Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forest Lake council presses consultants to trim $48.8M public works facility proposal
Summary
Consultants presented a schematic design for a consolidated Public Works facility (about 119,000 sq ft) with a schematic estimate near $48.8 million; council favored options that reduce cold-storage footprint and material costs and asked staff to pursue a $35M—$40M target and bring alternates back for bid-day decisions.
Consultants from Wold and KA presented schematic designs and cost estimates for a consolidated Forest Lake Public Works facility, and council members pressed for cost reductions and clearer budget targets.
Jonathan (Wold) summarized the program and site constraints and reported the schematic estimate: "So, again, currently, we're at about that 48,800,000.0," he said, describing a project that grows to roughly 119,000 square feet in the full 20-year build-out concept. KA's facility condition assessment documented roughly $4.6 million in deferred maintenance across six existing public-works facilities and recommended consolidation in part because some buildings are in critical condition.
The design includes office space, division workshops, multiple mechanics bays, a wash bay, a mezzanine for building systems and a cold-storage building for seasonal equipment. Consultants told the council that cold storage sized at roughly 16,000 square feet accounted for about $4 million of the schematic price; resizing to about 10,000 square feet could cut roughly $900,000 from the total. The core planning group's recommendation was option 3b: retain cold storage as a pre-engineered metal building (PEMB) while reducing maintenance space.
Council members and staff discussed trade-offs: maintaining future expandability, meeting operational needs (lube rooms, parts storage, shops), waiving internal permit/utility fees for the city project and using alternates at bid day to preserve options. Several members favored carrying cold storage as a bid alternate so the city can decide at bid day whether to build the larger facility. Jonathan and KA emphasized that many material and soft-cost choices will be refined in design development and that bringing a construction manager on early can reduce contingency and improve bid competitiveness.
On delivery methods, consultants explained options and trade-offs: low-bid general contracting, construction-manager-as-agent (CMA), and construction-manager-at-risk (CMAR). They noted CMAR/CMA add transparency and prequalification controls but can increase bonding and insurance costs (roughly a 1% bond and 1% insurance factor on large projects) and add consultant/management fees.
Council direction: members indicated a preference for keeping the schematic layout's operational components while pursuing options to reduce cost toward a $35M—$40M target and asked staff and the steering group to refine alternates, value-management options and schedule before returning with a recommended path into design development.
