Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks and Recreation - 12/27/1979 } 1979 DECEMBER 1 3 13 17 !) 27 MINUTES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE I ` UNAPPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL, SCHOOL BOARD AND PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION0P SATURDAY, DECErBER 1, 1979 10:00 A.M. , CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor; Dean Edstrom, Dave Osterholt, Sidney Pauly, Paul Redpath SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Loren Irvine, Gary Mohrenweiser, Lyle Shaw, Jo Wigen, John Lobben SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Norman Friedericks COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Dick Anderson, Chairperson; Dave Anderson, Steve Fifield, Robert Johnson, George i Tangen, Larry VanMeter, Bob Kruell f STAFF PRESENT: Robert Lambert, Director of Community Services OTHERS PRESENT: Dick Dahl, Eden Prairie News; Merle Gamm, Don Opheim, Steve Calhoon, Jerry Wigen, Jerry Kingrey f Mayor PeTizel called the meeting to order at 10:10 A.M. 4 Mayor Penzel explained that the purpose of this meeting is discussion of the 1. broad stroke direction to take regarding the Bond. Referendum. Mayor Penzel turned the meeting over to Lambert and he spoke to the following agenda items: I. Park Development A. Acquisition - Direction to obtain the necessary sites. B. Development a. Lambert feels the community wants to see some development next spring. fie indicated that cash park fees would be used to start projects at Homeward Hills, Flying Cloud Fields and the Athletic Fields at Staring Lake Park. Lambert stated that due to development in Bluffs West 2nd and 3rd, and the drainage situation in those areas, work should begin at Homeward Hills early next spring. b. Lake Eden Park Site - Lambert indicated that development of this site needs to be discussed with the School District as soon as possible. The City has contacted the School Board regarding using fill from the 15 acre school site. Irvine questioned if the whole area were developed as a temporary park, is it feasible to use as a school site later. Lambert felt that if a decision cannot be made soon another site should be considered. Lambert suggested that the School Board and the City Council consider trading this 13 acre site for possibly two school site "pads" at Preserve Park, a 22 acre site, and at the Franlo Road Park site, a 20 acre parcel. I Special Meeting -2- December 1, 1979 He also requested the School Board to provide the City with information on any needed future school sites, as the City has . a policy to purchase additional land within specific neighborhood parks for elementary school buildings. Wigen said she would request the School Staff take another look at the area and then get the two staffs together to make a recommendation to the Board and Council. c. Plans and Specifications - Lambert stated that the sites the City already owns are committed to start as soon as the bonds have been sold. Kruell asked if it is possible to bid the site before bonds are sold. Lambert said that the plans and specifications would be ready, but projects should not be bid until the bonds are sold. Mayor Penzel indicated that the sale of bonds would begin early April or May depending on the market conditions. Dick Anderson asked how much planning can be done at present and can cash park fee monies by used? Penzel said he felt cash park fees could be used to prepare plans and specifications. Lambert stated that the majority of the work would be completed in house. Osterholt requested a list of cash park fees collected for different development areas. He also asked what the agreement would be with the school regarding the tennis courts. Lambert indicated that there lis a commitment for them to be funded through the bond referendum and that a Joint Powers Agreement such as Prairie Views would be drawn up. Dick Anderson suggested that whatever funds are available they be used to get started. Mayor Penzel spoke to cost increases and felt work should begin as soon as possible. II. Community Center - Discuss the process for choosing an architect Mayor Penzel said he felt that a building committee was not necessarily the answer. He felt the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission could quickly develop criteria and the process of reviewing architects and made a proposal to the Council. Dick Anderson agreed, but he felt they needed the expertise of other organizations, etc. , and suggested a small committee of no more than 9 members. Osterholt felt that input from the school was necessary right from the beginning and throughout the process. Edstrom suggested there is merit in having a committee whose sole responsibility is to consider the building and they would report to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission who would untimately make the recommendation to the Council. Mayor Penzel stated his concern that a lengthy process would price us out of the market. He urged that a process be used that would not only be effective I but also speedy. I r .. Special Meeting -3- December 1, 1979 Irvine suggested that the school policy for choosing an architect be used, which was workable. Edstrom suggested that the School Board be contacted regarding their experiences. Wigen reported that staff within the District were helpful to the architect in that they had ideas that the architect had not thought of. She said that the School Building Committee was helpful. Dick Anderson suggested the facility be adjacent to the school so as to give the maximum use for their Physical Education programs. Mohrenweiser stated his concern about a timetable and inflation. He said that the high school needs plans now as to how the 2 facilities go together. He sees the need for a committee with a definite timetable to meet and bring their ideas to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Osterholt wants an indication from the School Board as to what they want to see in terms of the facility. Dick Anderson suggested a committee ]� appointed by the City and '� appointed by the School Board. Tangen suggested a sub committee of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resouces Commission and the School Board, and that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission not be bypassed, but a place for public hearings and then recommendations sent to the City Council. Irvine suggested a 7-9 member committee i School Board and ?1 City. Mayor Penzel suggested that the committee consist of the following: I. School Board Member 2. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Member 3. City Staff Member 4. EPAA S. HAEP 6. School Staff Nember 7. City Council Member Kingrey indicated that the EPAA would probably not be as interested in this facility as they are in development of neighborhood parks, but that swimming interests should be represented. MOTION: Osterholt moved to establish a 7 member committee including the following: 1 School Board member, 1 School staff member, 1 City Council member, 1 City Staff member, 1 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission member, 1 Hockey Board member, and 1 member of the committee representing swimming interests in the City. DISCUSSION: Discussion included the following comments: The 7 member committee report to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the Parks, C Rocreation and Natural Resources Commission report to the City Council. It was also noted that other interested persons in the community could attend these meetings and provide input, but would not be a voting member of the committee. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. Special Meeting -4- December 1, 1979 Mayor Penzel asked what is a reasonable timetable for the selection of an architect, l and should the selection process be restricted to those firms that have had experience constructing similar facilities? Osterholt suggested that the selection process itself would eliminate those applicants who hadn't done that type of facility. Lambert reported there are approximately 30 architects to date who have indicated interest in the facility. Kruell felt that the process of selection is not as important as the sub contractors, and the criteria would not indicate who those might be. Mayor Penzel asked how soon an architect should be chosen. Osterholt suggested the Council select a tentative date as to when bonds are to be sold and selection of an architect be simultaneous - architect selected by the time of bond sale. Wigen reported that he has talked to 2 architects and asked if they were to begin immediately how long before start of construction and they indicated they would need 6-8 months for the planning process, then another 3 months prior to beginning construction. Mayor Penzel suggested that the School Board advise the committee on their preferred location for the facility. ` Irvine stated that soil borings will be critical. Penzel felt that the layout of the school would dictate where the facility should be located. Lambert reported that when the committee starts talking to an architect one of the first things they will need to know is where the site is and will want to review it prior to submitting proposals. Penzel suggested that the committee could be appointed by December 6, 1979. The City will appoint their members at the December 4, 1979 meeting and the School Board will appoint their members December 6, 1979. Mayor Penzel spoke to the kind of facility - energy saving near to top of the list. Information from the University of Minnesota is available on this subject. Penzel suggested the committee establish the criteria to be sent to the architects. Dick Anderson felt it important to free up City Staff to start working on these projects. Mayor Penzel will look into this. Kruell asked if the committee members would fill out potential conflict of interest forms, Mayor Penzel replied yes. Wigen asked that when the committee comes in with a recommendatin on an architect, would the architect be hired? Penzel indicated that a transfer of funds is possible to accomplish a given goal. Special Meeting -5-, December 1, 1979 CWigen asked if the fund raising campaign money were turned over for a public owned facility, if this would cause any legal problems. Penzel replied not as long as there is a clear understanding that it is community property once donated. Wigen suggested that the people be offered their money back. Dave Anderson said this would be dealt with in the next week. Mohrenweiser asked if the donors name could be attached if they contribute. Lambert will check with the City Attorney on this. . Wigen asked who is going to be in charge of the committee. Penzel suggested the committee select a chairperson. Lambert will call the first meeting. Irvine suggested that the City Engineering Staff check with the School District Architect regarding the sanitary sewer line. I Mayor Penzel directed Lambert to make a recommendation to the Council on Tuesday December 4 on the amount of funds needed for consultants prior to hiring an architect. •. I Dean Edstrom asked that agenda and minutes be forwarded to the School Board and Commission. f� MOTION: Redpath moved for adjournment at 11:25 A.M. seconded by Motion passed unanimously. I Respectfully Submitted, Marlys Dahl Recording Secretary I I { i i I , AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION i MONDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1979 7:30 P.M. , CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: Richard Anderson, Chairperson; David Anderson, Steve Fifield, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell, George Tangen, Larry VanMeter COMMISSION STAFF: Robert Lambert, Director of Community Services Approx. Time to Begin Item 7:30 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 7:35 III. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 1979 7:40 IV. Letter From Jerry Kingrey V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Reports of Commissioners None B. Resorts of Staff 7:50 1. Prairie Village Professional (cont.) 8:05 2. Community Services Department Projects - Update 8:10 3. Trail Policy Report 8:30 4. Cross Country Ski Trails 9:00 S. Elmwood VI. OLD BUSINESS None VII. NEW BUSINESS None 9:05 VIII. ADJOURNMENT r APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION C onday, December 3, 1979 7:30 P.M. , City Hall COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Anderson, Chairperson; David Anderson, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell , George Tangen, Larry VanMeter COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Fifield COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Robert Lambert, Director of Community Services OTHERS PRESENT: Dick Dahl , Eden Prairie News I. ROLL CALL I : The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Richard Anderson. II. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Additions: V.B.6. Council Report - Lambert VI.A. Small Surface Water Storage Areas - Kruell VII.B. Appoint Park, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Representative to Community Facility Committee f' MOTION: Dave Anderson moved, and Tangen seconded, to approve the agenda as published and ammended. The motion passed unanimously. I. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 1979 4 Dave Anderson questioned the wording of the motion on page 6 concerning the closing of skating rinks. The Commissioners decided that the minutes would }$ not be revised; however, the rink attendants are to use their own discretion when enforcing the cold weather closing policy, depending on the number of ' users. Changes: Page 5, para. 7; school is setting a "course" not a "track" MOTION: Tangen moved, VanMeter seconded, to approve the minutes as ammended; motion passed unanimously. IV. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter From Jerry Kingrey MOTION: Tangen moved that the Commission accept the letter from Jerry Kingrey. Kruell seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. B. Reports of Staff 1. Prairie Village Professional (Continued) Lambert reported that he had contacted several people in order to gain more information on Section VIII Housing, and to consider the proposed sidewalk system. a Minutes - Parks, Recreation & proved December 3, 1979 2- Natural Resources Commission Staff is convinced that the pedestrianoandebicyclealk accesstem and frontage to the shopping road offer adequate center and the trail on County Road 4. They sugg ested that by waiving the Cash Park Fee on the housing units for the elderly, it might help the developer construct a building that meets the requirements set by HUD, and still be able to set the apartment rents within the HUD limits. Staff recommends this action. Tangen asked if all the units are eligible for the rent reduction, or only a percentage of them; also, could all the units be rented at the lowest rate? He was told all of the units are eligible, and all could be rented at the lowest rate if the renters qualify. Lambert explained that the owner is guaranteed a percentage of the rent on vacant units, up to a limit, based on a formula devised by HUD. Kruell said it appears that Eden Prairie is being forced by the Metropolitan Council to provide low cost housing; having set goals for each community, they are pressing them to meet these goals. Being basically opposed to the subsidy concept, he was in favor of collecting a Cash Park Fee. Dave Anderson noted that a building of this nature is amortized at a minimum of 25 years, and using that figure, the Cash Park Fee ( costs the builder $4.00 per year on each unit; this seems like a small percentage of the investment, and should not cause it to fail . MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend to the Council approval of the proposed Prairie Village Professional , as per the staff recommendations in the memorandum of November 29, 1979; with the condition that the Cash Park Fee be reduced to $100 per unit (Option B) and be allocated to the Senior Citizens' Center at Staring Lake Park. Dave Anderson seconded the motion. THe motion passed, with Kruell and R. Anderson voting "nay". 2. Community Services Departments Projects--Update Lambert asked the Commissioners if they had any questions concerning this report. Dave Anderson asked if there was any information on the December 3, 1979 meeting with the MAC Operational and Environmental Committee. Lambert reported that he was told before the meeting that they would tic fields, per the City's recommend to the full MAC expansion of the athle request if the City agrees to: 1) Construct a fence (for airport security) 2) No lights at the facility resent renter) 3) Pay rent (similar to what is being charged to the p Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved December 3, 1979 Natural Resources Commi;ssi.on -3- He added that since the airport commission would not consider allowing lights on the fields, staff was considering the construction of football/ soccer fields at Staring Lake Park where they could be lighted. The Babe Ruth fields originally planned for that area could be constructed at Flying Cloud Fields. Dave Anderson asked if the construction of the warming house at Edenvale Park was on schedule. Lambert told him they were now waiting for the electrician, who has a December 10, 1979 deadline. When the wiring is complete, the insullation and finishing work can be done; the warming house should be operational within four days after the electrician is done. 3. Trails Policy Report Lambert presented a report on the City's present trail policy, based on the Hikeway/Bikeway Task Force Report of 1974. Kruell commented that it appears the city is following the policies pretty closely, and recommended that the Commission not deviate from these policies at this time. He questioned the specific problems brought up by the Public Safety Department and the Council , concerning the safety of trails as opposed to sidewalks; and stated that revising or updating the report might be in order sooner,- since many changes have occurred since 1974. Lambert noted that the objections were to trails that run behind lot lines. Most trails are on public property, and do not follow lot lines, with the exception of connecting trails. Kruell asked how trails could be changed in order to lend themselves to skiing or biking. Lambert noted that recreational trails do that, while sidewalks do not. R. Anderson added the intent has been to have recreational trails. He noted that cul-de-sacs have presented special problems concerning access to parks and schools, creating a need for connecting trails between lot lines. Kruell felt that access should be gained by building parks which are accessible to the cul-de-sacs. He added that there are many ways to approach the problem, suggesting that the City should utilize corridors and adjust development to gain access to recreational areas. Opus II was offered by Kruell as an example of a well planned transportation system where roadways co-exist with a system of trails. R. Anderson noted that many other communities have developed extensive trail systems, and we should contact them to check out problems and get recommendations; we could gain from their experience. Kruell asked if there was a way the Commission could recap the trails policy, and devise a way to incorporate new ideas. Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved December 3, 1979 Natural Resources. Commis.sion -4- Lambert noted that the philosophy of the Commission is different from that of the Council . The major question seems to be the location of trails to serve neighborhoods as they feed into the main recreational trails. He also noted that it is difficult for citizens to see continuity in the City's trail plan because of scattered development. As development increases, the trail system will take shape: Tangen pointed out that Trails were included in the Eden Prairie Guide Plan Update. After the Metropolitan Council has acted on the plan, the task force could be reconvened. At that time, the City's policy can' be compared to the Guide Plan recommendations. Kruell suggested that a review of the Trails Policy could be considered as one major goal in 1980, since trails are more important now than ever. MOTION: Tangen moved to table the Trails Policy Report until the next meeting. When a series of major goals is incorporated, it should include a review of the Trails Policy. Kruell seconded, and the motion passed with Dave Anderson opposed. A recess was called at 8:40 p.m. 4. Cross Country Ski Trails Lambert presented a proposal for cross-country ski trails at Bryant Lake Park, utilizing a temporary access with limited parking, and a tracker that will be pulled with a snowmobile. Both novice and advanced trails are planned, but a potential problem exists because the trails must i cross a sleigh trail (which may also be used by snowmobilers). R. Anderson suggested that stop signs for the sleighs and snowmobiles should help, and the snowmobile club could be asked to help with the project. Kruell added that if snowmobiles are accomodated on sleigh trails, the Public Safety Department should be notified and asked to watch the signs and their useage. MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend that the Council give this plan to allow snowmobiles to use the sleigh trail , plus the access at Bryant Lake Park, a trial period. Users in the area should be notified of the conditions, and if it doesn't work, the policy will be rescinded, and snowmobiles will be banned from Bryant Lake Park. More stingent enforcement by the Public Safety Department will result if the policy has to be rescinded. R. Anderson seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Dave Anderson noted that Bryant Lake Park has been a no- snowmobiling area in the past, and asked if this policy is intended to ; be temporary or permanent. Tangen told him that it is intended to be temporary; the policy could t C be reconsidered again next year if it proves to be successful , or it could be rescinded at any time. Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved December 3, 1979 Natural Resources Commisson -5- R. Anderson reported that John Lobben, of the School Board, had discussed the availability of parking with Gene Jereczyk, of the Vo-Tech School . Jereczyk felt that after construction is completed, the parking facility at the stables could be available for the public. He also noted that snowmobile trails and cross country ski trails are not usually compatable--the noise is especially objectionable; but he noted that he would be willing to try this arangement this year. He then asked how the trail for hay/sleigh rides came into existance. Lambert explained that as part of their committment to serving the recreational needs of the community, the Vo-Tech proposed the possibility and received a very positive response. The trail was developed for this reason. He also noted that the park plan includes a separate narking area for cross country skiers, with good access to the trails. VOTE: The motion passed unanimously. R. Anderson asked about skiing at Edenvale this winter. Lambert reported that the City will set a track, but they have not received permission to sign trails yet. He noted that the City now has a tracker, but not a groomer. They will use the Public Safety " Department's smowmobile, and the snowmobile club has offere- their help. 5. Elmwood MOTION: Kruell moved to continue this item until the December 17, 1979 meeting, when more information will be available. Tangen seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. f s 6. Council Report Lambert reported that the Council had taken the following actions: 1) Awarded the bid for improvements to the barn roof at Eden Prairie Stables. 2) Authorized staff to obtain an appraisal -from the architect at the t Grill house, on renovation, etc. 3) Authorized staff to advertise for sale the small house on the Grill property. 4) Concerning the petition to lower the flood plain at Purgatory Creek, the Council requested the Watershed District to study and report on the impact of removing the culvert. 5) Awarded the bid for the sewer work at Bryant Lake Park. 6) Decided to move the Valley View Road/Rail Road crossing north,'-- resulting in a grade crossing rather than a bridge. This move Minutes--Parks, Recreation & approved December 3, 1979 6- Natural Resources Commission I . C will save between $850,000 - $1,000,000 on the cost of the road. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Small Surface Water Storage Areas Lambert reported that the Council felt there were sufficient checks on development without additional ordinances. He presented the maps of water storage areas, classify the type of wetland cover, which in turn created by the DNR to help determines whether it is public waters. This controls areas down to two and one-half acres. They will do a field check on an area from one - two and one-half acres. Kruell stated that the Commission should take action to protect those small areas , including those less than one acre--recognizing that they are as important as large areas in recovering surface water. He su4aested the Commission cnnsirIPr this problem at their first meeting in January. VII . NEW BUSINESS A. A oint a Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Member to the Community ace ity Committee MOTION: Tangen moved to recommend that the mayor appoint Richard Anderson as the representative of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to the Community Facility Committee. Kruell seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Georgia Jessen Recording Secretary III t, COMMUNITY CENTER COMMITTEE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1979 7:30 P.M. , CITY HALL ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION I. Choose Committee Chairman and clarify the purpose of the committee. II. Develop criteria to use for choosing architect. III. Develop list of information the committee will request of each architectural firm in a proposal form. IV. Determine the procedures the committee will follow through the selection process. A. Send request for proposal to all interested architectural firms. B. Set deadline for proposals. C. Review proposals and make calls on past performance. 1. Check to see the firm's past performance on meeting budget estimates. 2. Talk to facility managers to see if they are satisfied with the building design, quality of work, etc. C D. Eliminate all but 10-12 firms. E. Establish interview dates and questions. F. Make recommendation of the top three firms to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council. V. Decide what information the committee should obtain from the school architect on the building site at this time. A. How could it be attached to the existing wall? B. Where should the entrance and exits be located to conform to the campus plan and the school design? VI. The City is obtaining the soil borings at this time. Lambert will provide information on the proposal for soil borings and foundation engineering. VII. As soon as possible, the committee should determine the criteria the school has established for this structure. A. Type of exterior they would accept. B. Locations they would approve. C. Any other requirements the school may have at this time. r. APPROVED MINUTES COMMUNITY CENTER COMMITTEE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1979 7:30 P.M. , CITY HALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: David Osterholt, Chairperson; Dick Anderson, Richard Buretta, Arne Johnson, Robert Lambert, Lyle Shaw, Jerry Wigen Lambert called the meeting to order at 7:45 P.M. Items for discussion were distributed to each committee member. I. Choose Committee Chairperson and Clarify the Purpose of the Committee. Anderson nominated Osterholt as chairperson. Seconded by Shaw. Osterholt g was named committee chairperson. Discussion of the purpose of the committee followed. Lambert pointed out that the committee was set up for the purpose of recommending an architect and working through the design process with termination at that point. Buretta felt there was little for the committee to accomplish after the design order was completed. Wigen would like to see a contact person for change orders after the architect has been selected. Osterholt felt this should be handled through City staff. Lambert reported that after the blueprints are drawn Wally Johnson, Building Inspector, would be involved in the process. Anderson felt that after the design and structure was planned the committee could terminate, but could meet on consultation if necessary. Johnson suggested perhaps the focus of the committee would change later. Anderson suggested the possibility of a ' committee for operation of the facility upon completion. Lambert felt there could be a committee of interested parties at that point. Osterholt felt this would be the responsibility of the Community Services Department. Buretta suggested that a pool director would be necessary. Anderson felt it important to have someone to coordinate use of the facility with the school and Community Services Department. IT. Selection of Architect Discusssion took place on how often the committee should meet. Osterholt felt every two weeks would be adequate, but more often if necessary. k` Osterholt requested that the brochures and letters from interested architectural firms be available for the next committee meeting. He also suggested the committee select an architect to come in and talk with the committee in regards to the selection of an architect. Lambert felt this was a good idea. Anderson felt he would like to visit some of the completed facilities in the area. Buretta reported there are really only 2 good indoor municipal pools in the area, Rochester and Brooklyn Park. Osterholt asked Anderson if he felt it was necessary for each committee member to visit these facilities. Anderson felt some members could visit pool facilities and some hockey facilities and report back to the committee. i Community Center Committee -2- December 13, 1979 Wigen asked if the University of Minnesota had someone available to supply information on the selection of an architect. He is not sure that anyone on the committee knows what to look for and felt some professional guidance would be helpful. Anderson asked if Wally Johnson, City staff person, who has architectural experience could be of help to the committee. Lambert reported he has talked to Wally regarding this and he suggested that the committee talk to an architect about what questions should be asked. Johnson also suggested the committee look at the architectural firm's staff credentials - firm with their own engineers, planners, etc. He also suggested the committee take time to contact some of the completed projects and get information about the architectural firm they uesed - how were they to work with, accuracy of budget estimates, etc. Osterholt requested the American Institute of Architects information on the selection process be obtained and mailed to committee members. He also suggested the committee end up with 6-8 firms as likely candidates. Lambert asked if the committee was going to look only at good ice and swimming facilities, or should energy conservation also be considered. Osterholt felt both should be pursued. S Wigen suggested the committee look into the possibility of a design and construction firm, as this may not be as costly. Buretta reported that you can build a low cost swimming facility - basic. Wigen referred to the pools at St. Peter and Jackson, Minnesota being built now for approx- imately $700,000. Anderson suggested the facility would have to be acceptable to the school and fit in with the new facility under construction there. Buretta referred to a bubble roof which would be a faily low cost and suggested there are federal funds available for such facilities. Lambert will check on the availability of federal funds. Wigen will have a list of architectural firms to consider at the next meeting. Lambert reported that Richfield West, Brooklyn Center and Olson pools have good recommendations. Buretta felt the Richfield pool is not large enough.and suggested the pool should be at least 25 yards x 25 meters. Anderson asked what we are talking about in cost savings if one wall of the new school facility is used. Wigen reported the Mayor is interested in an underground facility and asked if information could be obtained from the University of Minnesota on costs of underground and above ground facilities. Lambert referred to the LeSuer facility, which is similar to what the committee is talking about. The facility is pre-cast concrete and has racquet ball facilities, gym, team rooms for hockey, seating for 700-800, game room, exercise room, pool and office space. Cost was a million and quarter dollars with local labor being used. r Community Center Committee -3- December 13, 1979 Lambert asked Osterholt if he had an architect in mind to attend the next meeting. Osterholt said he did not but he will check with the University of Minnesota. Osterholt asked about a target date for a recommendation to the Council. Wigen felt February 1, 1980, as it will take 5-6 months on the drawing board, 30 days for bids, and 30-60 after that before construction can begin. Osterholt requested Shaw to firm up what the school would accept so that information is available for the architect. Osterholt requested a report from Lambert on the existing sewer line at the school for the next meeting. Johnson reported that the soil in the area of the school is not good. When the school began construction the soil was mucky and clay and had to be replaced with fill. Lambert reported that soil borings are being done at the present time and he will have a report at the next meeting. Johnson will get information from the school regarding this so it can be distributed to the committee. Osterholt asked for a list of firms that the committee feels right now they want to interview. They are as follows: 1. Wold Association 2. Armstrong, Torseth, Skold and Rydeen, Inc. 3. Smily, Glotter Associates, Inc, 4. Green, Nelson, Watten, Weaver and Winsor, Inc. Dollar amounts, combination pool and hockey facility and allowance for expansion should be criteria for the architectural firm. The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, December 27, 1979 at 7:00 P.M, City Hall. The following information should be available for discussion: I. Wigen run down on architectural firms. 2. Shaw - school ;.nformation 3. Lambert - report on soil borings and existing sewer line at school, and information on State $ Federal funds for this type of project. 4. Johnson - to contact architect Keller regarding existing wall at school. S. Each member prepare a list of questions for proposals. A questionnaire for interviewing architects will be developed at the next meeting. Meeting adjourned at 9:15 P.M. Respectfully Sumbitted, Marlys Dahl, Recording Secretary AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MONDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1979 7:30 P.M., CITY HALL COMMISSION MEMBERS: Richard Anderson, Chairperson; David Anderson, Steve Fifield, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell, George Tangen, Larry VanMeter COMMISSION STAFF: Robert Lambert, Director of Community Services Approx. Time to Begin Item 7:30 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA r 7:35 III. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1979 and SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 1979 IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 7:40 A. Letter to Bryant Lake Residents - Snowmobile Trail V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS . A. Reports of Commissioners 1. Community Facility Committee Report - Dick Anderson B. Reports of Staff 1. Development Proposals 7:45 a. COR Investment 8:05 b. Olympic Hills 6th 8:30 2. Review of 1979 Commission Business 8:40 3. Council Report VI. OLD BUSINESS 8:45 A. Brown Property - Purgatory Creek 8:50 B. Tree Disease Program - Utilization Alternatives VII. NEW BUSINESS 9:10 A. Goals 1980 f 9:30 B. Bluff Property Preservation 9:45 VIII. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION �.. Monday, December 17, 1979 7:30 P.M. , City Hall COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Anderson, Chairperson; arrived at 7:45, Robert Johnson, Robert Kruell ,George Tangen and Steve Fifield COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: David Anderson and Larry VanMeter COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT: Robert Lambert,. Director of Community Services; Stu Fox, City Forester OTHERS PRESENT: Dick Dahl , E.P. News and Larry Peterson I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by George Tangen at 7:35 P.M. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The commission agreed to wait for possible other members to come before approving the agenda. III.MINUTES OF DECEMBER 3, 1979 AND SPECIAL MEETING OF DECEMBER 11 1979 Minutes of December 3, 1979: Pg. 2, para. 5 correct stated to said and C add "it appears" that Eden Prairie, Pg. 6, para. 2, add including those that are less than one acre MOTION: Kruell moved to approve the minutes of December 3, 1979 with the stipulation that other members when they appear may make corrections if necessary. Johnson seconded, motion passed with Fifield abstaining. F,rfield moved to approve the minutes of the special meetinq of December 1 , 1979. Motion carried unanimously. IV. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter to Bryant Lake Residents - Snowmobile Trail Lambert explained to the commission that he had just received a letter from John Golle, an adjacent property owner to the park, commenting that he felt it made sense to have the snowmobile trails. Golle noted that the snowmobile trails cross the ski trails four times and felt it would be advantageous to cut the park in half instead. Lambert noted that Golle did not understand the entire situation. Lambert explained that the snowmobile club had examined the terrain and will be advising as to the placement and direction of the snowmobile signs in the park. V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS Minutes - Parks, Recreation & approved Dec. 17, 1979 Natural Resorces -2- A. Reports of Commissioners 1 . Community Facilij�y Committee Report - Dick Anderson Lambert provided a memorandum in regard to the report on the Community Center Committee's first meeting. Lambert explained the reason for the memorandum is that it is the policy of the City not to send out copies of unapproved minutes. He noted that they ' need direction in order to pick an architect for the project. The State of Minn. has standard forms with typical questions and pro- cedures for the interviewing process. They will also be checking with the City of New Ulm since they recently have approved the same type of project. The goal to find an architect is Feb. 1 . Kruell asked for clarification in regard to the commission making a recommendation to the City Council without the minutes and if they would be able to modify any decisions. R. Anderson arrived at the meeting at 7:45. Tangen relinquished the chair with the arrival of R. Anderson. Lambert reiterated the policy of the City and said it is difficult to correct if wrong information is given out. He answered that the commission will have the opportunity to react to the recommendations but the City Council will still rule. Tangen questioned when this could be a formal agenda item. Lambert noted that the process from making a draft and getting the 20 - 25 pages of proposals, studying proposals and interviewing the top six will take to the first week in Feb. R. Anderson told the commission members that it may be necessary to start meeting every week since time is so important. Kruell asked if any architects have asked for feasibility studies. Lambert answered they have not asked for any. Tangen requested that the commission accept the report from Lambert and the request was granted. R. Anderson requested the commission to add to the published agenda under Old Business, Item C, Transportation Trails, Item D, Purgatory Creek Silting. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Johnson, to amend the agenda. B. Reports of Staff 1 . Development Proposals a. COR Investment Lambert suggested to the commission that they table this item since they are not in attendance although they had been notified and felt he was not prepared to give a presentation for them. r _ Minutes - Parks, Recreation & approved Dec. 17, 1979 Natural Resources Commission Tangen questioned the situation regarding the cash park fee for the proposed development across the street from COR. Tangen felt a policy should be established so the commission would not need to review each proposal . He felt something should be incorporated in an ordinance-,or amendment to the ordinance. ' Lambert answered that the City Council agreed to waive the cash park fee for the 46 elderly units in order to encourage and promote that kind of housing. The City will get a higher rating for grants and assistance for parks which in turn will provide extra funds. The City Council considered this for this proposal and had no comment if this should be a "policy". Kruell commented that an _economic..study_._o-f_.this__type is too large for us £o resolve at this meeti nc?.____ 5 l R. Anderson noted that money from grants comes from several different ways and can be used by different places. If Eden Prairie did not use the grant money it would be used in some other place. Anderson also commented to the stand the City Council made regarding mini parks in the past. He did not want a situation where the commission approves something but then have it turned down by the City Council . MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Kruell , to ask the City Council to inform this Commission of the policy regarding subsidized housing units of Eden Prairie in regard to waiving or modifiying of cash park fees. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Fifeld, to table COR Investment until the next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. b. Olympic Hills 6th Larry Peterson, representing the Preserve and Olympic Hills, came before the commission to explain the revised Olympic Hills 6th project. The original proposed development was turned down by the City Council in fear the ultimate end would come for the golf course. Peterson assured the commission that there would be no Olympic Hills 7th or any other expansion into that area. He explained the areas involved and the proposed development. He noted that they eliminated lots and in the case the Olympic Hills Corp. could not continue operations as a golf course and is forced to offer the golf course property for sale, the Olympic Hills Corp. would give Eden Prairie a right of first refusal over any such sa1:e'. , Lambert stated that he had recently walked the path along the golf course anj fognd it was high e ou hh to remain,dr He felt it would link in we 1 with the othergpatn a► d a connectionyto the future Homeward Hills RBI, R. Anderson questioned if the soil was spongy. Minutes -Parks, Recreation & approved Dec. 17, 1979 Natural Resources Commission -4- Lambert said the soil was peat, 3' above marsh, 2' above water. They would only mow the area to begin with then place aggregate. He felt if there proved to be heavy bicycle usage, asphalt with a 4-6" base could be installed. Kruell asked if the plan was approved how many acres would be left and the number of holes for the golf course. He also asked if this could be approaching the minimum size. Peterson answered 18 holes with approximatly 160 acres. The size of the golf course would not be changing because it is being replaced from an area in the Preserve. The present golf course is a "championship designed course" according to Golf Digest. The architect hired for the alteration said it would be a better course since two problem holes would be changed. Tangen questioned the letterhead of Olympic Hills Golf Club dated Nov. 14 in regard to the owners of the club. Peterson explained the owners of Olympic Hills Golf Club are the directors listed on the letterhead. This club is privately owned with the membership paying an initiation fee but not owning shares or having voting priviledges. R. Anderson noted when the corporation came before the commission regarding the development of the golf course nothing was established regarding a development. Then the corporation offered the course for sale to the City C� but raised the price after the City was interested in the course. Tangen felt there should be some official vote for a reaction of the members. Peterson pointed out there was no vote called since the members have no voting priviledges but they had a meeting a year ago and explained the changes which would be incurred. Of the 275 members, approximately one half attended the meeting and had a mixed reaction. The corporation explained the economics, the fact that the course would have better and drier holes and that this would be done in such a way that play would not be interrupted. Tangen questioned if the architect is from this area. Peterson answered that the architect is from Chicago and if this project is approved he would be awarded the contract. Tangen asked if there was a preliminary plat of the new golf course since nothing has been presented. Peterson explained how the golf course would be layed out. Kruell asked if Outlot A in the revised plat would remain with the corporation. Peterson answered that the Outlot A would remian with the corporation. Tangen questioned if the tennis courts would be affected. e Peterson said that they would not be affected. kruell felt that constructing housing through the course as proposed would only make a poorer golf course and possibly establish a plan making it easier to convert the whole area to housing; but that it is private enterprise and should not be constrained from choosing it's destiny. Minutes - Parks, Recreation & ap roved Dec. 17, 1979 Natural Resources Commission - i Peterson answered that ultimately the members would own the club, and then it might be done. Fifield noted that dividing a golf course with a string of houses is not in the best interest of a golf course as a recreational resourse. However, since Olympic Hills is a privately owned facility, the owners should be free to take whatever steps they feel are appropriate in regards to the golf course. MOTION: Fifield moved to approve, "seconded- by_Kruell the Olypfif Hills 6th Addition. _ _ _ The approval would include the staff recommendations dated December 5, 1979. Fifield, Kruell , and Johnson voted "aye"; Tangen and R. Anderson voted "nay". Motion carried. 2. Review of 1979 Commission Business i Lambert noted his memo dated December 13, 1979. i 3. Council Report Lambert reviewed the Council meeting including items that Zachman will not be building in Hidden Glen. since they can't build the homes without garages. Dick Ferrick will go before the City Council tomorrow night in regard to this land. Creekview is continued to January 22nd. Willow Creek was approved. The park cash fee was waived for Prairie Village Professional Building. Eight million was approved for referundum. bonds for Cooperative Power. A 1980 LAWCON grant was approved. M.I.D.B. guidelines were discussed. The low bidder was awarded the bid for a water compressor for the Fire Dept. Snowmobile trails were approved for Bryant Lake. A committee was appointed for the building of the Community Center. j Sutton 1st Addition was approved. VI. OLD BUSINESS �. A. Brown Property - Purgatory Creek Lambert explained that the proposed Limited Warranty Deed from the Brown' s to the Metropolitan Parks Foundation had certain restrictions which could affect the City for future trails. He explained the City has a policy to preserve the Creek Corridor and a possible trailway in the future. Tangen asked if this item could be placed on the City Council agenda. Lambert said it could be put on since the owners want to donate the land before the end of the year. MOTION: Kruell moved, seconded by R. Anderson, that th City of Eden Prairie accept the Limited Warranty Deed .wit out tehe restrictive convenance. Motion carried unanimously. 1 AN. ± - Minutes - Parks, Recreation & .-approved Dec. 17, 1979 Natural Resources. Commission B. Tree Disease Program- Utilization Alternatives Lambert introduced Stu Fox, City Forester. Stu explained the problems regarding Dutch Elm Disease and how the City is handling them. Kruell mentioned that Dakota County had an aT.terra=te method for utilizing the wood. Stu said he was familiar with the operation and explained it to the commission and the cost factors involving this procedure. He noted that to get financial aid for these projects,, a certain population is _.-__ required. He pointed out that the Freshwater Biolooical.,.Institute .is_ Lambert noted the cost incurred by the City of Eden 'Prairie compared to the other cities. R. Anderson noted the problems of the land fills and the need for utilization of trees in this area. Kruell felt the wood chips could be used as a source for methane, etc. C. Trails R. Anderson said he was approached by School Board Members in regard to transportation problems with the children. They felt with the energy crisis it will be become necessary to expand good concentrated trail for transpor- tation and recreation. The City could be divided into sectors and the routes be developed according to natural barriors. Kruell felt they were reacting backwards in this development. The unbuilt-, areas are equally important as the built up. He asked Lambert how the Planning Dept. would feel if a policy would be set up. Lambert replied that you could not set up trails and streets before a development. Trail easements could be established as the project is developed. Presently, the City is advertising for an engineering technician to aid in this planning. a . .r Minutes - Park, Recreation & approved Dec. 17., 1979 Natural Resources Commission -7- R. Anderson felt this item should be a goal for 1980. D. Purgatory Creek Lambert said Stu Fox will take this item with the Engineering Dept. Kruell told Lambert the location of the problem and felt the creek was filling in from the road approximately 8" a year. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Goals 1930 Lambert felt the commission should set their goals for 1980 not the staff. R. Anderson said this should be put on the agenda for the next meeting with each member of the commission bringing in their ideas. B. Bluff Property Preservation Lambert explained that Darrell Peterson wants to sell his farm and is looking for alternatives since the land is difficult to develop from the Bluffs down. Dick Ferrick is working out a proposal for the area and has requested that the City or Mayor write a letter stating this is a proper use of property to the Dept. of Interiors. MOTION: Tangen moved to approve, seconded by Fifield, to recommend to the City that a letter be sent to the Dept. of Interiors. Motion carried unanimously. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Fifield moved to adjourn, seconded by R. Anderson. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Sharon Gagon Recording Secretary C AGENDA COMMUNITY CENTER COMMITTEE DECEMBER 27, 1979 7:00 P.M. , CITY HALL I. CALL TO ORDER II ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1979 IV. INFORMATION ON HIRING AN ARCHITECT - Gary Mahaffey V. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE A. Report on school criteria - Shaw B. List of other architectural firms involved in similar projects - Wigen C. Report on Soil Borings - Lambert D. Report on Federal Grants available for Community Center - Lambert E. Request for reports from Parks, Recreation and Natural Resouces Commission - Lambert VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Discuss procedures for hiring architect B. Approve questions for RFP's and establish schedule for accepting and reviewing RFP's C. Set next meeting VII. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED MINUTES COMMUNITY CENTER COMMITTEE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1979 7:00 P.M. , CITY HALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: David Osterholt, Chairperson; Dick Anderson, Richard Buretta, Arne Johnson, Robert Lambert, Lyle Shaw, Jerry Wigen I. CALL TO ORDER t Chairperson Osterholt called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. II. ROLL CALL All committee members were present. S III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 13, 1979 t ' MOTION: Wigen moved to approve the minutes as recorded, seconded by Shaw. Motion passed unanimously. IV. INFORMATION ON HIRING AN ARCHITECT r. Osterholt introduced Gary Mahaffey, The Leonard Park Associates, who presented information to the committee on the selection procedure of an architect. Mahaffey distributed an outline on information -their firm has been asked during the selection process (See Attached) . Mahaffey suggested a letter for proposals be sent to architects who have indicated interest in the project as well as any other firms the committee may be 'interested in. He suggested the proposals be reviewed by the committee ; and be eliminated to 4-6 for interviews. Mahaffey reported that the client normally negotiates fees with the selected architect and if these negotiations !$are unsuccessful you can open negotiations with the 2nd choice. Mahaffey suggested that there be a brief description of the project and the owner's objectives in the letter to the architects. Rs Mahaffey described various types of construction procedures with the committee. He indicated that a method called "Project Delivery Approach" could possibly save the City money. Wigen asked if this method can be used with public funds. Lambert will check with the City Attorney on this. Mahaffey gave Lambert a copy of the American Institute of Architects - Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect to refer to. Osterholt asked Mahaffey if the time schedule the committee had set up was reasonable. Mahaffey said that a February 1, 1980 deadline is probably too soon. Firms submitting a proposal need two weeks to respond to the RFP's and then approximately 1 week for personal interviews after the .firms have been narrowed down to 4-6. Mahaffey suggested that cost control could be determined through references of work the firm has done in the past five years. He also suggested checking on design excellence by having the firm demonstrate awards, citations, and special recognitions. Community Center Committee -2- December 27, 1979 Mahaffey said that the architect needs to know what kind of facility is to be constructed and how much work is to be done. Wigen asked if there was an advantage to work with someone who has experience in this type of facility. Mahaffey said there would be advantages but he felt the whole team of a firm should be considered even if they had not done this type of facility before. Osterholt asked for a ballpark figure for the architects fee. Mahaffey said this is difficult to answer as it depends of the complexity of the faciltity - new construction or remodelling, etc. i Osterholt asked that within an architectural firm what is a reasonable number of people to work on a given project. Mahaffey said 2 people with at some points in the projects up to 4 or S. Osterholt asked what is a reasonable time frame from the hiring of an architect to the finished construction. Mahaffey replied 14-16 months. Anderson asked where the architectural firms are today in regard to energy efficiency. Mahaffey said there are three factors involved - insulation, earth sheltering and intelligent use of energy. He suggested looking into an exchange of energy. Mahaffey also stated that an earth covered building is out of the question because it is too costly. V. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE 'I A. Report on school criteria - Shaw 1 1. Details for selling the City up to 3I acres of land at the Round Lake complex. Shaw reported that the space is available. 2. The State Department of Education approval in regard to rules J and regulations has been obtained in writing. 3. There is a meeting set up with the school architect on January 9th regarding material use, etc. A report will be available for the next meeting. { 4. Osterholt asked about parking - Johnson said this would have to be reviewed but that there is parking on the north side of the building. S. Anderson suggested that a description of what is needed to drawn up - Johnson and Lambert will work on this. 6. Anderson asked about the location of the arena facility. Shaw said the east side is the area that is being considered. 7. Existing wall - Johnson reported that the joists run the wrong way for a totally bearing wall, but the wall could support some. He also reported that the plumbing was not roughed in for a future pool in order to cut costs. AC Osterholt requested a drawing of the site for the next meeting. Community Center Committee -3- December 27, 1979 Anderson asked about the locker room space at the new high school. Johnson said he did not know the exact number and this would have to be checked into. Johnson stated that the access from to the locker rooms to the arena and pool area is good. Anderson asked how much excavation would have to be done at the school site. Johnson said that most of it has 'been done barring bad soil. B. List of other architectural firms involved in similar projects - Wigen. Wigen had only 2 firms that were not on the original list - Birkland Architects and Matson, Wegleilner and Abendrath Architects, Inc. Osterholt asked if only architectural firms from the Twin Cities area should be considered or if out of town firms should also be considered. Wigen felt the firms should be in the Twin City area. Anderson felt that the committee should take into consideration the length of time a firm would take to complete the project in the selection of an architect. C. Report on soil borings - Lambert Reports on the soil borings were distributed to the committee. Holes were dug 50' and 200' from the school building. There was nothing found that cannot be built on. It is possible that pockets of soft clay may be found after construction begins and this would have to be remedied at that time. D. Report on Federal Grants available for Community Center - Lambert Lambert reported that there are no federal grants available for this project. E. Request for reports from Parks, Recreation and Natural Resouces Commission - Lambert Rather than prepare a written report after each meeting for the Commission, the committee felt the unapproved minutes could be distributed to the Commission, Council and School Board as long as they are clearly marked Unapproved. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Discuss procedures for hiring architect Lambert felt that the selection procedures on the outline from Gary Mahaffey were adequate. The draft letter to the architects was approved with minor changes. A January 14, 1980 deadline was set up for return of RFP's. Community Center Committee -4- December 27, 1979 The committee discussed the need for seven copies of the proposal. It was decided that each committee member should have one to review. Osterholt suggested a rating system be set up for use in reviewing the RFP's. C. Set next meeting The next meeting is scheduled for January 16, 1980 at 7:00 p.m. VII" ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Marlys Dahl . Recording Secretary C I. ARCHITECT SELECTION PROCEDURE (Normal) Date A. Letter to Architects B. Receive Proposals C. Evaluate Proposals & prepare "short list" for interview, notify unsuccessful respondents D. Interview short list (advise architects of location and time allowed for interview - recommend 1 hr) E. Final deliberations and evaluations, selection F. Notify unsuccessful respondents of "lst choice" selection G. Negotiate fees with selected architect H. If negotiations are unsuccessful open negotiations with "2nd choice" i II. CONTENTS OF LETTER TO ARCHITECTS (Request for Proposal) A. Brief description of project and owner's objectives. B. Project schedule and cost parameters C. Outline architectural selection procedure and schedule. D. Identify issues or questions Eden Prairie wishes respondent architects to address. E. Identify owner contact (for questions and answers during proposal preparation period) F. Identify recipient and address for.• delivery of proposals. • i III. QUESTIONS TO RESPONDENTS A. Provide a description of your firm: History 's - Philosophy, objectives, commitments } - Table of organization - Breakdown of staff by race; sex, utilization of women and minorities B. Provide a description of the team proposed for this project: - Key people committed - Consultants by discipline•• t - Team organization - Key personnel resumes C. Demonstrate your ability to perform the work of this project thru a presentation of the following aspects of your firm: - Schedule: History of adherence to owner's schedules, current work in progress, ability to maintain project schedule. - Cost control: Historical results, methods and techniques. - Design excellence: Technical competence, quality of results, awards, citations, special recognitions. y D. Familiarize the selection committee with your past work through a. brief presentation of the following: - General experience and client survey (past projects and work in progress) - Specific experience related to this project (include information , on the experience of any proposed consultants) E. Project definition: Discuss your perception of the project through a presentation addressing the following areas of concern: - Project delivery approach, methodology, etc. - Special project issues (energy, cost, etc. ) - Special expertise or unique qualifications required. F. A/E Fees: Discuss the basis for architectural and engineering fees under which your firm is willing to enter into an agreement a, for the work of this project. j G. Financial stability of firm 1 - Current financial statement - Bank affiliation s H. Provide references and •letters of recommendation. I I. Contact: Name, title, address and telephone number of individual(s) with authority to negotiate and contractually bind the company, and 3 who should be contacted during the period of proposal evaluation. 7 e