price Per Unit
N/A
§ 4.4 Allowances included in the Contract Sum, if any:
(Identify allowance andstate exclusions, ifany. from the allowance price.)
Item Price
N/A
ARTICLE 5 PAYMENTS
§ 5.1 PROGRESS PAYMENTS
§ 5.1.1 Based upon Applications for Payment submitted to the Architect by the Contractor and Certificates for
Payment issued by the Architect, the Owner shall make progress payments on account of the Contract Sum to the
Contractor as provided below and elsewhere in the Contract Documents.
§ 5.1.2 The period covered by each Application for Payment shall be one calendar month ending on the 25" day of the
month, or as follows:
§ 5.1.3 Provided that an Application for Payment is received by the Architect not later than the I st day of a month,
the Owner shall make payment of the certified amount to the Contractor not later than the 30 day of the same
month. If an Application for Payment is received by the Architect after the application date fixed above, payment shall
be made by the Owner not later than thirty ( 30 ) days after the Architect receives the Application for Payment.
(Federal, state or local laws may require payment within a certain period oftime.)
§ 5.1.4 Each Application for Payment shall be based on the most recent schedule of values submitted by the Contractor
in accordance with the Contract Documents. The schedule of values shall allocate the entire Contract Sum among the
various portions of the Work. The schedule of values shall be prepared in such form and supported by such data to
substantiate its accuracy as the Architect may require. This schedule, unless objected to by the Architect, shall be used
as :a basis for reviewing the Contractor's Applications for Payment.
§ 5.1.5 Applications for Payment shall show the percentage of completion of each portion of the Work as of the end of
the period covered by the Application for Payment.
Init AIA Document A101TM —2007. Copyright O 1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967, 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
Institute of Architects. All rights rose Ned. WARNING: This AIA" Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Trsaties. Unauthorized 3
reproduction or distribution of this AIA" Document, or any portion of 1t, may result In severe civ if and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the
t maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 08 :37:02 on 0911512011 under Order N0 .9240190901_1 which expires
on 0112472012, and Is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
§ 5.1.6 Subject to other provisions of the Contract Documents, the amount of each progress payment shall be
computed as follows:
.1 Take that portion of the Contract Sum properly allocable to completed Work as determined by
multiplying the percentage completion of each portion of the Work by the share of the Contract Sum
allocated to that portion of the Work in the schedule of values, less retainage of five percent (5%
).Pending final determination of cost to the Owner ofchanges in the Work, amounts not in dispute shall
be included as provided in Section 7.3.9 of AIA Document A201 - 2007, General Conditions of the
Contract for Construction;
.2 Add that portion of the Contract Sum properly allocable to materials and equipment delivered and
suitably stored at the site for subsequent incorporation in the completed construction (or, if approved in
advance by the Owner, suitably stored offthe site at a location agreed upon in writing), less retainage of
five percent ( 5% );
.3 Subtract the aggregate of previous payments made by the Owner; and
.4 Subtract amounts, if any, for which the Architect has withheld or nullified a Certificate for Payment as
provided in Section 9.5 of AIA Document A201 -2007.
§ 5.1.7 The progress payment amount determined in accordance with Section 5.1.6 shall be further modified under the
following circumstances:
.1 Add, upon Substantial Completion of the Work, a sum sufficient to increase the total payments to the
full amount of the Contract Sum, less such amounts as the Architect shall determine for incomplete
Work, retainage applicable to such work and unsettled claims; and
(Section 9.8.5 ofAfA Document A201 -2007 requires release ofopplicable retainage upon Substantial
Completion of Work with consent ofsurety, if any.)
.2 Add, if final completion of the Work is thereafter materially delayed through no fault of the Contractor,
any additional amounts payable in accordance with Section 9.10.3 of AIA Document A201 -2007.
§ 5.1.8 Reduction or limitation of retainage, if any, shall be as follows: NIA
(If it is intended, prior to Substantial Completion of the entire Work, to reduce or limit the retainage resultingfrom the
percentages inserted in Sections 5.1.6.1 and 5.1.6.2 above, and this is not explained elsewhere in the Contract
Documents, insert here provisions for such reduction or limitation.)
§ 5.1.9 Except with the Owner's prior approval, the Contractor shall not make advance payments to suppliers for
materials or equipment which have not been delivered and stored at the site.
§ 5.2 FINAL PAYMENT
§ 5.2.1 Final payment, constituting the entire unpaid balance of the Contract Sum, shall be made by the Owner to the
Contractor when
.1 the Contractor has fully performed the Contract except for the Contractor's responsibility to correct
Work as provided in Section 12.2.2 of AIA Document A201 -2007, and to satisfy other requirements, if
any, which extend beyond final payment; and
.2 a final Certificate for Payment has been issued by the Architect.
§ 5.2.2 The Owner's final payment to the Contractor shall be made no later than 30 days after the issuance of the
Architect's final Certificate for Payment:
ARTICLE 6 DISPUTE RESOLUTION
§ 6.1 INITIAL DECISION MAKER
The Architect will serve as Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Section 15.2 of AIA Document A201 -2007, unless the
parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as Initial Decision Maker.
(If the parties mutually agree, insert the name, address and other contact information of the Initial Decision Maker, if
other than the Architect.)
IniL AIA Document Alit" —2007. Copyright @1915,1918,1925.1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967. 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. NIARNING: This AIA" Document is protected by U.S, Copyright Law and International Trachea. Unaudionzed 4
reproduction or tlsCibvtion of this AIA' Document, Oran y portion of it, may msun in severe ON antl c mina] penalties, and will be prosecuted to the
t in aximum extent possibleuncer the law. This document was produced by AlAsoftware at 08:37:02 on 09/15!2011 under Order N0,9240190901_1 which expires
on 01124/2012, and Is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
§ 6.2 BINDING DISPUTE RESOLUTION
For any Claim , the method of binding dispute resolution shall be as follows:
(Check the appropriate box. If the droner and Contractor do not select a method of binding dispute resolution below,
or do not subsequently agree in writing to a binding dispute resolution method other than litigation, Claims will be
resolved by litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction.)
[ ] Arbitration pursuant to Section 15.4 of AIA Document A201 -2007
[ X ] Litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction if demanded by Owner.
[ ] Other (Specify)
ARTICLE 7 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION
§ 7.1 The Contract may be terminated by the Owner or the Contractor as provided in Article 14 of AIA Document
A201 -2007.
§ 7.2 The Work may be suspended by the Owner as provided in Article 14 of AIA Document A201 -2007.
ARTICLE 8 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
§ 8.1 Where reference is made in this Agreement to a provision of AIA Document A201 -2007 or another Contract
Document, the reference refers to that provision as amended or supplemented by other provisions of the Contract
Documents.
§ 8.2 Payments due and unpaid under the Contract shall bear interest from the date payment is due at the rate stated
below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the place where the Project is located.
(Insert rate of interest agreed upon, ifany)
1 ''/2% per month (MN Statute 471.425)
§ 8.3 The Owner's representative:
(Name, address and other information)
Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator
City of Cottage Grove
7516 80" Street South
Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016
§ 8.4 The Contractor's representative:
(Name, address and other information)
David Lenss, President/Branch Manager
Graham Construction Services, Inc.
2995 Lone Oak Circle
Suite I
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
§ 8.5 Neither the Owner's nor the Contractor's representative shall be changed without ten days written notice to the
other party.
§ 8.6 Other provisions:
snit AIA Document A101 TM — 2007. Copyright ®1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967, 1974, 1977. 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
Institute of Architects. Ail rights reserved WARNING: This AIA" Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized 5
reproduction Ord istributroin of this AIA" Document or any portion of it, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the
t maximum extent possible underthe l aw. This documentwas produced by AlA software at08:37:02on 09(15(2011 under Order No.9240190901 1which expires
on 01124 @012, and is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
ARTICLE 9 ENUMERATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
§ 9.1 The Contract Documents, except for Modifications issued after execution of this Agreement, are enumerated in
the sections below.
§ 9.1.1 The Agreement is this executed AIA Document At 01 -2007, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner
and Contractor.
§ 9.1,2'Fhe General Conditions are AIA Document A201 -2007, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction.
§ 9.1.3 The Supplementary and other Conditions of the Contract: N/A
Document Title
Date
Pages
§ 9.1.4 The Specifications:
(Either list the Specifications here or refer to an exhibit attached to this Agreement.)
As listed in the Project Manual Table of Contents.
(Table deleted)
§ 9.1.5 The Drawings:
(Either list the Drawings here or refer to an exhibit attached to this Agreement.)
As listed on the Drawing Cover Sheet.
(Table deleted)
§ 9.1.6 The Addenda, if any:
Number
Date
Pages
Addendum No. 1
July 22, 2011
1 page and attachments
Addendum No. 2
August 1, 2011
7 pages and attachments
Addendum No. 3
August 5, 2011
6 pages and attachments
Addendum No. 4
August 12, 2011
11 pages and attachments
Portions of Addenda relating to bidding requirements are not part of the Contract Documents unless the bidding
requirements are also enumerated in this Article 9.
(List here any additional documents that are intended toform part of the Contract Documents. AIA
Document A201 -2007 provides that bidding requirements such as advertisement or invitation to big
Instructions to Bidders, sample forms and the Contractor's bid are not part of the Contract Documents
unless enumerated in this Agreement. They should be listed here only if intended to be part of the
Contract Documents.)
Attachment D — Challenges / Solutions
Preplanning Meeting Minutes September 12, 2011
Pre -award Meeting Minutes September 14, 2011
.(Paragraphs deleted)
ARTICLE 10 INSURANCE AND BONDS
The Contractor shall purchase and maintain insurance and provide bonds as set forth in Article 11 of AIA Document
A201 -2007.
(State bonding requirements, if any, and limits of liability for insurance required in Article II ofAlA Document
A201-2007)
(Row deleted)
AIA Document A101 ur — 2007. Copyright ®1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1961, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967, 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
!nit. Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA` Document is protected by U,9. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized
reproduction Ord stribut on of this AIA'` Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe eW 11 and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the
t in a ximum esfentpossibie under the taw. This document was produced by AIA software at 08:37:02 on 09 /15/2011 under Order No,9240190901_1 which expires
on 0112 412 01 2, and is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above.
OWNER (Signature) CONTRACTOR (Signature)
D Lenss, President / Manager
(Printed name and title) (Printed name and title)
snit AIA Document A101 ^^ —2007. Copyright ®1915, 1918, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1958, 1961, 1963, 1967, 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1997 and 2007 by The American
Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AIA' Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and Im mational Treaties. Unauthorized 7
reproduction 0, distribution of this AIA" Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe c1v Sl and edminai penalties. and evil be prosecuted to the
t maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 08:37:02 on 09/1512011 under Order No .9240190901_1 which expires
on 01124!2012, and is not for resale.
User Notes: (1701134963)
rd
CHALLENGES I SOLUTION
(two page rtMaximurn)
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each. All cost
and schedule impacts for all challenges listed MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges / Solutions can be increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: Electrical Riser Sheet E4.00. Feeder between MSWB 12000 amp and Service
Entrance 1200 amp ATS does not show a feeder Schedule Number.
Solution: Supply and install feed schedule # 1, 1200 amp fee
We have included the feeder
Challenge #2: Electrical Riser sheet E4.00 Feeder between Transformer T4 to Panel LP1 is
schedu for 200 amp feed t a 100 amp panelboard.
Solution: Change feeder to match pa neiboard
We have included changing the fecdet�
Challenge #3: Electrical Riser Sheet E4.00. Utility Transformer to connect cabinet feed to conduit is
by utility. Xcef will require a conduit vault between transformer and CT cabinet by
Electrical and Feeder. Conducto su tied a nd installed by Electrical _ __
Solution: Supply and_ Install vault and co nductors between utility trans former and CT cabin
We have included the cost of the CT cabinet and mete
Challenge #4: Electrical Drawings only show elevator connection and disconnect. There are
Solution: We have successfully completed 10 projects with Vlold in th
last 10 years and we fully und erstand and have included in our hid
t ezr requirements. ___ Non Issue
Page 5
disconnects needed for 208 volt power & lighting, pit lights and switches are not
called out. GFCI is needed in pit and fi Key switch is needed in Iobb
Solution:
and install Electrical needed for functionin
Supp
Plan set is complete for functio elevato
Challenge #8:
Addendum # 2 sheet 7 of 7 notes 26,27,28 Door hardware changes list that electrical
_ to pr ovide and in stal l conductors for request to exit
Solution:
Reiterate that sheet E7.00 Details FI6,119 tha owner is to supply and wire electric
Strike an lock systems_ Our c ontractor ha included the wiring
Challenge #6:
Addendum # 4 Detail R1 /E1.11 shows a one -fined diagram for council chambers.
Detail R1/E1.21 shows new lay -out of Chambers. Details are missing lighting
connections and lay -out of lighting controls. No Spec. Section regarding the lighting
co ls, just a one - diag _
Solution:
Suppil a install a comp functio council lighting control system/
Our contractor will provide a fully functional system _
Challenge #7:
Win Constru t meet schedule v
Solution:
_
Heat an cover for concrete and masonry.
_
Ou pr includ p heat . and cover
Challenge #8:
Expecta of Wold Architects and Engineers
Solution: We have successfully completed 10 projects with Vlold in th
last 10 years and we fully und erstand and have included in our hid
t ezr requirements. ___ Non Issue
Page 5
Mi
A ;f
CHALLENGES / SOLUTION
(two page maximum)
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each. All cost
and schedule Impacts for all challenges listed MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges / Solutions can be increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: Proposing to complete all work -identl#ied within the documents for the predetermined
_budget amount.
Solution: If our numbers come in over budget, we have offered several value added options
we feel can be removed from the project to maintain the budget.
Graham's price is within the owner's budget
Challenge #2: Due to the length the precast concrete is spanning, there will be a significant camber
Gr aham will pr ovide proper heat and cover
Page 4
in the plank which can decrease the thickness of the cast in place concrete topping.
Solution:
Field measurements and assessments will be made to determine if adjustments of
building heights need to be made to maintain adequate topping thickness.
_
Proper topping depth will be provided
Challenge #3:
The exterior stair next to the generator and trash enclosure is drawn with a
foundation on the structural plans and as soil bearing on the architectural plans.
Solution:
We intend on providing a foundation as shown on the structural drawings to help
eliminate the stair movement during freeze —thaw✓ cycles.
Our proposal is based on structural footings
Challenge #4:
The site is adjacent to the Washington County Ravine park. This area has abundant
wildlife and natural trees and grasses that should be protected. In addition, it is a
public space with walkers, hikers and bicyclists. Completing a construction project
next to this is a risk to public safety and damage to the parklands.
Solution;
The equipment, materials, and workers will be limited to the building site only. We
will implement a site access plan showing fences and signs directing the public away
from and around the construction site. There will be drainage fencing installed to
eliminate run -off affecting the natural prairies and wcodlots and a run -off prevention
plan implemented. Non issue _ _ —
Challenge #5:
Maintaining saf wo rking conditions on afas tracked project. _
Solution:
__�
Our company's safety practices and procedures will be reviewed by all personnel on
site at the beginning of the project. in addition, we will be holding weekly safety
meetin to u ndersta nd all aspects of the� roject go in on at that time. _
Graha assumes the risk for site safety
Challenge #6:
Maintaining progress of building throughout the winter months without potential
de lays impacting substantial completion dat _
Solution:
Enclosures at exterior openings will be provided to heat the space in an effort to
protect materials and continue progress. Temporary heaters and gas supply will be
monitored daily for safety related reasons and to verify if they are sufficiently heating
Gr aham will pr ovide proper heat and cover
Page 4
Iw
Once the roof is completed, protecting it while additional work, such as mechanical
Challenge #7: and electrical systems in the penthouse, takes place is critical to maintain roofing
warranties and keep the roofing system weather tight.
Solution: Protection boards will be placed on the roof in areas where additional work is taking
place after roof completion for workers to stand on and material to be set on.
Graham will provide roof protection while moving* materials
Challenge #8: It is nearly impossible to plan on paper how mechanical and electrical systems will all
fit together within the small space above finished ceilings. If these details are not
worked out before rough in work has started there is sure to be potential conflicts
affecttn tjthose stems and architectural finishes.
Solution: Coordination meetings will be held between the general contractor, subcontractors,
and design team to verify both on site conditions and the intent of the drawings to
halo eliminate anv issues before thev arise.
Graham will coordinate mechanical and electrical trades
Challenge #9: Finished size and delivery dates of owner supplied furniture, equipment, and
accessories are unknown. Without having this information in place prior to layout of
interior walls and finishes, the installation of the owner materials may not be
accounted for.
Solution: During the initial phases of construction, long before interior construction, we intend
on meeting with the owner to review proposed furniture and equipment supplied by
them to verify everything will fit in the proposed location. Once this information is
reviewed we can account for any changes that need to happen for the owner to have
a smooth and effortless move info th sp ace':' _
Non issue
Challenge #10: Maintaining quality control of materials and construction practices to ensure the city
receives a final product worthy of their investm
Solution: Our superintendants and project managers are trained to keep quality in the forefront
of everything we do. Daily inspections of work completed will be assessed and
verified they meet the specifications and local codes for building practices. If work is
found to be unfit for the project, it will be corrected as needed. In addition, we intend
on sending additional company personnel through the project at random intervals to
perform independent walk - throughs of the space verifying details and overall
construction ultimately ensuri is taking place as it should __ __ _ �__
(,raharl pjLodnCes grrality work
Page 5
9
CHALLENGES / SOLUTION
(two page maximum)
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each. All cost
and schedule impacts for all challenges fisted MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges / Solutions can be increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: If the roadwork for 85`' Avenue is delayed, this could potentially eliminate the
proposed project access to the City Hall construction site.
Solution: Our proposal includes costs to provide temporary access from CSAH19.
Challenge #2: Completing quality concrete foundation work in Winter conditions could be a
potential problem.
Solution: Our proposal includes p heat & cover to properly cure concrete in the Winter.
Challenge #3: The drain tile on Detail 34013 is not located in the correct location and will not
intercept water from drainage board
Solution: Our proposal includes moving the drain the location to the wall /footing interface. - Accepted by owner
Challenge #4: The proposed haul road location on CAA cannot be used because the proposed -1-c' IV c fill material one until
excess earth disposal area Is placed in the same location. project completion
Solution:
We will use 85' /Ravine Parkway to access site at the proposed main site entrance
Challenge #6:
Room 8030 (l3ooking Area) does not have hardened ceiling for security purposes:
Solution:
Our proposal includes providing a plaster ceiling - Accepted by owner
Challenge #6:
Interior walls for Room A142 & At 43 do not provide intruder and ballistic protection.
Solution:
We will change interior wall types to masonry with sand core fill. -Owner wants ballistic materiel and drywall
Challenge #7:
Doors Al 38A, Al 39A and At 45 are not ballisticallY protected
Solution:
We will provide wood doors with Kevlar inserts - Owncr uccclucd
Challenge #8:
Door D124A doesn't have access control to prevent ent y to secure Police basement.
Solution:
We have added electric hardware and access control to this door. -Owner rejected
Challenge #9:
Door 8136A does not have access control to prevent access to roof.
Solution:
Our proposal includes providing electric hardware and access control to this door. Owner reiecled
Challenge #10: Untimely procurement of gun lockers in the sally port could delay the completion of
the sallypo t masonry
Solution: We will procure gun lockers early to allow for flush installation in the masonry wall.
Challenge #11: There could be a potential schedule delay due to late deliver of critical equipment.
Solution:. We will provide early submittals for generator, air handling units, gun lockers,
detention equipment, elevator, motor control centers, sump baskets and flammable
Challenge #12: Depth of shallow pad footings could be damage- d by winter conditions.
Solution: Our proposal includes dropping footings from 10" below finished floor to 24" to allow
proper winteY protection Concrete columns Head to be lengthened
Page 4
Challenge #13: Moving equipment & materials into the Penthouse while avoiding damage to the roof.
Solution: Our proposal includes having the roofing contractor install walkway pads and
plywood from the building e to the Penthouse.
Challenge #14: Unforeseen conditions and/or winter weather conditions could affect the schedule
and delay Owner's efforts to install FF &E items as proposed on the RFP schedule.
Solution: To help control this issue, we have provided three additional weeks for this task. We
have proposed a substantial completion date of Sept. 5 2012, three weeks early.
Challenge #15: Winter snowplowing operations could damage metal light poles (CC1 and CC2)
located on Detail 1, E0.01.
Solution: To prevent damage to metal light poles during snowplowing operations, our proposal
includes chanaina heiaht of concrete base from 6" to 24 ". - Architect to review with owner
Challenge #16: Sheet A1.12 & detail 31013 conflict; they show drain tile draining to different
Solution: Our proposal includes piping drain the to sumps SP -2 and SP -3 as per detail 31013 -Run drain file to Storm
sewer
Challenge #17: Council Chamber Room A112 indicates a raised floor for seating area. Floor plan
El /A3.05 indicates an elevation of 101 A0, and to coordinate with structural
drawings. There are no details on how this raised slab is constructed. Detail
F8/A3.05 shows the V -0" high raised area but with no pertinent information.
Solution: Our pricing includes the raised floor to be constructed on 8" +/- high of rigid foam
with 4" of concrete topping. word to assure det ils
Challenge 418: Specifications and drawings are contradictory as to ground ring conductor size.
Solution: O ur proposal includes #4/0 ground ring wire.
Challenge #19: No conduit and wire are detailed for the battery charger and tank heater circuits for
Solution: Our proposa( includes the aonduit an wire.
Challenge #20: Electrical dwgs. show conflicting responsibility for the CT connection cabinet and
meter socket.
Solution: Our proposal includes the cost of the CT cabinet and meter socket.
Challenge #21: Manually operating air handling system and boiler during constriction will void
manufacturer's warranty.
Solution: Provide temporary heating and unit to condition construction space.
Challenge #22: Energy rebates will be available for HVAC equipment used. Provide utility company
with information after purchase.
Solution: Rebate values will accrue to the Owner.
Challenge #23:
Solution:
Challenge #24:
Solution:
Page 5
CHALLENGES / SOLUTION
(two page maximum)
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each.. All cost
and schedule impacts for all challenges listed MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges / Solutions can be increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: Voiding equipment warranties by utilizing permanent equipment for temporary
heating /cooling. _
Solution: We are proposing to use temporary equipment which will ensure full factory warranty
of permanent equipment. _
Graham will utilize temporary heaters
Challenge #2: Fiber at Room B012 is not specified
Solution: We have included in our proposat.
Owner has requested no fiber in this room
Challenge #3: Feeder between MSW B 1200 amp and Service entrance 1200 amp ATS does not
show a Feeder Schedule Number.
Solution: Supply and install Feeder Schedule #1 1200 amp feed.
We have included this feeder
Challenge #4: Feeder between Transformer T4 to Panel LP1 is scheduled for a 200 amp feed to a
100 amp panelboard. _
Solution: Change feeder to match panelboard amperage.
We have included the change in feeder
Challenge #5: Utility Transformer to Connection Cabinet feed and conduit is by Utility. Xcel will
require a conduit vault between transformer and CT Cabinet by Electrical and
Feeder Conductors su fled and ins talled by Electrical.
Solution: S uppl y and instal[ vault and conductors between Utility Transformer and CT Cabinet
Graham will provide the CT cabinet and meter socket
Challenge #6: Electrical drawings only show elevator connection and disconnect. There are
disconnects needed for 208 volt power and lighting, pit lights and switches not called
out, GFCI is needed in pit, and Fireman's Key Switch is needed in lobby.
Solution: Supply and install electrical neede far functioning elevator.
Drawings are complete for these items
Challenge #7: Addendum #4 Detail RVE1.11 shows a one line diagram for Council Chambers.
Detail R1 /E1.21 shows new layout of chambers. Details are missing lighting
connections and lay -out of lighting controls. No spec section regarding the lighting
controls, just a one -line diagram.
Solution: Supply and install a complete functionin9 Council Lighting Control System.
Graham will provide a fully functional lighting system
W
9
Page 4
EA
, 9
CHALLENGES I SOLUTION
(two page maximum
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each. All cost
and schedule impacts for all challenges listed MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges I Solutions can be Increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: Project Manager and Superintendent experience working together.
Solution: The project manager and superintendent have worked together on numerous
projects over the last 10 years, with a deviation rate of less than 3% (construction
_ changes). Together they have achieved a +95% owner satisfaction rating.
Grahams management team has successfully completed projects
Challenge #2: Sheet A1.12 — lower level, grids 7 -10 & F -H: not all wails are shown to be grouted
Page 4
solid to provide a 100% secured perimeter.
Solution:
We have included 100% of the walls in this area to be filled solid with grout for the
secured perimeter.
Plans indicate 100% grout
Challenge #3:
Changes to the scope of work due to unforeseen conditions and owner requests
have impact on project cost and schedule.
Solution:
(Notification of time and cost impact will be shared immediately with resolution of item
within 3 days, Weekly updates of cost and schedule will be provide at project
meetings.
Unforeseen conditions will be presented to the owner im
Challenge #4:
Retaining wall block — detail 8tC2.2 calls for contractor to install owner provided
retaining wall blocks, however Section 32 32 23 Unit Retaining Wall states the
contractor to purchase the blocks at a previously agreed upon price from the
supplier. In addition, detail 31L -4 also calls for owner supplied limestone.
Solution:
We have i ncluded the cost of the blo and limestone in our price.
Scope w as clarifie in Addendum 4
Challenge #5:
Bronze plaque — detail 21.4 shows a 12" diameter bronze plaque, however not
specified id n any s ecificatlon section.
Solution:
We have included (6) six bronze plaques and limestone stands as shown.
Our proposal includes the plaques
Challenge #6:
Exhaust fan blocking —for the (4) four exhaust fans no blocking is shown.
Solution:
We have included this blocking as required with discussions with mechanical
subcontractors.
Our proposal includes blocking
Challenge #7:
Council Chambers raised floor structure is not shown on drawings.
Solution:
We have included a wood framed structure to support casework and furniture.
Need design input for acceptable ramp cost included in our scope
Challenge #8:
Concre and masonry work require accelerated schedu an high q
Solution:
In order to ensure both schedule and the highest qua lity craftsmanshi is m et, we
Page 4
will self - perform all concrete forming pouring finishing and all brick stone work
Graham will self perform the concrete
Challenge #9: detail 31221 (C71A2.22) — we have concern with no thermal break shown to prevent
excessive condensation at interior side of window.
Solution: We included a thermal break (ice /water) at the window head to prevent interior
condensation.
Non issue
Challenge #10: Evidence Storage Room ( 3002) requires a recess for the rail however detail 43021
indicates a 2" topping on either side of rail. Drawings do not indicate extent of
Sotutlon: We have included sufficient topping to cover the room as necessary.
Topping is not required in this area
Challenge #11: Room finish schedule requires Armstrong flooring products and specification have
Johnsonite product codes.
Solution: Provide Johnsonite tread /riser /tile products.. Forbo does not have a 3.5 MM product,
Project includes 2.5 MM product. _
Graham will provide samples for architect review
Challenge #12: Subcontractor default in a difficult construction economy.
Solution: We employ extensive background checks of each prime subcontractor and their
lo wer tier vendors all payment are direct to prime/lower tiers to ensure payments
Graham has selected well capitalized sub contractors
Challenge #13: On exterior elevation C1 /A2.02, there is no material noted at the exterior wall from
the low roof to the high roof along grid line C from grid 4 & 6.
Solution: We have included Brick 1 at this l _
Plans indicate metal panels in this area
Challenge #14: Sh op drawing review as to not affect proiect schedule
Solution: Some early shop drawing packages will be submitted and reviewed during pre -award
phase to provide immediate construction start following Contract Award.
Graham wilt sub mit lord; lead shop drawings early
Challenge #15: C old formed metal framing does not have a Specification Section assig
Solution: We have included the costs to include the cold formed metal framing.
We have included the metal framing in ou proposal
Challenge #16:
Solution:
Challenge #17:
F"3+3AfiC7i>�
fA
Page 5
0
CHALLENGES 1 SOLUTION
(two page maximum)
Provide a list of challenges you have identified for this project with a proposed solution for each. All cost
and schedule impacts for all challenges listed MUST be included in your base bid cost and schedule. This
template with fonts and font size must be used. Lines can be added or deleted as needed. Quantity of
Challenges / Solutions can be increased or decreased as long as they fit on two pages.
Challenge #1: Permanent power will be needed to operate the temporary heating units during the
winter. Xcel needs to have the permanent power leaders installed by December 1 st .
Solution: We include providing a temporary generator to power the temp heat units if
permanent power is unavailable (but based on the current road schedule we
anticipate Xcei will have its work done on time.) -we will provide temporary po wer
Challenge #2: We need the building a t the award of contract September 22 °
Solution: The City and architect should implement the plan review immediately, with any code
official comments forwarded to th contracto bef ore the pre award meeting.
Building permit is ready to be issued ,-
Challenge #3: The City will be paying a testing agency for testing and special inspections. These
costs will be billed based on costs incurred, which may vary greatly from initial
p opos an could run over budget.
Solution: Before submitting proposals, testing companies should review with the contractor the
construction schedule — activity durations, sequencing, number of concrete pours,
etc. -- fo chef a mare realistic basis for their cast proposals. owner reg«ireaeat
Challenge #4: Starting foundation work in the fall means that some concrete work will be subjected
to frost and freezing, which could damage the work or cause delays.
Solution: We include protecting all winter concrete work with insulated blankets or proper
bacfill. We also include lowering some of the interior pad footings to avoid freezing
and he avirt . We ha ve included housing an h eating cost
Challenge #6: The power company exterior transformer is not shown on the grading and landscape
. plans but is located in a sl area.
6
Solution: The transformer needs a level subgrade. We include modifying the grades around
the transformer. or orovidino a small modular retainino wall, if necessary. We will provide it level area
Challenge 96: The acoustical plank ceiling is specified as 24" wide, but drawn as 12" wide. The
vector edge will not work in the Council Chambers as dr
Solution: The 24" -wide plank will be used or cut to 12 "' and with an edge that lays into a 9116"
ceillnR_g We will use W material spccified
Challenge #7: Note #21 on the room finish schedule says to use a Schluter "snap -in" trim at
tac kwal{ joint The Sc trim is not specified.
Solution: Fry reglet reveal trim will be used at all tack wall joints. C hange per Addendum 3
Challenge #8: Drawing E0.01 shows primary wiring to backup generator, but does not show conduit
and 120 volt wire needed for battery charger and tank he ater circuits._ __ _
Solution: We include 120 volt conduit and wire fo battery charger and tank h circ uits. Graham includes these costs
Challenge #S: Detail D1 on drawing E5.00 shows the ground ring conductor to be #2 AWG size.
The specification re quire #410 AWG size.
Solution: We include # 410 A WG size ground ring wire. _
We have included kMQ ground wire
Page 5
1F. M
Challenge #10: The storm drain overflow located at 3 -H is at or below the 10' ceiling elevation at the
point where it exits the exterior wall due to pitch, structural (joist support beam), and
the duc at that location.
Solution: The ceiling height may have to be dropped or the duct flattened to get the pitched
_p ipe out of the building. Graham will field modify location for proper drainage
Challenge #11: There are inconsistencies between the plans and specs regarding who provides the
m eter socket and CT connection cabine
Solution: We will provide and install the exterior meter socket and CT connection cabinet; the
Utlli will provide and Install meter. Graham will provide the CT cabi and meter socket
Challenge #12: The video surveillance system should meet the Owner's expectations regarding
visual clarity and sound levels.
Solution: We will provide a
surveillance inst
:hat the Owner's
S
e Non issue. Architect will
met. review-submittal.
Challenge #13: The electrical drawings only show a power connection and disconnect to the
elevator. Additional power, disconnects and circuits will be n eeded.
Solution: We have included all power and fighting needed to satisfy the State elevator
InS peGter. Drawings a include this scope oT'w
Challenge #14: The schedule for completion of the br dge work could impact completion of gas and
_ electric services to the building
Solution: We met with the bridge contractor and have taken their completion schedule into
account for th connections to the public utilities. Non issue. The bridge is cornplac
I ` -
CHALLENGES / SOLUTION
Challenge #t: The exterior envelop of the building is designed as a classic composition of masonry,
glass with aluminum framing, and metal wail panels. This type of construction
involves many different craft trades and usually different subcontractors. Failing to
have these trades working in concert and coordinated on every detail of the work can
lead to quality issues often resulting in leaks, condensation problems, water damage
and potentially mold. _ ,
Solution: The quality control panel required by the contract documents is an excellent way to
address these issues before construction starts. We will augment this process by
requiring the lead foremen for each craft trade be present during the construction of
the control panel. We recommend chamber testing the panel as part of the process.
Any flaws will be corrected in the control panel and the panel retested. The entire
control panel process, including all issues, corrective measures taken, and test
results will be documented and tracked in our proprietary QA/QC tracking system.
We will publish the "Lessons Learned" in detail to all craft people working on the wall.
Our quality control director will oversee the control panel construction, testing and
documentation to ensure we learn as much as possible during this critical exercise.
Graligm wilt provide required mock ups per detail 31004
Challenge #2: The exterior wall has several intersections of different materials and systems such as
.sunshades, metal panels, storefront and various masonry systems, The details at the
joints between these various systems are critical to developing a weather tight
building enclosure. Failure to properly coordinate this work among the different
trades will likely result in water infiltration and /or condensation problems.
Solution: We will develop 3D "virtual mock -ups" of these critical details and work through the
construction sequencing and techniques with the subcontractors and the architect to
ensure the intended results are achieved. Graham will provide requi mock ups
Challenge #3: The structure is comprised of a number of different structural types including
a
Page 4
concrete, precast concrete, masonry, and steel columns and joists. Again, this
involves the work of many different trades and subcontractors, and ensuring the
intended result can be difficult. Sequencing the work between the subcontractors will
require multiple mo and can lea to costly delays.
Solution:
We will work with each subcontractor early in the project to develop a construction
sequencing, hoisting and logistics plan to limit the number of mobilizations for each
trade and enable us to monitor the progress of each structural subcontractor's work
whether the work is underway on site or in their shop. The weekly look ahead
schedules will focus on all of these critical pieces and corrective plans will be quickly
developed for any element that falls beh ind. Grabarn will schedule subs to meet schedule
Challenge #4:
_
The Civil Plans provide very specific quantities and directions for stock piling and
reuse of existing site soils. The road work contractor has been using the site and
done some grading. The site visit indicates that the existing grades, soil quantities
an soil conditions may have changed from those surveyed and shown on the Plans.
Solution:
Immediately following the kickoff meeting, we will meet on site with the Architect,
Civil Engineer, Soils Engineer and the Earthwork Subcontractor to establish a
protocol for processing the site soils and tracking the proposed quantities against the
actual existing conditions. non issue. Site ¢odes have been provided
Challenge #5:
The architecturally exposed steel structure can present difficulties in achieving a
quality finish as most steel structures are concealed. If the steel is erected and left
exposed to the elements rust and pitting will occur and may present a rough uneven
appearance when finished. Handling and erecting the steel can leave tool marks that
standout when the final finish is applied.
a
Page 4
Attachment B
Solution: The key to accomplishing a quality architectural finish on exposed structural steel is
proper shop preparation of the steel and attention to rigging and erection techniques.
We will work closely with the steel fabricator and erector to plan the work, inspecting
the steel in the shop to be sure it is cleaned and prepared in strict accordance with
the specifications and standards of the paint manufacturer. Attention to the erection
planning and rigging used will minimize damage to the exposed portions of the
structure. This structure will be erected last followed closely by the enclosure to limit
exposure to the elements Steel will be finished to specification
Challenge #6:
Main Air Handling Unit #1 in the boiler room is a large unit that would best be shop
assembled and placed in the room prior to erecting the walls of the room. However,
these masonry walls are structural and given the pace of the schedule, construction
may not be able to wait for the unit to arrive.
Solution:
Upon contract award we will work closely with the mechanical subcontractor and
engineer to expedite delivery of the unit, attempting to get it in place before the walls
need to be erected. In the event the unit cannot be obtained in time we will work with
the architect and structural engineer to develop a "leave out" panel in the structure. If
this approach is not acceptable, the unit would have to be assembled in the field.
Grabaun means and methods responsibility
Challenge #7:
Indoor air quality issues can occur in new buildings if construction dust and
contaminates are allowed to accumulate in the building ventilation system.
Solution:
All air returns will be covered with filter material during construction to protect the
ventilation system. This material will be removed and all filters will be replaced as
part of the commissioning process. Temporary filters will be p rovided
Challenge #8: The Finger Print Hood shown in elevation 43040 and on the plan is not called out on
the Mechanical Plans or in the Specifications
Solution: Since this is likely to be required, we have included the hood as a Value Added
Option. This can be accepted or we would be pleased to price an alternative once a
specification is provided This is an owner FFE item
Challenge #9: Drawing E4.00 shows the feeder between Transformer T4 to Panel LPt as a 200
amp feed for a 100 amp panelboard.
Solution: Provide 1 00 amp feeder to match panelboard amperage Graham includes changing the feed
Challenge #16: Drawing E400 calls for the feed and conduit between the utility transformer and the
connection cabinet (CT) to be provided by the Utility Company. Xcel will require a
conduit vault and fee to be provided by the contractor.
Solution: We will provide the co nduit vault and feeders between the transformer and the CT.
Graham will provide the CT cabinet and meter socket
Challenge #11: Drawing E4.00 shows the feeder between MSWB 12000 amp and Service entrance
1200 ATS does not show a Feeder Schedule Number.
Solution: Provide Feeder Schedule #1 1200 amp feed. our propos includes this feeder
Challenge #12: The bulk of the structure will be erected during the winter of 2012 creating the risk of
weather delays and qual co ncerns.
Solution: Our winter construction "best practices' will be implemented to mitigate this risk. Our
schedule includes up to 10 days for weather delays if needed. our s chedule completes 3 we eks early
allowing for weather delays
Challenge 413: We have named the apparent best subcontractors in our proposal. However, given
most subcontractors' proposals were only available in the final hour before bid
closing we have not had adequate time to ensure all proposals are complete and
meet the specifications.
Solution: Immediately upon award we will engage in detailed scope verifications. Any issues
requiring a chang to the named Subcontractors will be shared with the owner.
Page 5 Graham has defined their subcontractors
A meeting was held at Wold Architects and Engineers' office with the apparent Best Value Contractor- Graham
Construction- to discuss the challenges /solutions outlined in their proposal and from other submitted and reviewed
proposals. Also discussed were value added items along with any other issues or concerns regarding the construction
of the project.
Discussion Topics:
A. Challenges/ Solutions
1. The group reviewed the Challenges outlined in Graham's proposal and discussed the possible solutions.
a. Challenge #1 - Site access from 85" Street overlaps with road project. Graham proposed building a
temporary access off CSAH 19 or modifying the current road. No access from Ravine Parkway will be
allowed. Final solution will be determined by Graham. .
b. Challenge #2- No comment
c. Challenge #3 - Drain tile detail. Graham proposed moving the drain tile location closer to the wall/
footing intersection. Weld had no objection.
d. Challenge #4 — Haul route through north site. Graham is concerned that the haul route is located in
the middle of the soil export /fill on the north end of the site. Weld reiterated that traffic is not allowed
on Ravine Parkway. Graham stated they will look at shifting the location of the haul route through the
site.
e. Challenge #5- Booking Area ceiling types. Graham proposed a security plaster ceiling in the main
Booking area. The Owner/Wold confirmed that a security plaster ceiling is not desired in this area as
long as the acoustic ceiling tiles have impact clips.
I. Challenge #6- Ballistic protection in Public Safety Sub - Lobby. The plans call for a ballistic layer
within the stud wall surrounding the front counter. The Owoer/Wold confirmed that changing the
interior walls to sand - filled concrete block is not desired. However, the ballistic layer within the stud
wall could continue around the sub -lobby to the south and west walls as well. Graham to confirm
they can provide this without changing their price.
g. Challenge #7- Kevlar inserts on sub -lobby doors leading into the two interview rooms and staff area.
Minnesota The Owner determined this is an acceptable solution.
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
memorandum
I mp
To Ryan Schroeder
From: Jodi Nelson
architects
engineers
Date: September 12, 2011
www.woldae.com
Comm. No: 102189
Saint Peter Street
Saint
Sai nt Paul. MN 5551002 2
„ ......._.... .................... ...... .................
Subject: City of Cottage Grove- New Public Safety/ City Hall
September 7, 2011 Best Value Pre - Planning Meeting Minutes
tol 651 227 7773
fax 651 223 5646
mailQawoidae.com
Attendants:
Ryan Schroeder, Cottage Grove City Administrator
Craig Woolery, Cottage Grove Public Safety Director
David Lenss, Graham Construction Services
Mark Fisher, Graham Construction Services
Dave Rey, Anderson- Johnson Associates
John McNamara, Wold Architects and Engineers
Ryan Charlton, Weld Architects and Engineers
Obsa Abdi, Wold Architects and Engineers
Jodi Nelson, Weld Architects and Engineers
A meeting was held at Wold Architects and Engineers' office with the apparent Best Value Contractor- Graham
Construction- to discuss the challenges /solutions outlined in their proposal and from other submitted and reviewed
proposals. Also discussed were value added items along with any other issues or concerns regarding the construction
of the project.
Discussion Topics:
A. Challenges/ Solutions
1. The group reviewed the Challenges outlined in Graham's proposal and discussed the possible solutions.
a. Challenge #1 - Site access from 85" Street overlaps with road project. Graham proposed building a
temporary access off CSAH 19 or modifying the current road. No access from Ravine Parkway will be
allowed. Final solution will be determined by Graham. .
b. Challenge #2- No comment
c. Challenge #3 - Drain tile detail. Graham proposed moving the drain tile location closer to the wall/
footing intersection. Weld had no objection.
d. Challenge #4 — Haul route through north site. Graham is concerned that the haul route is located in
the middle of the soil export /fill on the north end of the site. Weld reiterated that traffic is not allowed
on Ravine Parkway. Graham stated they will look at shifting the location of the haul route through the
site.
e. Challenge #5- Booking Area ceiling types. Graham proposed a security plaster ceiling in the main
Booking area. The Owner/Wold confirmed that a security plaster ceiling is not desired in this area as
long as the acoustic ceiling tiles have impact clips.
I. Challenge #6- Ballistic protection in Public Safety Sub - Lobby. The plans call for a ballistic layer
within the stud wall surrounding the front counter. The Owoer/Wold confirmed that changing the
interior walls to sand - filled concrete block is not desired. However, the ballistic layer within the stud
wall could continue around the sub -lobby to the south and west walls as well. Graham to confirm
they can provide this without changing their price.
g. Challenge #7- Kevlar inserts on sub -lobby doors leading into the two interview rooms and staff area.
Minnesota The Owner determined this is an acceptable solution.
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
City of Cottage Grove- New Public Safety/ City Hall
September 7, 2011 Best Value Pre - Planning Meeting Minutes
It Page Two
h. Challenge #8- Door 8124 access control. Weld confirmed that this door cannot have access control
on it since it is part of the path of egress for the City Hall staff.
architects I. Challenge #9- Door B136A Roof Stair access control. Weld confirmed that access control is not
engineers necessary on this door and that a keyed lock will suffice.
www.woldae.com j. Challenge #10- No comment
k. Challenge #11- No comment
I. Challenge #12- Shallow pad footings and winter conditions. Weld confirmed that the footings could
be lowered as long as the cost for the lengthening of the precast columns is included in the original
bid. Graham confirmed that longer precast columns were included in their price.
m. Challenge #13- No comment
n. Challenge #14- Early Substantial completion. The Owner/ Wold confirmed that the additional three
weeks is not required. Graham agreed to keep the substantial completion date as stated in the bid
documents. It was discussed to utilize that time for punchlist completion.
o. Challenge #15- Snowplowing near light poles. Weld to confirm with maintenance staff if increasing
the concrete base height is desired.
p. Challenge 116- Drain Tile. Drain to storm sewer pipe, not sumps.
q. Challenge #17- Council Chambers dais floor material. Graham proposed 8" of rigid foam topped
with 4" of concrete. Wold requested that further coordination occur between architectural, electrical
and the AV consultant to determine the best solution for materials.
I. Challenge #18- Grounding ring conductor size. Weld confirmed the proposed size is suitable.
s. Challenge #19- Conduit and wire to the generator for the battery charger and tank heater circuits. All
in agreement on the proposed solution.
t. Challenge #20- CT connection cabinet and meter socket. Weld confirmed that these items are to be
supplied by the contractor.
u. Challenge #21- Warranty issue with manually operating air handling system/ boiler. Wold confirmed
the proposed solution is acceptable.
v. Challenge #22- No comment
2. Challenges listed in the other six Best Value proposals were reviewed by the group. Graham confirmed
that all challenges are accepted by them and are covered in their bid/ proposal. A few of the items were
discussed by the group and clarified by Weld.
a. Contractor A, Challenge #5- Weld reiterated that the electrical contractor is responsible for wiring all
doors in the building.
b. Contractor E, Challenge #2- Fiber in room 8012 will be supplied by the Owner's consultant.
c. Contractor F, Challenge #13- Metal panel should be provided at the described location, not Brick 1.
d. Contractor G, Challenge #6- Acoustic plank ceiling the chambers should be 24" wide, not 12" wide
as drawn in the documents.
e. Contractor H, Challenge #8- Fingerprint Hood will be included in the FF &E portion of the project.
B. Value Added Items
1. The group reviewed the list of potential Value Added Items suggested by Graham in their proposal. The
fist will be reviewed by the Project Team before making the final recommendation to Council.
2. The following are the proposed value added items and the Owner's response to the item.
a. Value Item #1- Eliminate haul route.
1. Owner's response- No
b. Value Item #2- Provide additional recycled water from drain tile to valve system manhole.
1. Owner's response- No
c. Value Item #3- Impact resistant drywall in lieu of security plaster in Booking area
1. Owner's response- No
Minnesota
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
City of Cottage Grove- New Public Safety/ City Hall
September 7, 2011 Best Value Pre - Planning Meeting Minutes
Page Three
d. Value Item #4- Replace sweat copper fittings with ProPress fittings for plumbing piping.
1 . Owner's response- Maybe, need to check with building official /Project Team.
architects e. Value Item #5- Alternate brand for air handlers and condensers
engineers 1. Owner's response- Need more information from Graham
www.woldae.com f. Value Item #6- Additional time for FF &E installation
1. Owner's response- Not necessary /utilize time to complete punchlist.
g. Value Item #7- Heat recovery wheel for AHU -1
1. Owner's response- No
h. Value Item #8- Elevator access control
1. Owner's response- No
i. Value Item #9- Change feeders from transformer to generator to main automatic transfer switch from
copper to aluminum.
1. Owner's response- Maybe, need to check with building official /Project Team
I. Value Item #10- Allow grooved pipe and fittings for hydronic piping
1. Owner's response- No
k. Delete pre- action system in main Server room
1. Owner's response- No
C. Next Steps:
1. Pre -Award Meeting next Wednesday, September 14, 2011 at 1 pm.
a. Graham will present to the Project Team the following agenda:
Summary presentation including all coordination and planning done during this phase.
Distribution and discussion of all challenges and solutions.
Distribution and discussion of the project schedule.
• Distribution and discussion of all action items and responsibilities.
Conclusion.
2, Contract Award at the September 21, 2011 Council Meeting
cc: Attendants
KI /CI Cottage Grove/1021891mins /9 -7 -11
Minnesota
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
Ab sentees:
Mayor Myron Bailey
Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator
Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer
A meeting was held at Cottage Grove City Hall for Graham Construction to present a summary of what was developed
and agreed on during the pre - planning phase. Also presented was a project schedule, risk assessment list and action
item list related to the project construction.
Discussion Topics:
A. Introductions
B. Graham's Presentation
1. Challenges/ Solutions
a. Graham presented a completed list of the Challenges listed in all seven proposals. Graham also noted in
the outcome /decision for each Challenge, whether it be Graham's acceptance of the challenge or the
Owner's acceptance of the solution.
1) Amend Graham's Challenge #7- Keviar door inserts to say "Accepted by Owner"
2. Uncontrolled Risk List
a. Graham presented three items that presented a risk to the Contractor.
b. No objections were taken.
3. Action Item List
a. Graham presented eight action items along with a due date for the responsible party to respond by in
order to keep the project moving forward.
b. Clarification: The Notice to Proceed will be concurrent with Council's approval to award the contract on
Minnesota September 21, 2011.
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
memorandum
• •
To: Attendants
C G h I t e C t$
From: Jodi Nelson
engineers
Date: September 14, 2011
www.woldae.com
Comm. No: 102189
305 Saint Peter Street
Saint Paul. MN 55102
... ......................... .......................__....._............................. ...__..._._............... -..._ _......................................._......................... ....._......_._................
SUb 1 y of Cottage Grove- New Public Safety/ City Hall
Subject: City
September 14, 2011 Best Value Pre -Award Meeting Minutes
tel 651 227 7773
fax 651 223 5646
Attendants:
mail@woldae.com
Derrick Lehrke, Councilmember
Craig Woolery, Public Safety Director
Robin Roland, Finance Director
Bob Byeriy, Fire Chief
Bob LaBrosse, Chief Building Official
Pete Koerner, Captain
Greg Rinzel, Captain
David Lenss, Graham Construction
Mark Fisher, Graham Construction
Rob Puncochar, Graham Construction
John McNamara, Wold Architects and Engineers
Jodi Nelson, Wold Architects and Engineers
Ab sentees:
Mayor Myron Bailey
Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator
Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer
A meeting was held at Cottage Grove City Hall for Graham Construction to present a summary of what was developed
and agreed on during the pre - planning phase. Also presented was a project schedule, risk assessment list and action
item list related to the project construction.
Discussion Topics:
A. Introductions
B. Graham's Presentation
1. Challenges/ Solutions
a. Graham presented a completed list of the Challenges listed in all seven proposals. Graham also noted in
the outcome /decision for each Challenge, whether it be Graham's acceptance of the challenge or the
Owner's acceptance of the solution.
1) Amend Graham's Challenge #7- Keviar door inserts to say "Accepted by Owner"
2. Uncontrolled Risk List
a. Graham presented three items that presented a risk to the Contractor.
b. No objections were taken.
3. Action Item List
a. Graham presented eight action items along with a due date for the responsible party to respond by in
order to keep the project moving forward.
b. Clarification: The Notice to Proceed will be concurrent with Council's approval to award the contract on
Minnesota September 21, 2011.
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
City of Cottage Grove- New Public Safety/ City Hall
September 14, 2011 Best Value Pre -Award Meeting Minutes
pip Page Two
c. Amendment: The Testing Agency Selection is the responsibility of Wold, as well as the City of Cottage
architects Grove.
engineers d. Conformed Documents were requested of Wold. Wold stated the Contractor is responsible for their own
www.waidae.com conformed document set and should make any revisions from the outcome of the Challenges /Solutions to
their set as part of the record drawings,
e. Wold suggested that Graham include an action item that Bonding and Insurance need to be in place at the
time of the contract signing.
4. Schedule
a. A detail project schedule was provided to the group. Graham reiterated that the schedule will constantly
be evolving and updated for each construction meeting at which the three week look -ahead schedule will
be presented.
C. Moving Forward
1. Contract Award will take place at the next Council meeting on September 21, 2011 at 7:30 pm,
2. The final contract amount may not include the Value Added items that the Project Team has already reviewed.
A number of items need more information and will be decided at a later date. The value added items will be
processed by Change Order at a future date.
3. Graham will submit a projected cash flow (draw down) to Wold.
4. The Groundbreaking Ceremony is scheduled for September 29, 2011 at 8:30 am. Graham will provide the hard
hats, shovels and site backdrop (equipment).
cc: Attendants
Absentees
Ss /CI Cottage Grove/ 1021U/mins/0 -14 -11
Minnesota
Illinois
Michigan
Colorado designers and researchers for public environments
PSCH Update 09/12/11
Review of Best Value Process toward bid award on 9/21/11
Sample Proiects for Graham Construction Services, Inc.
1. U of M Landcare Facility, and various renovation projects
2. Minneapolis Central Library
3. Metro State Library
4. Army /Air Force Arden Hills Readiness Center
5. Minneapolis Pantages Theater Renovation
6. Mound Transit Center
7. Minneapolis Downtown LRT parking garage
8. Metro transit Park and Ride in Minnetonka
9. Bottineau Boulevard Park and Ride in Brooklyn Park
10. Minneapolis Dewatering plant
11. Willmar Waste Treatment Plant
12. Edina Water Treatment Plant
13. Northstar Corridor LRT Extension project in Minneapolis
14. MSP People mover in St. Paul
15. City of Savage City Hall and Public Safety Building
16. MSP Airport Fire and Rescue Station No. 1
17. Scott County Police and Fire Training Academy
18. City of Champlin Municipal Facilities Expansion (incl. new Fire and Police
Station)
19. Dakota County Law Enforcement Center
20. Dakota County Community Development Agency office complex
Graham Subcontractors
1. Excavation and Site Utilities:
2. Masonry:
3. Drywall:
4. Roofing:
5. Windows:
6. Flooring:
7. HVAC / Temp Control:
8. Plumbing:
9. Fire Protection:
10. Electrical:
Carl Bolander & Sons St. Paul, MN
Weise Masonry
Prior Lake
RTL Construction
Shakopee
Berwald Roofing
North St. Paul
Interclad
Plymouth
Harrison Tile
Little Canada
Master Mechanical
Minneapolis
Northern Air
St. Paul
Total Fire Protection
Brandon, SD
Premier Electric
Minneapolis
Project Team/ Best Value Team Process
1. Council Approves Sustainability Features: May 4, 2011
2. Wold Presentation to Council an BV Process: May 18, 2011
3. Project Team Selects Best Value Team:
May 23, 2011
4. PSCH Financing Workshop:
June 1, 2011
5. Land Swap and Infrastructure Agreements:
June 1, 2011
6. Pre /Final Plat Approvals /Approve Financing:
June 1, 2011
7. Bid Awards on Ravine /85
June 1, 2011
8. Best Value Team Training:
June 2, 2011
9. Best Value Selection Criterion:
June 13, 2011
10. Council Approval of Land Mitigation:
June 15, 2011
11. Council Approval of Vets Memorial:
June 15, 2011
12. Best Value RFP Development:
June 24, 2011
13. Council Authorization of PSCH Bids:
June 24, 2011
14.Wold mandatory Pre - bidders mtg:
Aug 3, 2011
15. Best Value Review of Pre -Bid:
Aug 4, 2011
16. Best Value Eval Criterion:
Aug 22, 2011
17. CG Ravine Addt. Plat Recorded:
Aug 23, 2011
18. Best Value Shortlist:
Aug 25, 2011
19. Best Value Interviews:
Sept 1, 2011
20. Wold Distribution of Final Matrix:
Sept 1, 2011
21. Publication of Finalists:
Sept 2, 2011
22. Wold Pre -Award mtg with Graham:
Sept 7, 2011
23. Project Team Pre -Award mtg
Sept 12, 2011
24. Wold /Graham Challenges /Adds Deadline:
Sept 16, 2011
25. Scheduled Council Bid Award:
Sept 21, 2011
Best Value Selection Matrix
1. Cost:
35 points
2. Project Plan / Schedule:
15 points
3. Challenges / Solutions:
20 points
4. Value Added Options:
5 points
5. General Contractor Experience:
10 points
6. Construction Team Experience:
10 points
7. Interviews:
5 points
Bid Cost Range (base bid)
Evaluation Points Subtotal
Total
A.
$13,248,350
57.42
B.
$13,430,300
72.80
C.
$12,985,000
83.50
86.98
D.
$14,280,000
NA
E.
$13,375,000
73.10
F.
$12,997,000
79.10
83.16
G.
$13,330,000
75.90
H.
$13,196,800
78.90
82.83
1.
$13,721,269
NA
091211 Project Cost Estimating
1. Project Budget:
2. 6/24/11 Project Estimate:
3. Base Bid:
4. Vet's Memorial:
5. Value Added Options:
6. Construction Contingency:
7. Project Costs:
8. Project Cost contingency:
9. FFE:
10. FFE contingency:
11.090611 Estimate:
12. Estimate w/ contingency:
13. Grants Receivable:
14. Est. Proj. Fndg Req.:
$17,000,000
$16,196,000
$12,985,000
$ 36,000
TBD
$ 500,000
$ 1,232,501
$ 75,000
$ 830,000
$ 50,000
$15,083,501
$15,
$ 126,000
$14,957,501 to $15,582,501 (w /cont.)
Anticipated Proiect Schedule
1. Bid Award:
2. Notice To Proceed:
3. Mobilize and Construction Staging:
4. Ground Breaking Event
5. Footings, Foundation and Basement:
6. Structural Erection and Building Envelope
7. Building Envelope:
8. Roof:
9. Elevator:
10. S ite:
11. Lower Level Build out:
12. Upper Level Build out:
13. Commissioning:
14. Substantial Completion:
15. Final Inspection:
Sept 21
Sept 22 (amended)
Sept 26 (amended)
Sept 29 8:30 AM
Oct 20 — Feb 24, 2012
Feb. 27- May 01
May 02 — Aug 07
Aug 08 — Sept 06
June 14 — Aug 13
Oct 20, 2011 — June 24, 2012
Apr 04 — Aug 24
May 02 — Aug 31
Aug 20 — Oct 4
Sept 5/28, 2012
Nov 5, 2012
Summary of Space Needs Square Footage Allocations projected
for 2010 compared to the 2011 Wold Designed PSCH Project
Note: the "limited" column includes the assumption for off -site storage
and archiving, restricted office spaces (which start at 36 and 48 SF)
and enclosed police parking significantly below benchmarked levels;
the traditional allocations includes on -site archiving, office spaces
which are somewhat larger and parking at benchmarked levels.
2006 Space
2006 Space
Needs
Needs
Limited
Traditional
Wold
Existing
Storage /parking
Programming
Design
Use
City Hall
for 2010
for 2010
for 2011
Police
8,376
17,901
18,322
26,741
Fire
NA
3,155
2,553
included
PD /FD Shared
NA
4,005
4,827
included
PS /GG Shared
NA
included
included
2,598
Gen Govt
9,292
14,881
19,225
8,822
Public Space
included
included
included
7,624
Total Office /Public
17,668
39,942
44,927
45,785
Mechanical
included
included
included
2,608
Police Parking
6,480
9,362
18,275
18,264
Total Sq. Ft.
24,148
49,304
63,202
66,657
Note: the "limited" column includes the assumption for off -site storage
and archiving, restricted office spaces (which start at 36 and 48 SF)
and enclosed police parking significantly below benchmarked levels;
the traditional allocations includes on -site archiving, office spaces
which are somewhat larger and parking at benchmarked levels.
Public Safety/ City Hall 2010 Project Timeline /Action Steps
Updated 09/12/11
Historical:
1993: City Proposed 18 to 20K $1.5 million City Hall Project
1994: Revised Proposal of 19.2K $1.6 to $2.0 Million plus remodel of
existing building between $0.75 and 1 million
1995: Remodel of City Hall at $1,111,704
4/18/01 City Hall in 2001 -2006 CIP (and thereafter)
8/7/03 First East Ravine Open House @ City Hall
12/17/03 Planning Commission workshop on ER
12/26/03 Press release announcing second ER Open House
1/8/04 Second ER Open House @ River Oaks
1/12/04 Parks Commission Update on ER
1/26/04 Planning Commission Update on ER
2/23/04 Planning Commission review of Civic Campus concept
2/24/04 ER CAT reviews Civic Campus concept roll out
3/8/04 Parks Commission review of Civic Campus concept
3/9/04 EDA review of Civic Campus concept
3/10/04 Joint Council /Planning Commission workshop on ER
4/1/04 Date of County Gov't Center Campus Site Plan
4/6/04 Washington County Board decision to pursue Campus Site @ 90
4/13/04 Presentation to County Board on Campus concept layouts
4/14/04 Lower St. Croix WMO Presentation on ER
4/15/04 EDA staff booth @ Chamber Business Show w/ ER concept
5/11/04 EDA update on ER
7/14/04 Joint Council /Planning Commission Workshop
8/10/04 EDA update on ER
9/04 ER Newsletter Volume 2 distribution
11/15/04 Third ER Open House @ CGJH
11/17/04 Parks Commission update on ER
12/04: Met Council approved Land Exchange to 12/31/15
12/14/04 EDA update on ER
1/05 County /City Land exchange agreement
1/10/05 Parks Commission update on ER
1/10/05 Public Works Commission update on ER
1/11/05 EDA update on ER
1/12/05 HS /HR Commission update on ER
1/21/05 PW Commission update on ER
3/5/05 Council workshop on ER
4/11/05 PW Commission update on ER
5/17/05 Historic Preservation Commission update on ER
5/19/05: Date of SEH Campus site plan for City
5/23/05 Planning Commission update on ER
6/2/05 Fourth ER Open House @ Station 3
6/8/05 Joint Council /Planning Commission workshop
6/22/05 Fifth ER Open House @ CGJH
6/27/05 Planning Commission ER Public Hearing on ER
7/6/05 City Council ER Open House
7/18/05 ER AUAR draft for public comment
7/20/05 East Ravine Comp Plan Amendment approved by Council
8/05 Met Council ER Comp Plan Review
8/10/05 City Council update
8/22/05 Planning Commission ER Public Hearing
9/21/05 City Council Approval of ER Master Plan
3/15/06: City Receives Hay Dobbs Space Needs Report
3/27/06 Planning Comm. review of draft ordinances and dev. Standards for ER
4/5/06 Council adopts AUAR and road standards for ER
4/19/06 Planning Comm. Workshop on development standards for ER
4/24/06 Planning Comm. Public hearing on development standards for ER
5/17/06 Council workshop on ER development standards
6/06: Council proposed 49,011 SF $12.6 million project for 2008
6/7/06 Council orders feasibility study for Upper Ravine trunk sewer
6/21/06 Council adopts ER development standards
8/9/06 Council approves feasibility report/authorizes P &S for easements
12/20/06: Council adjusts schedule for PSCH project to 2010 via CIP
2/20/08: Council adjusts PSCH project cost estimate to $15 million via CIP
I ) , O
1/23/10 Council Strategic Planning Session
2/3/10 Council 2010 Goals Adoption
215/10 Requested Space Needs Review of CW, HB, RR
2/17/10 Joint Council / EDA on goals including PSCH
3/3/10 Updated PSCH Space Needs Comparisons
3/12/10 SD 833 Luncheon includes joint project discussion
3/22/10 Request to Hay Dobbs for Norris Marketplace site testing
3/31/10 Received Hay Dobbs Norris Draft
4/1/10 Sent Norris Draft to BWW
4/5/10 Sent Norris Draft to PHM
4/5/10 Reminder to Dept's on Space Needs Update May Deadline
4/6/10 Sent Draft of Norris to Staff Reps
4/6/10 Received Space Needs update from Finance
4/9/10 SD 833 Luncheon includes joint project discussion
4/13/10 EDA development update on PSCH
5/5/10 Held 1 St Design Charette at Norris w/ Library and Y
5/12/10 Received Space Needs Update from CD
5/13/10 Received Space Needs Update from PD
5/13/10 Requested Staff Team review of 5/19 Council Space Needs Memo
5/13/10 Staff Team Mtg on Project and approach with KA
5/14/10 SD833 Luncheon includes update of Design Charette
5/14/10 Requested Staff Team review of RFQ
5/14/10 Final Draft of Space Needs Memo to Council
5/14/10 Submitted Comments back to PD Space Needs Update
5/17/10 Solicitation of interested Arch's for RFQ
5/19/10 Mtg with Buetow Arch's
5/19/10 Council Workshop on Space Needs/ received staff update
5/19/10 Emailed RFQ to interested Arch's post Council mtg
5/20/10 Requested Staff Team review of 6/2/10 workshop memo
5/20/10 Mtg with Wold Arch's
5/21/10 Requested Staff Team review of Arch. Score Sheet for 6/2 Council
5/28/10 Requested Staff Team review of Site Pro's /Con's for 6/2 Council
5/28/10 Mtg with KKE Arch's
5/28/10 Requested HB review of pro /con subjective ratings
6/1/10 Mtg with SEH Arch's with JL
6/2/10 Council Workshop on Project Approach/ sites evaluated
6/3/10 Staff Mtg on Council Direction
6/4/10 Mtg with YMCA with HB
6/4/10 Receipt of RFQ Submittals
6/7/10 Design Charette #2
6/7/10 Week of; Review of RFQ's by Project Team
6/16/10 Council Workshop on RFQ's, RFP's; authorize RFP's; review
Communication plan/ site confirmed
6/17/10 Submit RFP's to Arch's
7/7/10 Council adoption of communication plan; receive budget
documentation /financing plan including CIP process; authorizes feasibility
study on Ravine Parkway
7/13/10 Receipt of RFP Submittals
7/13/10 EDA development update on PSCH and Ravine Parkway
7/21/10 RFP Interviews (confirm committee availability)
8/9/10 Week of; begin final programming
8/10/10 EDA development update on PSCH
8/11/10 Council authorized contract with Wold Architects; public hearing called on
CIP
8/17/10 Public Safety Commission Initial Review
9/1/10 CIP Public Hearing
9/14/10 EDA receives presentation from PS Dir. On PSCH
9/15/10 Council update on programming /schematic design; adopt programming/
Rescind CIP authorization
9/21/10 Public Safety Commission Review
10/8/10 Phase One Environmental received
10/12/10 EDA receives development update on PSCH
10/14/10 PS Dir. Presentation to Chamber on PSCH
10/19/10 SWWD Board Review
10/20/10
Council update of schematic design
10/25/10
Planning Commission Review of Site
10/28/10
Project Open House
11/9/10
EDA receives development update on PSCH
11/15/10 Community Center Task Force Update on PSCH Project
11/17/10
Council Update on Schematic Design
12/14/10
EDA receives development update on PSCH
12/14/10
Community Meeting on PSCH
12/21/10
Schematic Design Complete /authorize Design Development
1/19/11
Council Update on Design Development
2/9/11
Environmental Commission update on PSCH
2/16/11
Workshop on site /chambers; Council presentation by Wold
3/16/11
Workshop on Building materials
3/29/11
Community Open House 6P to 8P
4/6/11
Approval of Design; authorize construction documents
4/6/11
Begin Construction Documents
4/25/11 Planning Commission Site Plan Review
5/4/11 Council Site Plan Review
6/24/11 Approve construction drawings /Set bid date
8/3/11 Pre Bid Meeting
8/18/11 Bid Submissions
9/1/11 Interview Contractors
9/21/11 Bid Award
9/22/11 Notice to proceed /break ground
9/29/11 Ground Breaking