Minutes of The Price Redevelopment Agency

City Hall: Price, Utah


April 22, 1998, 6:45 p.m.

Present

Boardmembers: Roy A. Nikas, Betty P. Wheeler, Joe L. Piccolo, Stephen L. Denison
Vernon W. Jones (Exec. Director), Pat Larsen, Gary Sonntag, Aleck Shilaos

Excused: Chairman Lou Colosimo, Joanne Lessar, Nick Sampinos

Others Present: Dal Hansen

1. CHAIRMAN PROTEMPORE - Boardmember Roy A. Nikas

MOTION. As Chairman Lou Colosimo is absent, Boardmember Piccolo moved that Boardmember Roy A. Nikas be appointed as Chairman Protempore. Motion seconded by Boardmember Wheeler and carried.

2. MINUTES - April 8, 1998

MOTION. Boardmember Piccolo moved that the minutes of the April 8, 1998 meeting be approved as written. Motion seconded by Boardmember Wheeler and carried.

3. DAVIS PHOTOGRAPHY AND GALLERY FRAMING - 79 West Main, Restoration and Revitalization Grants - Concept Approval

Vern Jones reported that Scott and Susan Davis (Davis Photography and Gallery Framing) have purchased The Gallery, 79 West Main, and plan to renovate portions of the building. They have submitted a requests for an Extended Rstoration Grant with project costs of $3,000 and a Revitalization Grant with project costs in the amount of $1,900.00. They plan to remodel the store, including the basement, and will update restorm fixtures to comply with ADA requirements. The Redevelopment Agency's share would be 1/3 of that total. MOTION. Boardmember Piccolo moved that concept approval be given to the Davis Photography and Gallery Framing for Restoration and Revitalization grants. Motion seconded by Boardmember Denison and carried.

4. PRICE MAIN STREET DOWNTOWN SIDEWALK AND LIGHTING PROJECT - Committee Report

Gary Sonntag reported that the committee met to review the bids received for the Price Main Street Downtown Sidewalk and Lighting Project. B. Hansen Construction's bid was $131,143.80 and Southeast Blasting was $137,193.50. There were some mathematical errors in Southeast Blasting's bid and their corrected total is $134,448.25. Southeast Blasting did not submit a bid bond. B. Hansen submitted a bid bond but did not sign it. The engineer's estimate was $116,309.00. In comparison, this places the two bids in excess of 10% of the engineer's estimate. Gary stated that one of the items that concerned the committee was the difference between the engineer's estimate and the bids that were received. As a rule of thumb and in other organizations, anytime a bid exceeds 10% over the engineer's estimate, it is thrown out. The committee discussed and contemplated whether it would be in the Agency's best interest in this case to re-evaluate the project and rebid it. Chairman Protem Nikas stated that the budget of the Redevelopment Agency expires June 30 of this fiscal year. Research is being conducted as to exactly what that means to the commitment of the funds, whether it involves contractural arrangements or the actual payout. Boardmember Denison stated that other concerns of the committtee was that if the total project falls within what is budgeted. The total project is not within the Redevelopment Agency. The area under the underpass and as it continues onto Carbonville Road is not within the Agency's boundaries. This portion would have to be funded under Price City. Chairman Protem Nikas stated that the other issue is that Utah Power & Light has not confirmed figures with regards to the street lights. There was concern that if the Redevelopment Agency went ahead with the project, either overbudget or not, without those firm figures, it might exceed the proposed budget of the Electric Department of Price City.

Chairman Protem Nikas stated that one of the options is to give the committee the authority to confirm the electrical costs with Utah Power and make a decision whether that fits within the budget that has been set. Secondly, because RDA funds cannot be spent in a non-project RDA area, the project would have to be adjusted or rebid. Boardmember Piccolo stated that he sees a risk of losing the whole project by having to rebid it. The project may have to be shortened as it is overbudgeted, or it may have to be thrown out. He questioned if it would be fair to shorten the project after it is already bid.

Dal Hansen, owner of B. Hansen Construction, stated that he has been in business for twenty years and as far as the issue of the 10%, it is the rule of thumb. He referred to 4 different projects he has bid in the past few weeks. One of those was under the engineers estimate by 40% and the bid was awarded and one where he has been above by 50%. The engineer's estimates do make some of the calls, but on this particular job, it has less than a 10% profit margin. He can provide supplier information and the costs involved. As far as the bid bond, once they are issued they are intact. As far as cutting the job back, the way the job is written is on a square footage basis, so you can pick and choose whatever you want. The prices are already established on the bid form. You can take any section of the job and add to it or eliminate from it. Chairman Protem Nikas stated that another concern is if the project is cut back to a lower level, if it is fair to those contractors that didn't bid in the first place because their bid limit might have been lower that the engineer's estimate. Boardmember Piccolo recommended that the committee seek the electrical costs, put the project into the proper scope and then re-review it before it is thrown out. The two bids can then be compared, see where the project comes out and if it happens to come out over just a $100,000, then we don't have the problem; consider all aspects before it is thrown out. Pat Larsen stated that there is a possibility that the RDA can participate in the electrical costs along Main Street. Gary Sonntag stated that this is a 60 day project and it would have to be completed by the end of June in order to use RDA funds. The Board directed that the committee go back and review the plans and provide a final report at the special meeting scheduled for April 28th.

MOTION. Boardmember Denison moved that the Redevelopment Agency Meeting adjourn and that the Council Meeting reconvene. Motion seconded by Boardmember Piccolo and carried.

Meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m.