[0:31] 3Play Media Captioner Present Planning development

[4:16] environmental Committee meeting planning development

[4:18] and environmental Committee to order.

[4:20] Open forum.

[4:21] I don't have any cards but if there

[4:23] is somebody who would like to comment

[4:25] please come to the podium and then we

[4:28] will have you fill something out.

[4:31] Not seeing any.

[4:32] There is no introductions come up public presentations

[4:34] come up public hearings.

[4:36] Open forum is officially closed.

[4:39] Consent.

[4:40] You have the consent in front of you.

[4:44] Reports.

[4:44] It is received request.

[4:51] I am sorry an purchase order approvals.

[4:55] Does anybody have any questions on any of these

[4:58] that they would like to be Brought down?

[5:01] If not roll call.

[5:07] Thank you thank you.

[5:10] Moved in Second all in favor?

[5:15] I. Passed.

[5:16] We are going to run into business.

[5:20] We've got a big agenda today.

[5:21] We are going to take these individually.

[5:24] You may want to have do you want a seat?

[5:27] Since you are going to be up there for a while?

[5:31] Thank you chair.

[5:33] The good news is I get to sit down

[5:35] and come back up a couple of times.

[5:37] >> What we are going to do is as I said we will start with 3.1

[6:34] capital Improvement program adjustment.

[6:35] Shorter than the person that was here

[6:35] last time I'm a little bit shorter than the person that

[6:35] was here last time.

[6:35] Good morning everyone.

[6:35] I hope you all had a good long holiday weekend.

[6:35] I'm Ashley Vlasic I'm a senior project manager with Airport

[6:35] Development.

[6:35] I am here today to talk to capital improvement program

[6:35] adjustment for the 2026 34th Avenue Sanitary Sewer

[6:35] Replacement.

[6:35] This project is currently in design.

[6:35] Replaces and installs new sanitary sewer line that runs

[6:35] through the parking lots off of 34th Avenue kind of next

[6:35] to terminal two.

[6:35] You can see it in the red line here.

[6:35] During design the project found that the existing sewer

[6:35] would require some additional digging to repair the sewer.

[6:35] When we created the CIP originally we didn't know how

[6:35] deep the sewer was so now that we are in design they do this

[6:36] thing called Potholing where they check different parts

[6:36] of the sewer to really get the existing conditions verified

[6:36] and we found that it's deeper than we originally anticipated

[6:36] so we are requesting ahead of the bid an additional $1,500,000

[6:39] to be added to the CIP so the project can be left forbidding

[6:45] in October.

[6:46] The action requested today is recommended the full commission

[6:49] increase the CIP budget for the 2026 34th Avenue Sanitary Sewer

[6:53] Replacement project to $4,600,000 in authorized

[6:56] the Executive Director and CEO need to execute the necessary

[7:01] documents.

[7:02] Questions?

[7:03] >> Any questions?

[7:35] Can I get a motion and a second?

[8:17] Moved by Chair Lawrence.

[8:18] Second by Commissioner Beeson.

[8:18] All in favor say aye.

[8:18] All opposed motion passes?

[8:18] Thank you.

[8:19] >> Great still me still me.

[8:38] 3.2 we have our project budget adjustment for the 2024 Safety

[8:41] and Security Center also called the SW phase two.

[8:41] The purpose of this project is really

[8:41] to build a consolidated effort for emergency operations

[8:41] here in MSP in a collaborative location.

[8:41] We are combining our police department fire department

[8:41] emergency operations and communications project.

[8:41] This project also is pursuing Leed certification which aligns

[8:41] with Max sustainability goals.

[8:41] If you remember the first phase of the project

[8:41] was the fire station.

[8:41] The new fire station has finished

[8:41] construction in the firefighters are using it now.

[8:41] And then out phase two is the big building.

[8:41] Safety and Security center portion

[8:41] attached to the fire station.

[8:41] The original CIP is 165 million period

[8:41] the project budget is currently $113 million.

[8:41] Since the project has progressed additional work

[8:41] has been identified that wasn't included that we

[8:41] didn't know about at the time.

[8:41] Final f a height restrictions.

[8:41] This is a submission that we put forward to the FAA

[8:41] for final height approval.

[8:41] We had to do some adjustments after we bid the project which

[8:41] required some schedule extensions and some changes

[8:41] to our third floor.

[8:41] This is really just because the building

[8:41] is very close to the tower so it was something

[8:41] we didn't know during design.

[8:42] We also found additional contaminated soils

[8:44] which will cause us to have to remove additional soils that we

[8:47] weren't anticipating.

[8:48] We've also seen additional waterproofing

[8:50] needed for the building based on the condition of these soils.

[8:54] That added some additional funding

[8:55] and scheduled to the project.

[8:57] We've also seen because of the soils increased generator

[9:01] concrete pad requirements and some electrical gear

[9:03] modifications to the project as well.

[9:05] This project is over a period of many years.

[9:09] The IT infrastructure was also added to the project

[9:12] to support the ongoing changes in technology

[9:15] for the emergency operations staff.

[9:16] We've added that to stay current with what was originally

[9:20] bid as the technology for their work is increasing every day.

[9:24] We're asking every day to increase the budget

[9:27] by $4,500,000 which fits within the approved capital.

[9:30] So our action today is to recommend that the full

[9:33] commission increase the project budget for the 2024 Safety

[9:36] and Security Center phase to two 117,600,000 and authorized

[9:42] the Executive Director CEO as his need to execute

[9:46] the necessary documents.

[9:47] Questions?

[9:50] >> Commissioner Lawrence.

[11:37] >> Thank you.

[11:38] I may have misheard this earlier but I

[11:40] think you said it was within the estimated CIP?

[11:42] >> That is correct Commissioner.

[11:50] >> I've often heard with these projects when there is

[11:54] an additional slice like this but actually the approval was

[11:54] for an amount which therefore the slice would not take it

[11:54] over.

[11:54] Is this a slice which comes out of the original larger budget

[11:54] or is it as in the totality of the CIP

[11:54] that there is room for it?

[11:55] >> Great question period this does not increase the overall

[12:24] CIP or the CIP for the project.

[12:25] We are just moving money into the project budget.

[12:25] I have a question.

[12:25] On the f a the height issue was that because we

[12:25] needed to change something that the FAA said

[12:25] was not good on our end?

[12:26] >> Bridget I will leave that to you.

[12:50] >> Thank you Ashley.

[12:52] Mr. Chair and Commissioner so the relationship

[12:54] with this particular project and the FAA is quite complicated.

[12:54] The building does create some obstructions

[12:54] to some of the FAA radio network.

[12:54] We have had in our opinion resolved that before we even

[12:54] started the project.

[12:54] When we came back the final design

[12:54] a few changes had been made and we wanted to resubmit

[12:54] and then the FAA came back a second time

[12:54] and said oh wait actually what you did before actually

[12:54] didn't solve the problem.

[12:54] We are working with the FAA separate from this project

[12:54] to resolve those obstruction issues

[12:54] that this building will create.

[12:54] We modify the building in accommodation

[12:54] with our original plan and the original response from the FAA.

[12:54] Whether or not it ultimately degrades the signals

[12:54] more so than it did before is yet

[12:54] to be seen but we are working with them

[12:54] because we have quite honestly obstructions around the campus.

[12:54] We have development we want to do

[12:54] that will create other obstructions to the radio

[12:54] network and so we really need to solve it holistically

[12:54] rather than one project at a time period

[12:54] that is why it is separate from us.

[12:54] The changes that were made after the bid

[12:54] came directly from the FAA second review period something

[12:54] that we had to do.

[12:55] >> I appreciate the answer and I appreciate your good

[14:17] relationships with our partners at the FAA given the fact that

[14:20] this is going to be a bigger issue so thank you any other

[14:20] questions?

[14:20] I see none can I get a motion to approve?

[14:20] Move by Commissioner O'neill and Commissioner Howard.

[14:20] I'm sorry.

[14:20] All in favor say I. Pose motion passes..

[14:20] We can move to the next order of business.

[14:20] 3.3 and we will take all three of these individually.

[14:22] >> Good morning.

[14:44] My name is Chris Roy I work in airport development

[15:06] and I've got two items here in front of you the first one is

[15:08] going to be the recommendation to award

[15:08] mechanical electrical plumbing technology design

[15:08] continue and consult. Continue and consultants

[15:08] is a program that we use where we hire in this case

[15:08] a couple of firms to be able to draw upon them over the course

[15:08] of a five year period.

[15:08] Individual work item scope some work against the master contract

[15:08] that continue a consultant contract

[15:08] and what we do work on individual projects that way.

[15:08] By doing it like this we are able to have some consistency

[15:08] for a period of time with those consulting firms

[15:08] and they start to get to know us.

[15:08] They get to understand our requirements

[15:08] and I think overall it just produces a better project.

[15:08] So today we are going to make a recommendation

[15:08] to forward three firms into this mechanical electrical plumbing

[15:08] and technology continuum consultant contract.

[15:08] Those firms are Emek Mashhad and the last one is WSP.

[15:08] A little bit about the timeline.

[15:08] We came in front of the commission

[15:08] back in May looking for that ability

[15:08] to post those rfqs which we did do and back in June.

[15:08] The proposals were due at the end of June

[15:08] and then we went through a deliberation.

[15:08] We reviewed those technical proposals

[15:08] and then based on the technical proposals

[15:08] we did create a short list and we asked those shortlisted firms

[15:08] to come on in for an interview in August.

[15:08] Based on the interview and the technical score in the proposals

[15:08] we have advanced those three names for recommendation

[15:08] for approval.

[15:08] The review team is made up of the individuals here.

[15:08] I would really like to thank the individuals that did volunteer

[15:08] to be on the selection committee.

[15:08] It takes quite a bit of time to go through those proposals.

[15:09] A lot of times you are busy with other things at work

[15:09] so it happens outside of normal work hours

[15:09] when we are doing that review.

[15:09] I really appreciate their efforts and ability

[15:09] to be on the selection committee.

[15:09] So with this particular RFQ we did receive eight proposals.

[15:09] Those firms were both national and local firms.

[15:09] Most of the national firms also have a local office

[15:09] but based on the proposals we were able to shortlist down

[15:09] to three firms.

[15:09] The three firms that we shortlisted

[15:09] were just kind of standing out from the rest of the bunch.

[15:09] They had some familiarity with working at airports working

[15:11] at 24 over seven operations.

[15:13] They also had a much larger presence

[15:15] so they were able to get to the MSP

[15:17] very quickly if we ever needed that situation where it would be

[15:21] a fair meeting an onsite meeting or maybe we had an emergency

[15:24] response that we needed.

[15:26] These three firms had that local presence

[15:28] that we really felt quite important

[15:31] and we went to the interview there.

[15:35] Based on the interview we saw that those three teams all

[15:41] of them had specialty characteristics that really

[15:44] would serve the very well so therefore we took all three

[15:47] of them and are advancing them forward and making

[15:50] this recommendation to the full commission to select I

[15:53] MiG S E and WSP as our continuing consultants

[15:56] to provide mechanical electrical plumbing and technology

[15:58] engineering consulting services for a term of up to five years.

[16:02] The second requested action is to authorize

[16:05] the second Executive director CEO to execute

[16:08] the necessary documents.

[16:09] With that if there are any questions

[16:12] I am certainly happy to.

[19:16] >> First you showed a couple of pictures of stuff.

[19:18] These guys don't do this stuff?

[19:18] They advise how much it is going to cost to do this stuff

[19:18] and they advise when something has gone wrong

[19:18] when opposed to the person originally put into it?

[19:20] Is that the role?

[19:40] >> Absolutely.

[19:41] The purpose of this contract is to do

[19:41] the design of the stuff in the pictures

[19:41] and then they also do some contract administration

[19:41] so they do the inspection for us to make sure that the contractor

[19:41] separate contract is installing it correctly and doing it

[19:41] as per the plans and specs that these firms would

[19:41] have developed.

[19:42] >> As you heard earlier they would help us out of cost put

[20:04] a little slack in but put the slack in and then it is in fact

[20:06] the slack gets used.

[20:06] We get told like we just did that it is still

[20:08] within that first circle

[20:33] >> Commissioner.

[20:34] Yes.

[20:34] What these firms will do is put together construction estimate

[20:34] period they are using their best ability to put that cost

[20:34] together the actual cost to.

[20:34] Knowing that there is differences in market conditions

[20:34] and bidding day environment tariffs

[20:34] or whatever else might be going on most

[20:34] of the time in that estimate there is some contingency.

[20:34] We use that as our engineer's estimate

[20:34] to compare against the bids that we receive when we open bids.

[20:37] >> The bids are familiar within the rules of the state for so it

[21:05] is outside of those rules?

[21:06] The second and you don't have to do that for these today

[21:06] but I will just say in general we looked

[21:06] at local and national firms and three of them

[21:06] are clearly better than anybody else.

[21:06] It would be useful to not just say

[21:06] and therefore since we haven't done all of the things

[21:06] you guys should prove I am e.g.

[21:06] And CEWSP.

[21:06] It would be helpful to know are they local or are they national?

[21:06] If they are national do they have local branches?

[21:06] Whether they are local or national and people are there.

[21:06] What made them so much better than anybody else?

[21:06] If you other things.

[21:06] I know more than you have done a terrific job

[21:06] until you got to the point of telling

[21:06] we should vote on I MEGWSP.

[21:06] Not for this let me just check with p G and e committee.

[21:06] Think that's a good idea?

[21:07] >> I'm going to turn it over to Bridget.

[22:35] I think we've got this solved already.

[22:36] >> In your packets you have a not memo which will provide some

[22:40] of that information that you are looking for.

[22:42] It is our way of sharing a little bit more of the behind

[22:42] the scenes information with you that we wouldn't generally

[22:42] talk about in front of the public

[22:42] unless you ask us a specific question about it

[22:42] you are free to do that but just make it aware

[22:42] that you are provided some of that additional information.

[22:45] >> If I could add put two chair Lawrence's comments I would also

[23:06] like the public to know the number of things that the chair

[23:09] brought up I think even if it is in a not memo it would be a good

[23:12] idea for us to know who these folks are.

[23:28] >> First of all I apologize I did not read it sufficiently

[23:30] thoroughly to know that some my question was already addressed

[23:30] but also I agree some of this should be made public but I

[23:30] would feel confident in management to make

[23:30] the distinction of what might be competitive disadvantage

[23:30] for other firms as opposed to simply saying here are

[23:30] the answers of these questions.

[23:32] >> The last time I looked you our management so we will take

[24:06] that under advisement

[24:10] >> Just to clear up some confusion Chair Lawrence.

[24:12] The reasons as to why there is a selection process under the data

[24:12] practices that is still not public data.

[24:12] Once the selection and the contract

[24:12] gets signed within the parties then

[24:12] that data will become available to anybody that

[24:12] asks for it from the public but because it is still

[24:12] right now not public data it is provided

[24:12] in the public packets of that nature it comes separately.

[24:12] If there is something you want to talk about on the memo

[24:12] you have the ability to talk about that

[24:12] in that fashion at the public meeting here

[24:12] but it will become public after everything gets signed.

[24:14] >> Thank you.

[24:33] That is useful.

[24:53] Not to excuse myself but having been on some other boards

[24:55] when you get this many board papers is often

[24:55] the case that not line by line you

[24:55] will ask the question which has already been answered.

[24:55] Again nothing suggesting this is happening

[24:55] here or in particular this one but again I have seen instances

[24:55] where management would rather the board

[24:55] not see certain details and so it is often

[24:55] helpful to have an executive summary which says

[24:55] here are some of the important things

[24:55] that you will be sure to want to read the whole thing.

[24:55] Just a thought for management.

[24:56] >> I have one more suggestion if we could.

[25:49] The group that reviewed this it's terrific

[25:51] but also there is a lot of expertise on the board.

[25:51] I would say Commissioner O'neill Commissioner school Commissioner

[25:51] Crimson in particular when it comes to these labor

[25:51] type of things and I know we are going

[25:51] to deal with a new policy in the future as far as consultants

[25:51] but I would hope that the staff in the future

[25:51] would reach out to these folks and allow them

[25:51] a right of first refusal to participate because I

[25:51] do think that it would be helpful to have a commission

[25:51] member be on these kind of things.

[25:51] I am all for the deal.

[25:51] Anything else anything else?

[25:52] >> If I May the 3rd firms that we selected are national firms

[26:39] but they have a local office and in fact WSP has partnered with

[26:41] another local firm to provide us with that team approach so there

[26:41] is a lot of local staff it will be nearly exclusively local

[26:41] staff working on our projects.

[26:41] On the other hand MSK or MCE is a local firm

[26:43] and they are headquartered out of Minneapolis.

[27:13] >> Any other questions or concerns?

[27:15] Somebody like to move the item?

[27:15] Move by Commissioner Hoard Commissioner Skoog.

[27:15] All in favor?

[27:15] All opposed?

[27:15] Motion passes.

[27:15] Thanks.

[27:15] We are going to move to the next item.

[27:16] >> Very similar but for a different purpose this time we

[27:40] are looking for the architectural continuing

[27:42] consultant so this would be the design services of our buildings

[27:42] and our facilities putting together those plans and specs.

[27:42] That is what we are looking for at the consultant

[27:42] services under this contract.

[27:42] In this case we would like to recommend

[27:42] the selection of the following three architects

[27:42] Alliance in Millard Dunwoody.

[27:42] We went with three firms this time because of the growing CIP

[27:42] we've got more projects than ever.

[27:42] The complexity of the projects is changing as well.

[27:42] We have got different requirements

[27:42] that are coming on board not only in the building

[27:42] codes but also just overall sustainability

[27:42] and being able to be more responsive to the requirements

[27:42] that are being placed on our buildings and our construction

[27:42] projects.

[27:42] A lot of our projects are also rehabilitation projects

[27:42] so they are not brand new projects they are instead

[27:42] going into a part of our terminal

[27:42] or another building they are repairing something

[27:42] they are remodeling.

[27:42] Require a little bit more time and more investigation

[27:42] and require some additional thought

[27:42] about how can you actually build this new park into the existing

[27:42] structure.

[27:42] Therefore we thought that having a little bit deeper abilities

[27:42] in selecting from three teams would give us

[27:42] that staff that we are really looking forward

[27:42] to make sure we get the right number of people

[27:42] available at any one time to work on our projects.

[27:42] Very similar timeline to the last timeline

[27:42] we did the posting of the RFQ in June

[27:42] the proposals were due at the end of June

[27:42] and then we did that panel deliberation

[27:42] in the middle of July with interviews being in August

[27:42] and now looking for that commission approval

[27:42] and then entering into contract negotiations.

[27:42] If the approval is made later this month.

[27:42] Again the review team very same thing.

[27:42] A lot of these people I would really

[27:42] like to thank them for their help

[27:42] in reviewing the proposals we received eight proposals here as

[27:42] well and it takes time to do that so I really

[27:42] appreciate their effort and diligence

[27:42] in reviewing the proposals and helping us with the selection.

[27:42] Not only that it is also a good cross-section of Mac.

[27:42] We are able to get in the different opinions of what

[27:42] makes a good architect.

[27:42] What are they looking for it is a very review team

[27:42] to be able to get those differing opinions

[27:42] and hint to the selection.

[27:42] With the statement of qualifications

[27:42] we received eight proposals and based on those eight proposals

[27:42] we felt that five of them are far enough above the others

[27:42] to come in for an interview and what we were looking for

[27:42] and why we went to those five was their familiarity

[27:42] with working at an airport or other 24 over seven operations.

[27:42] Right here in Minneapolis that would be able to serve us.

[27:42] We have looked at their abilities of their key staff.

[27:42] How much experience did they have overall?

[27:42] Did they have the right type of experience

[27:42] that we were looking for.

[27:42] Those are the kind of things that we

[27:42] are evaluating when we ask those five to come on

[27:42] in for an interview.

[27:42] Based on the interview we were able to narrow it down to three

[27:42] and we felt that the three that we selected Alliance Meat

[27:43] and Hunt and Millard Dunwoody were the three that were going

[27:43] to provide us the best service.

[27:43] They all have local offices right here

[27:43] in the Minneapolis Saint Paul area.

[27:43] National firm hunt is a national firm

[27:43] but they have a very strong local presence they also

[27:45] partnered with a local firm on in the Minn is going

[29:39] to be coming out of exclusive staff

[32:12] for our projects is going to be coming out of the Minneapolis

[32:15] Saint Paul area.

[32:15] So so therefore we have got a couple of actions requested.

[32:15] The two that are up on the screen

[32:15] the first one being to recommend to the full commission

[32:15] ratify the selection of Alliance Miller Dunwoody as continuing

[32:15] consultants to provide architecture consultant services

[32:15] for a term up to six years and to authorize executive director

[32:15] CEO the necessary documents.

[32:15] With that if there is any questions

[32:15] I would be happy to try and answer.

[32:16] >> I have a question.

[32:48] When they contract are they going is it

[32:52] a smaller firm is it allowing us to meet some standard

[32:55] to give some businesses to others that would probably not

[32:55] have that opportunity.

[32:56] Is that the >> A lot of times that

[33:14] is the case in this particular case it is a smaller firm

[33:16] but it's a firm that has a little different specialty.

[33:16] They are a little bit more of a creative architect

[33:16] so if we've got a situation where the project is really

[33:16] requiring that they are able to draw upon that other firm

[33:16] to help us out and come up with those creative solutions.

[33:16] Sometime it is to be able to hit some of the small business

[33:16] requirements.

[33:16] Other times it would be there for just

[33:16] making sure they are complementing their services

[33:18] offered to us.

[33:51] Any questions Commissioner Gardner.

[33:52] >> Thank you Mr. Chair.

[33:55] At providing services to the out state systems.

[33:57] they are new to the pool. we prior experiences with them

[33:57] directly at MSP? would so but can you put a color that?

[34:00] >> Thank you for the question but I'm going to have to turn

[34:23] to Bridget to help me out on that one.

[34:24] Manhunt is with us today they are providing services

[34:24] on our continuation planning and they will be presenting

[34:24] to us a little bit later.

[34:24] Yes we have direct I will say that the team that was submitted

[34:24] in the proposal is completely different than the planning team

[34:24] so Mead and Hunt is a large enough firm where

[34:26] it is a completely different set of team >>

[35:01] Thank you Commissioner O'neill.

[35:02] >> The last item was a contract for five years this is for six.

[35:05] What is the reason for the difference?

[35:07] >> So Mac has a consultant policy that limits the number

[35:16] of years up to six years.

[35:17] That is what we did for this one to give us

[35:17] that greatest flexibility.

[35:17] The previous one last year we hired met firms as well

[35:17] and we did that for a six year selection period

[35:17] this year we did for a five year selection so that all of them

[35:17] are up in the exact same year.

[35:17] It's really just a kind of marry up and make

[35:17] sure we do the one selection five years from now as opposed

[35:19] to having it staggered again.

[35:53] >> Any other questions?

[35:54] Do I have a motion and a second?

[35:54] Commissioner garden and Commissioner Skoog?

[35:54] All in favor?

[35:54] Opposed?

[35:54] Motion passes.

[35:54] Now we will move to something that is pretty unique.

[35:54] We are changing the way we are doing some business

[35:54] and I think it is going to take a little time

[35:54] and we can ask questions as needed

[35:54] but it may be useful to hold them until the end.

[35:54] Morning everyone again I'm Ashley Vlasic a senior project

[35:54] good morning everyone.

[35:54] Good to see you all again.

[35:54] I have with me Jon Kedrowski Associate general counsel from

[35:54] Legal Affairs..

[35:54] Today we are going to talk about a recommendation to award

[35:54] terminal one expansion construction manager

[35:54] Preconstruction and Construction services contract.

[35:54] I would like to start with this opening slide.

[35:54] I know we have a few new commissioners

[35:54] since the last time we talked about this project delivery

[35:54] method so I thought I would start with an overview.

[35:54] What you are seeing here on the screen on the left hand

[35:54] side is the original management center that

[35:54] is our central utility plant that provides all of the heating

[35:54] and cooling for all of MSP and our parking ramps

[35:54] here at terminal one terminal two has its own separate plant.

[35:54] You can see it in this circle when the airport opened.

[35:54] Central plant today we have built all of concourse C

[35:54] and just continued along on a concourse

[35:54] and B concourse to surround the central plan

[35:54] period MSP has seen tremendous growth since the airport opened.

[35:54] We are very excited to share the next phase of the Energy

[35:54] Management Center with you all.

[35:54] Since its opening it has been more than 60 years

[35:54] the MC equipment is nearing its end of life.

[35:54] Our energy Management Center staff

[35:54] our Chief Engineer Travis and his group

[35:54] has done a fantastic job of keeping this equipment

[35:54] maintained as long as it has been.

[35:54] Since we have expanded the heating and cooling requirements

[35:54] of MSP quite dramatically you can

[35:54] see it here again circled in this little tiny building

[35:54] surrounded by concourse C in red.

[35:54] It is time to grow the plant for the appropriate amount

[35:54] of heating and cooling that we need today

[35:54] and that we are going to need in the future.

[35:54] In 2023 knowing that this was coming we

[35:54] did a study to validate the central plant location.

[35:54] We looked at its current location

[35:54] we looked at other areas should we move it

[35:54] off airfield to another part of the area parking ramps.

[35:54] We looked at the whole long term plan

[35:54] and we eventually decided that it is currently

[35:54] in its right location.

[35:54] What that told us is we needed to renovate and expand

[35:54] the plan in place.

[35:54] Right now we have a $480 million CIP

[35:54] that you all approved for this process back in December.

[35:54] Planning and design is in process.

[35:54] We anticipate an enabling construction project

[35:54] that has fueling line moves for the airlines

[35:54] for some concrete work kind of happening

[35:54] to prep this project in 2027 period

[35:54] with the start of construction in 2028

[35:54] with final completion somewhere in 2032.

[35:56] The project scope is expand the energy Man for the equipment

[39:41] we're going to be replacing all of the heating and cooling

[39:43] systems within the central plant in phases um the MC itself grows

[39:43] by about 60% and what that 60% is is um appropriate size

[39:43] equipment not only for the equipment itself but also

[39:43] the space around the equipment so that our staff can access

[39:43] for repairs today we have that problem where a lot

[39:43] of the equipment is on top of each other and we know we can

[39:43] get the old equipment out but today we can't get new equipment

[39:43] in so it is the equipment is literally too large

[39:43] for our building and what this does and

[39:43] I'll show you some real quick picture back and forth about

[39:43] where we are because the EMC itself is getting bigger

[39:43] we're expanding gates C six through C 11 as an adjacent

[39:43] project to rightsize those gates because the EMC is now going

[39:43] to be in its place we're also adding restrooms concessions

[39:43] airline and Mac support spaces I wanted to show a floor plan this

[39:43] is very early in design we're looking forward to a 30% design

[39:43] by the end of the year so this may look very finished

[39:43] and polished it's only because of the 3D modeling capabilities

[39:43] we are still very much shaking out exactly kind of what this

[39:43] building looks like but the EMC the original

[39:43] concourse C is at the bottom and the new expansion is at the top

[39:43] so this gray box here in the center is the current energy

[39:43] management center so you can see that it grows on multiple levels

[39:43] um at multiple levels to get about 60% bigger and then

[39:43] the yellow is the gate hold space so if you can imagine

[39:44] where we are today between C six to C 11 we're pushing

[39:44] the building out towards the airfield all the planes go back

[39:44] as well so that we can provide the most um ground service

[39:44] equipment parking possible for the airline operations um

[39:44] so that's kind of that's where we are today just really

[39:44] planning if you think about

[39:44] it as some of the renderings that you've seen from the infill

[39:44] project where there's restrooms support spaces gate holds that

[39:44] are the proper size for the fleet mix that we're going

[39:44] to fly it's really a similar project when it comes

[39:44] to the gate hold area of that I thought I would just show you

[39:44] a quick um superimposed this is a Google Earth image of um from

[39:44] C 11 over here down to C six over here this is the concourse

[39:44] this concourse C today when I switched to this next this is

[39:44] what it's going to look like in the future again

[39:44] we're in preliminary design but if I go back to today with

[39:44] the growth of

[39:44] the central plant we grow all of the gate hold areas as they push

[39:44] out into the airfield themselves so um as you are probably aware

[39:44] if you think about this project it's a very complicated

[39:44] complicated project for us so as we've been planning this

[39:44] we've been thinking about the project delivery method how are

[39:44] we actually going to get this constructed we are proposing

[39:44] a construction manager at risk preconstruction and construction

[39:44] services I came to you back in December to request

[39:44] for authority to go through the selection process so I'm here

[39:44] today to talk about where we are and seek approval for a selected

[39:44] construction manager but I thought I should just remind

[39:44] everybody what construction

[39:44] manager at risk services are so this is a project delivery

[39:44] method where the construction manager is hired early to assist

[39:44] with design they take on the risk of delivering the project

[39:44] with a guaranteed maximum price when we have the documents um

[39:44] delivered in enough detail that we're comfortable with moving

[39:44] forward with construction this is a little bit different from

[39:44] our typical design bid build contracts where we design

[39:44] the whole thing and we put it out for a bit and then

[39:44] the contractor joins us after we're 100% complete with

[39:44] the design um for reference in 2005 the Minnesota Legislature

[39:44] approved state agencies the ability to use the construction

[39:44] manager at risk method and then in 2023

[39:44] they extended that authority to municipalities which Mac falls

[39:44] under and other political subdivisions like us to use um

[39:44] construction manager at risk so again why cmaa for this project

[39:44] complicated airport operations this is a you know if we think

[39:44] about the EMC as the heart of the of the airport it provides

[39:44] all of the heating and cooling the heart is an a central plant

[39:44] and then all of the fingers go out to every furthest point

[39:44] to provide comfort for our passengers and our staff

[39:44] it's a multi-year project with phases that require close

[39:44] coordination we really wanted to fill that chair to have

[39:44] the construction manager on board with us um reduce the we

[39:44] have a

[39:44] desire to reduce or limit gate closure and really day closures

[39:44] and really talk about that timing we have a lot

[39:44] of construction going on that affects gates in the next ten

[39:44] years and we really wanted to be um to be really in a partnership

[39:44] with kind of how those closures were going to happen and we

[39:44] needed some central plant expertise this is a project we

[39:44] will do again in another 60 years so we really wanted

[39:44] somebody with construction plant central plant experience

[39:44] and this delivery method and had the right subcontractors to join

[39:44] us on this journey um construction experience

[39:44] in an airport setting we're looking for somebody that has

[39:44] airport experience we identify we can

[39:44] identify costs early this will help our overall capital plan

[39:44] to really kind of know what we're getting into what

[39:44] we're seeing um as opposed to waiting until the end

[39:44] we're going to buy equipment early one of the things that

[39:44] John will talk to you about today is just the idea that

[39:44] there's electrical mechanical equipment that has that we can

[39:44] purchase it now but it may not be ready for us to install

[39:44] and be here for 12 to 18 months Uh bringing the contract

[39:44] on board early allows us to purchase that early so we can

[39:44] start construction sooner and we're looking for innovative

[39:44] opportunities from our construction teams during

[39:44] the design process this is a area

[39:44] of expertise that has lots of phasing and we're really looking

[39:44] for that partner to come with us and say hey

[39:44] how would you do this you're the actual builder of this what

[39:44] what would you do differently than maybe some

[39:44] of our design consultants.

[39:44] Staff are thinking so the selection process has four steps

[39:44] the first step was is a request for qualification I'll go over

[39:44] that um kind of where we've been step two is a request

[39:44] for proposal for a list of short or short listed firms step three

[39:44] is where we are today Commission approval we're bringing

[39:44] in negotiated contract to you all for approval and then step

[39:44] four is the signing of the contract and the key joins

[39:44] our project so there's a few um things before we go through

[39:44] through the process I really wanted to highlight some

[39:44] of the selection team members some of them are very similar

[39:44] to the MEP and architecture team members that you've seen

[39:44] before again I want to highlight I'm just going to read them

[39:44] because I'm very thankful that everybody that was a part

[39:44] of this took time out of their regular job duties to help us do

[39:44] this for the first time Tim Simon our chief financial

[39:45] officer Chris Roy my boss who just presented to you myself

[39:45] Alex Oster um assistant director of operations and facilities

[39:45] Adrian our manager he manages all the electricians plumbers

[39:45] carpenters and painters Travis who couldn't be here today

[39:45] because he's working through an actual heating and cooling

[39:45] incident where we're getting some equipment back up

[39:45] and running but he is our chief engineer for the Energy

[39:45] Management Center Mike farmer our construction executive from

[39:47] Carl Anderson Construction we hire Chris Anderson to be

[39:50] our construction coordinator they provide logistics planning

[39:53] for our projects estimating this is also one of the legislature

[39:57] requirements that they require at least three people to be

[39:59] on the selection committee and one of them has to have

[40:02] construction expertise so we were happy to have Mike

[40:04] Commissioner Skoog joined our team thank you Commissioner

[40:07] Bridget VP of Planning and Development John Associate

[40:11] General Counsel and then Mike from auditing so we really feel

[40:14] like we had a really good selection here for our first

[40:17] our first goal with this so step one request for qualification

[40:21] so we issued a request for qualification

[40:23] for Preconstruction and construction services um when

[40:26] we did this we really looked at how other agencies other

[40:29] airports Hennepin County MnDOT kind of what they were all doing

[40:33] how they were structuring their rfqs and we really made one that

[40:36] worked for MacK we the commission approved a selection

[40:39] of minimum criteria back um license to work in Minnesota

[40:43] have experienced constructing a new or remodeled central plant

[40:46] of similar size within the last 15 years and then five or more

[40:50] years experience with construction manager at risk

[40:52] projects exceeding 50 million we received six statements

[40:56] of qualifications um and Icon a mechanical joint venture

[41:01] that's a construction manager and mechanical contractor joined

[41:04] together G done construction company Mcguff Mortenson

[41:08] Construction Services and the White company

[41:10] we evaluated them based on the criteria this is a snippet from

[41:14] the commission action back in December Proposer's experience

[41:17] with similar projects technical competence capability to perform

[41:20] capacity of key personnel and staffing past performance safety

[41:24] record compliance with state and federal laws and familiar with

[41:27] the project locale these are all based on some

[41:29] of the requirements that are laid out in the state statute

[41:32] and things that we were concerned about for this project

[41:35] um we shortlisted three proposers three proposers stood

[41:39] out out of the six as a natural um a natural interview we

[41:44] brought they have National aviation expertise and they were

[41:47] joined with icon mechanical to provide mechanical services um

[41:51] J.E. Dunn Construction company

[41:52] that is national but also has a huge Minnesota presence and then

[41:56] Mcguff which is a local Minnesota company we scored

[41:59] and selected the highest ranking proposers out of the six and we

[42:02] invited these three in for an interview um the team met um

[42:06] very closely to um independently and then together to kind

[42:10] of decide who to shortlist so we kind of did our own thing

[42:13] and then we got together and decided who to shortlist we all

[42:16] agreed um and we also sent this out to the building trades

[42:19] for their input as well we sent them the RFQ process so we

[42:23] shortlisted these three proposers invited them

[42:26] to a request um for proposal and an in-person

[42:29] interview the in-person interview had a um

[42:33] a presentation from the proposers and then it also had

[42:37] a Q&A where the selection committee was able to ask them

[42:40] open ended questions and then a closing statement of why should

[42:44] you pick us a very open ended it was very um very cool to see

[42:47] kind of how this all worked together we rated them based

[42:50] on the commission approved interior and criteria and points

[42:53] there was 1000 points total um the detailed cost information

[42:55] that was that was one thing that we gained from the RFQ is what

[42:58] and what is their what are their fees going to be for both

[43:01] construction and pre-construction we asked

[43:03] for more experience on

[43:04] similar projects their project approach now that we're really

[43:07] getting into this is how are we actually going to do this like

[43:10] give us some give us some options you know what do you

[43:13] actually think from your areas of expertise um how does

[43:15] your team work together and then what sustainability initiatives

[43:18] have you done in the past that makes you a good fit for us um

[43:21] our recommendation is the selection of J.E.

[43:24] Dunn Construction Company for the construction manager at risk

[43:27] Pre-con and Construction Services again they have

[43:30] their team is comprised of a central plant expert expertise

[43:33] with 24 over seven operations that they have actually worked

[43:36] on together which is a unique thing that um

[43:38] had them stand out from other people they have airport

[43:41] experience they have natural national experience like I

[43:43] mentioned but with a very very strong local Minneapolis office

[43:46] they have experience in Minnesota working

[43:49] for the political subdivisions and our trades their project

[43:52] approach they approach it in a little bit of a different way

[43:55] than even our design team was thinking but they also created

[43:58] flexibility in their plan to work with us because they knew

[44:00] that they didn't know everything at this point and we were really

[44:03] impressed by that um their collaborative decision process

[44:06] and then their phasing innovation we're very excited

[44:08] to get started with them um with the approving the selection with

[44:12] some of the

[44:13] phasing and they were very competitive with their cost

[44:15] for the overall construction fees in the pre-design services

[44:18] and we have Jim from J Dunn here Jim today with us Jim is going

[44:22] to be our project manager for construction so he may be up

[44:25] here with me or I may reference him as we kind of go through

[44:27] updates over the next couple of years um the next steps for us

[44:31] today is a commission approval Uh we are requesting to award

[44:35] the contract for pre-construction services to J

[44:37] Construction company they will provide us with future

[44:40] guaranteed maximum price approvals for construction

[44:42] services that will come for you all for approval so we'll be up

[44:45] here talking about

[44:46] phasing talking about different buckets of construction that

[44:49] we're going to be putting together we'll develop

[44:51] the phasing and the pricing and then after the contract is

[44:54] executed and joins the joint joins the design team um

[44:57] the next phase is again the actual team approach of it

[45:01] so they will provide us with pre-construction services that

[45:03] includes estimating cost saving reviews phasing logistics

[45:06] and scheduling they'll provide us with one or likely multiple

[45:10] buckets of construction guaranteed maximum prices that

[45:13] is essentially the max the owner will pay for that scope of work

[45:16] so we'll know this ahead of time and then they'll provide us with

[45:19] if we so choose early procurement for equipment based

[45:22] on our phasing and

[45:24] based on what we what we know about the scope

[45:26] um we wanted to hit on a few I'll turn this over to John

[45:29] we wanted to hit on a few contract negotiations

[45:31] to share a little bit about what is

[45:32] different from this contract from the contract

[45:34] that you all are used to seeing kind of with our design bid

[45:37] build so with that I'll turn it over to John

[45:39] well actually collects her breath here well

[45:43] Ashley collects her breath here if anybody

[45:45] has a question for her beforehand otherwise

[45:47] I will go into the contract negotiations.

[45:49] Go ahead John.

[54:38] >> Contract negotiations.

[54:39] This process is just a little bit the design

[54:39] been build the contractor the bidder themselves

[54:39] are given a contract and they don't negotiate that contract.

[54:39] In a similar approach there is a negotiation that happens

[54:39] and that is where we are today in the contract negotiations

[54:39] we are at a point where we can bring it forward

[54:39] to the committee and then to the commission

[54:39] to say this is a good contract we recommend taking this on.

[54:39] There are a few things that stood out in the contract

[54:39] negotiations that I want to make sure to highlight

[54:39] for the committee here number one

[54:39] was the project Labor agreement.

[54:39] As you can tell this is going to be a lot of trade labor

[54:39] Paraguard typical stance is that a particular dollar

[54:39] amount we try to have a project labor agreement.

[54:39] This project labor agreement is written into the contract.

[54:39] J.E. Dunn has already said yeah.

[54:39] Project labor agreement we do them all the time not a problem.

[54:39] But also in case J.E. Dunn cannot reach an agreement

[54:39] on the building trade unions Mac has the ability to step

[54:39] in as an owner.

[54:39] We have both avenues in that sense

[54:39] but it provides us that ability to say this

[54:39] is an important project.

[54:39] We don't want the strikes we don't want disharmony

[54:39] we want to make sure this gets built

[54:39] and that everybody is going to be working together that way.

[54:41] >> If that situation came what would be the process for the Mac

[56:03] to step in?

[56:03] It wouldn't be an arbitration it would be what?

[56:05] >> It would be similar to a negotiation that J.E. Dunn had.

[56:13] We and we would go back to the building association

[56:15] to say hey can you accept this and if not is there

[56:15] a change that needs to be made?

[56:15] Can we have that change and if there is a particular change we

[56:15] bring it back to the committee to say are

[56:15] we accepting of those changes?

[56:16] >> I don't anticipate that happening but I appreciate

[56:42] the clarification.

[56:43] >> When unique element of the See approach is pre-construction

[56:47] services the construction manager gets into the design

[56:50] process.

[56:50] We are not even at 30% yet but they are already

[56:50] going to be brought in to provide us some expertise.

[56:50] Some tips and tricks and ways that the construction company

[56:50] would say instead of designing it this way it

[56:50] is probably more economical and beneficial to design it this way

[56:50] or to have this particular way of a path

[56:50] or other types of factors that work in on pre-construction.

[56:50] One element that the committee here

[56:50] is going to be taking here in the action

[56:50] is authorizing pre-construction services.

[56:50] $3.299 million payment over 18 months

[56:50] will be pre-construction services

[56:50] that are being provided by G done in this manner.

[56:50] That will be approved here also as an action

[56:50] item for the Commission.

[56:50] It will also be incorporated into the final GMP.

[56:50] At the end when we get to that process

[56:50] the final GMP would be that final price

[56:50] that the condition is going to be looking

[56:50] at spending on this project.

[56:50] Now there are anticipations to have

[56:50] interim gmps such as the enabling work that

[56:50] might be done in 2027.

[56:50] There are particular projects that could be let out

[56:50] or put out early so that we can get those done

[56:50] before we get to a final guaranteed maximum price which

[56:50] is a GMP.

[56:50] From the GMP itself all of those interim and pre-construction

[56:50] get included in the final so we know

[56:50] at the end what that price is.

[56:50] The other factors going to be involved in the GMP

[56:50] and for the committees is liquidated damages.

[56:50] We'll be setting liquidated damages

[56:50] as those processes come forward for the GMP

[56:50] so each time the committee decides the GMP price that they

[56:50] would be willing to accept liquidated damages

[56:50] are generally where the construction company doesn't

[56:50] hit a milestone.

[56:50] Allows us to set those the scheduling and other such to be

[56:50] more realistic as to what might be liquidated damage versus it

[56:50] isn't you know our process isn't to collect the damages

[56:50] our process is to have the project done on time on schedule

[56:50] and on budget included with that is a waiver of consequential

[56:50] damages this is something that Jordan has specifically

[56:50] requested because of liquidated damages consequential damages

[56:50] typically are those damages which go to lost profits

[56:50] or reputational harm or other what I would call very different

[56:50] damages to prove we can prove direct damages you know it costs

[56:50] X in order to do what those are problematic consequential

[56:50] damages are those factors that go on

[56:50] further they're also very skeptical when introduced

[56:50] everybody can incorporate there profit might be everybody can

[56:50] try to talk about but it's really difficult to refine what

[56:50] those that dollar amount is is it a dollar is it $5 it gets

[56:50] to be really difficult to collect those damages

[56:50] because it's hard to prove as part of that difficulty you know

[56:50] we can bake in some lost profits that's not hard for us to be

[56:50] able to look at our concessions revenue and if the concessions

[56:50] revenue didn't open up on this particular day come up with

[56:50] a dollar amount and put that into liquidated damages those

[56:50] are not hard factors for us to come forward with but they are

[56:50] hard to establish specifically what

[56:50] they are given that difficulty you know the department does

[56:50] recommend saying yes in this case

[56:50] waiving consequential damages is a good thing it will get us

[56:50] to the contract and it gets us to where the contractor is also

[56:50] accepting liquidated damages one of the unique things going

[56:50] into this one of the unique things going into this

[56:50] but we have found has been used in other processes

[56:50] is the insurance pick J.E. Dunn is going to have a construction

[56:50] contractor insurance program.

[56:50] This is where all the subcontractors and such

[56:50] will be participating in the insurance program.

[56:50] This provides some efficiencies that we

[56:50] are dealing with when insurer as opposed to multiple insurers

[56:50] if there was a problem of some nature.

[56:50] If for some reason a sub doesn't participate Jordan

[56:50] will be instituting our insurance requirements to them

[56:50] as well.

[56:50] General liabilities workman's Comp

[56:50] a lot of types of different insurance

[56:50] that we would be requiring in their.

[56:50] And then also for the most interesting part of it

[56:50] is a purchase agent authorization or purchasing

[56:50] agent authorization.

[56:50] This is a process where we would be designating GE done

[56:50] to act as our buyer for this.

[56:50] Itself would be purchasing the equipment.

[56:50] Would be the one sending the check authorizing the purchase

[56:50] amounts.

[56:50] GE done would act as our receiver

[56:50] our holder of all of this until that project is ready to go.

[56:50] With this authorizes then is it allows

[56:50] MacK to take advantage of its sales Tax exemption now

[56:50] as opposed to a reimbursement later

[56:50] to use it right away we would be able to use it right away

[56:50] and that would be bringing a cost savings.

[56:50] It is about an 8% savings on equipment.

[56:50] You read the actions first or should we take read the actions

[56:50] first or should we take questions?

[56:50] What with the piece of equipment what

[56:50] happens with the warranty on a piece of equipment

[56:50] if we are getting it early but it is not

[56:50] going to be put until later?

[56:50] How does that work?

[56:51] >> The warranty period itself starts when we purchase it

[1:03:06] and then receive it.

[1:03:06] Most equipment materials that we are buying

[1:03:06] have a longer lead period or longer warranty

[1:03:06] that happens in that sense than what

[1:03:06] the minimum contractor needs to provide for a warranty.

[1:03:06] If you look at a boiler it might have a 15 year warranty

[1:03:06] on top of that or some of the heating

[1:03:06] and cooling equipment may have longer time periods

[1:03:06] that way period the typical construction contract

[1:03:06] only has a one year warranty.

[1:03:08] >> Sheriff Lawrence?

[1:03:43] >> At the risk of proving not reading the deck fully but as it

[1:03:47] is important I'm just trying again.

[1:03:47] This is not about warding contracts to the physical people

[1:03:47] company who actually puts this stuff in is that correct?

[1:03:49] >> Not necessarily.

[1:04:03] We are approving pre-construction design

[1:04:13] essentially services today.

[1:04:14] GE Dunn will construct this project.

[1:04:14] They will also select and bid out

[1:04:14] other Subconsultants for that for the future phases

[1:04:14] like mechanical contractor electrical contractor

[1:04:14] but we are selecting them today to actually facilitate

[1:04:14] the build of this.

[1:04:14] We have yet to work through what they will be self-performing

[1:04:14] and they will have to compete for any

[1:04:14] of that self-performed work in the future.

[1:04:14] We are selecting them today as a contractor.

[1:04:16] >> The word contractor is very broad which is why I'm trying

[1:04:54] to specify to what exactly is done here and what I think you

[1:04:56] are saying that as to someone putting a pipe in the ground

[1:04:56] that that part is subject to the state bidding process.

[1:04:56] They can bid themselves and obviously

[1:04:56] have an advantage from where they are but that piece of it

[1:04:56] is done within the state statute of bidding is that correct?

[1:04:59] >> Chair Lawrence Commissioners that is correct but I will

[1:05:31] provide you a little bit better explanation.

[1:05:33] J.E. Dunn is being brought in they will manage the project

[1:05:33] to make sure the project gets built as it is designed

[1:05:33] as it is put forward.

[1:05:33] As a part of that J.E. Dunn as a construction company

[1:05:33] there is going to be bids.

[1:05:33] There is going to be low price bids put out there.

[1:05:33] Je Dunn themselves will have to compete

[1:05:33] with other companies that want to submit public improvement

[1:05:33] bids that way.

[1:05:33] J.E. Dunn actually has to get their bid in a couple of days

[1:05:33] before the bids would be due because we don't want

[1:05:33] any kind of a favoritism that would be happening so therefore

[1:05:33] their bid comes in before the rest of the bids

[1:05:33] come in they will be competing with others.

[1:05:33] J.E. Dunn will take that in and they

[1:05:33] will put that as part of their construction management.

[1:05:33] They have already got a pricing that they will put together

[1:05:33] before they put their bid in.

[1:05:33] That will mean that that pricing is actually a little bit lower

[1:05:33] from a public bid standpoint.

[1:05:33] There may be some savings in that.

[1:05:33] We will see how that goes but Jordan

[1:05:33] is going to know quite a bit of the documents

[1:05:33] so they do have a little bit more of an advantage

[1:05:33] because they may understand it and price

[1:05:33] it a little bit easier.

[1:05:34] >> I heard what you said okay I think I heard what you said

[1:06:53] but when you hear words you don't necessarily the same way.

[1:06:56] So I will try it back which is that the physical work which

[1:06:56] would fall within the normal state rules forbidding they

[1:06:56] can bid but others can bid and you described what

[1:06:56] may be the advantages to that which I find

[1:06:56] interesting relative to the state's desire to have

[1:06:56] a public bidding process.

[1:06:56] Because I have now read that this is a special statute

[1:06:56] for this type of work.

[1:06:56] I think I get this type of work and I

[1:06:56] think I get a lot of work which has to be done

[1:06:56] to manage this part of work.

[1:06:56] What we are agreeing to price now

[1:06:56] is the early part of this type of work

[1:06:56] and the rest of this type of work

[1:06:56] is going to get negotiated as we work through.

[1:06:56] Now for the third type of work involved

[1:06:56] in that who describes the totality of the request

[1:06:56] and the CIP which goes to the board here is that Jordan

[1:06:56] or is that Max staff or who does do you remember

[1:06:56] the concentric circles?

[1:06:56] Who lines up the outside circle?

[1:06:57] >> J.E. Dunn as part of the contract will required to follow

[1:08:48] the bidding statutes in fashion.

[1:08:49] Those bids would in to J.E. MacK will be participating them

[1:08:49] especially for projects where J.E. Dunn going

[1:08:49] to be their own internal quote. would see those and the bids

[1:08:49] be awarded from that. particular dollar amount those bids are

[1:08:49] already in what J.E. would be providing to Those bids

[1:08:49] wouldn't back to the Commission we are having Dunn

[1:08:49] and then the itself is awarding as opposed to J.E.

[1:08:51] >> It's about the document that we will approve in December

[1:09:32] of the CIP going forward.

[1:09:33] That will be a particular slice of it

[1:09:33] and will that slice be precisely what

[1:09:33] J.D. Dunn says it ought to be within this

[1:09:33] or will MacK management say we've heard what J.D. Dunn said.

[1:09:33] We are just going to put a little bit larger just

[1:09:33] to maybe these construction estimates.

[1:09:35] >> Chair Lawrence commissioners.

[1:10:12] The upcoming CIP will have a dollar amount

[1:10:13] that Bridget and her staff will be working through and forward

[1:10:14] with.

[1:10:14] We won't know the final amounts yet

[1:10:14] until that guaranteed maximum price comes back

[1:10:14] to the Commission.

[1:10:14] Right now I believe we are looking at the end of 27 or 28

[1:10:14] when that particular CIP request or the dollar

[1:10:14] amounts from the GMP will be offset

[1:10:14] with the CIP but Bridget and her staff

[1:10:15] will be able to continue to monitor that

[1:10:45] >> So it won't be this December but some December after the J.D.

[1:10:48] Dunn work has been done?

[1:10:49] >> Chair Lawrence commissioners yes this project will probably

[1:10:56] be going on until 2032 so there may be an element to the CIP

[1:10:58] that's broken out.

[1:10:58] Overall Bridget and her staff will

[1:10:58] be able to monitor and provide the CIP.

[1:10:58] Come back to the first piece of it what we are doing here

[1:10:58] this is a fixed price which certain overages

[1:10:58] you can do if we tell them but they are basically

[1:10:58] taking the risk.

[1:10:58] If their own management some key player

[1:10:58] is going to leave unless he gets a raise that is not ours?

[1:10:58] They are locked into it?

[1:10:59] >> Chair Lawrence commissioners you have hit on they are going

[1:11:41] to give us a dollar amount that we approve which is a guaranteed

[1:11:43] maximum price or some interims as well but they take

[1:11:43] on the risk that that cost may be higher and that is

[1:11:43] the at risk part.

[1:11:44] >> You have been very helpful and very thorough in that

[1:12:01] answer.

[1:12:01] I just had a chance to look through it quickly.

[1:12:01] Had you not done line by line earlier

[1:12:01] and made a fool of myself.

[1:12:01] But unfortunately the snarky response

[1:12:01] would have been even worse than the one very thoughtful kind

[1:12:01] careful one that was given but what

[1:12:01] you have said now is a very very helpful

[1:12:01] in getting me to understand.

[1:12:03] >> Thank you chair.

[1:12:23] Would you like to add a little comment?

[1:12:34] >> Thank you Chair Ginsberg.

[1:12:39] I was able to participate in the process here

[1:12:41] and sat on the group that looked at the RFQ and the RFP

[1:12:41] and participated in the interview process.

[1:12:41] Bridget you have selected the right person to do the work.

[1:12:41] Ashley you have done a terrific job in your leadership

[1:12:41] through this process and I thank you for that.

[1:12:41] There is a lot of hard work to come

[1:12:41] but you have really done a great job leading us

[1:12:41] through this process.

[1:12:41] I support this CMAR project delivery method.

[1:12:41] I think it is the right thing for this very large project.

[1:12:41] We had six firms that we started with.

[1:12:41] We got it down to three.

[1:12:41] All three of those would have done a terrific job for us

[1:12:41] but I think we picked the firm that best fits for MacK.

[1:12:41] I went back and looked at some of my notes

[1:12:41] from earlier as we went through the process

[1:12:41] and I just wrote a few things down.

[1:12:41] Built around trustful team alignment.

[1:12:41] Budget confidence trusted partner collaboration

[1:12:41] transparency communication airport experience.

[1:12:41] Just some of my notes as I had written down

[1:12:41] as we were going through the process

[1:12:41] and finally selecting g e done.

[1:12:41] Roy said Roy said something earlier.

[1:12:41] They stood out from the bunch.

[1:12:41] I think JT Dunn stood out from the bunch

[1:12:41] as we finally settled on them as the contractor.

[1:12:41] They have done terrific work around our state.

[1:12:41] Finished a big steam plant here in town

[1:12:41] recently so we know they can do the work

[1:12:41] and they have done a lot of work at the airport

[1:12:41] here over the years.

[1:12:41] This is a whole different thing than what they have done here

[1:12:41] and she is right.

[1:12:41] I called you out on this but I think

[1:12:41] it is important to recognize some of the people that

[1:12:41] have participated.

[1:12:41] Bridget thank you for all you've done.

[1:12:41] Chris thank you for all you've done.

[1:12:41] As we went through the interviews

[1:12:41] I was fortunate enough to sit next to Travis that day.

[1:12:41] Travis is our chief engineer.

[1:12:41] I don't think he is in the room today.

[1:12:41] That was so good for me to sit next to him

[1:12:41] because all day I kept poking him and asking him questions

[1:12:41] and he is a very talented guy here at MacK.

[1:12:41] We are lucky to have him.

[1:12:41] John it goes without saying you show terrific leadership

[1:12:42] here too.

[1:12:42] I just want the group here the commissioners

[1:12:42] to know that I think we have really poked at this thing hard

[1:12:42] and have come with a method that is really

[1:12:42] going to deliver this project in the right way

[1:12:42] and we have selected the right contractor GE done.

[1:12:42] I don't know if it is the right time

[1:12:42] period there may be more questions

[1:12:42] but I would be the one that would

[1:12:42] like to move this when it comes to that because it

[1:12:42] is the right contractor for us.

[1:12:42] Thank you.

[1:12:42] Thank you Mr. Chair this thank you Mr. Chair.

[1:12:42] This is a curiosity question.

[1:12:42] The RFP referenced having relevant experience of at least

[1:12:42] $50 million project scope.

[1:12:42] Ours approaches ten times that.

[1:12:42] And the GE done there is examples of projects done.

[1:12:42] I am just curious how those the scope of those

[1:12:42] are in comparison to ours.

[1:12:42] Do any of them approach ours or exceed and by how much?

[1:12:42] The team working on this project in the past five years has

[1:12:42] worked on another steam plant conversion at a local hospital

[1:12:42] in our area and so we are very comfortable with them working

[1:12:42] on a similar size in a similar complexity and similar phasing

[1:12:42] if you think about a hospital and airport they're very similar

[1:12:42] um 24 hours 24 over seven operations critical

[1:12:42] infrastructure um the team that we chose worked on that project

[1:12:42] together Commissioner Skoog you know one more thing Ashley you

[1:12:42] just talked about the team and that was a big part

[1:12:42] of our discussion you know some of the teams were more

[1:12:42] fragmented some we knew were going to age out with potential

[1:12:42] retirements and

[1:12:42] things like that this team has worked together and that was

[1:12:42] a big piece of our final decision who are we going

[1:12:42] to have after a long term project you know ten years down

[1:12:42] the road and they're continuing to work on this and GE done

[1:12:42] stood out in that area too for us that was a good question

[1:12:42] Patty and um that was something that really kept moving us

[1:12:42] farther down the road with the contractor we selected any other

[1:12:42] questions comments I'd second Commissioner Skoog in a also

[1:12:42] want to again highlight the importance of having

[1:12:42] Commissioner participation on the panel the panel was

[1:12:42] outstanding but this is a big deal this is a new way of doing

[1:12:42] business Ashley terrific job John and everybody a part

[1:12:42] of this it's great stuff and you took the time and the effort

[1:12:42] and I know this has taken some time but it deserved it so with

[1:12:42] that being said Ashley did you get through the action requested

[1:12:42] yes I will read the actions requested so number one

[1:12:42] recommend the full commission award the contract

[1:12:42] for construction manager at risk CMR Preconstruction

[1:12:42] and construction services for the terminal one boiler

[1:12:42] and chiller replacement and EMC expansion project to JT Dunn

[1:12:42] company number two except the CMR pre-construction guaranteed

[1:12:42] maximum price of $2,299,309 and number three authorize

[1:12:42] the Executive director CEO or his designee to execute

[1:12:42] the necessary documents chairman motion and

[1:12:42] I'd like to make that motion second Skoog first O'neill

[1:12:42] second all in favor say aye aye all opposed motion passes thank

[1:12:42] you very much thank you and we're going to move

[1:12:42] on to the next Uh part of business

[1:12:42] I think that's Skylake Air Lake change the name thank you

[1:12:42] Mr. Chair and Commissioners thank you for hanging

[1:12:42] with us today we still have a thank you for hanging

[1:12:42] with us today we still have a couple of beefy items left

[1:12:42] on the agenda.

[1:12:42] We are here to talk about the Air Lake

[1:12:42] Airport and the environmental process that we are in.

[1:12:42] A few of you may recall we have adopted a long term plan back

[1:12:42] in 2018 it's been a while.

[1:12:42] We put our proposed plans on hold through COVID of course

[1:12:42] and then started up on the environmental process

[1:12:42] a few years ago.

[1:12:42] We have been dealing with the FAA

[1:12:42] and some property related issues for a long time

[1:12:42] but finally got them to start the time clock.

[1:12:42] The FAA has a 12 month time clock.

[1:12:42] Since then I think this is honestly

[1:12:42] going to be the fastest E ever but it's

[1:12:42] because we put in so much work ahead of time.

[1:12:42] Through the slides he is going to walk through the slides

[1:12:42] with his cohort Colleen.

[1:12:42] Will introduce her and talk you through the process

[1:12:42] where we are at.

[1:12:42] And I will run you through the action at the end.

[1:12:42] Thank you Bridget good morning Chair Ginsburg chair

[1:12:42] it is a pleasure to be here today

[1:12:42] and the assessment we have been working on their.

[1:12:42] As Bridget said my name is Evan Barrett.

[1:12:42] I'm the project manager in the airport

[1:12:42] planner working on the project.

[1:12:42] Also our stakeholder engagement coordinator.

[1:12:42] There are some fairly unique aspects

[1:12:42] under environmental review projects

[1:12:42] that Colleen does a great job of making everything go smoothly.

[1:12:42] We are going to talk about a number of things

[1:12:42] today fairly quickly but first I will talk about

[1:12:42] what is the project?

[1:12:42] What is it trying to achieve.

[1:12:42] What are the actual environmental effects

[1:12:42] that we have identified and then Colleen

[1:12:42] will talk a little bit about our stakeholder engagement plan

[1:12:42] and our next steps for the project

[1:12:42] and then Bridget will talk about our request for action today.

[1:12:42] This project is fairly complex in that there

[1:12:42] are a lot of different objectives

[1:12:42] it is trying to achieve.

[1:12:42] The purpose of the project is to reconstruct the existing runway

[1:12:42] and to extend it from 4100ft to 4850ft.

[1:12:42] That is an additional 750ft and the purpose of extending

[1:12:42] the runway is to accommodate smaller business jet and turbo

[1:12:42] aircraft that use the other relievers throughout the Max

[1:12:42] system.

[1:12:42] The existing runway pavement is over 30 years

[1:12:42] old so the design line for airport pavement

[1:12:42] is about 20 years.

[1:12:43] Well overdue and the need for reconstruction.

[1:12:43] Some of the are secondary of the project incompatible land uses

[1:12:43] so that is the reason we are environmental assessment

[1:12:43] worksheet we're mitigating a few airspace obstructions

[1:12:43] there's just a handful of trees that that obstruct imaginary

[1:12:43] airspace surfaces that need to be removed the project will meet

[1:12:43] FAA design standards so even since 2018 when the TCP was

[1:12:43] completed FAA has come up with new design standards so we took

[1:12:43] another look at the proposed action from the long term

[1:12:43] comprehensive plan and made some minor adjustments to accommodate

[1:12:43] new FAA design standards primarily associated with

[1:12:43] taxiway design there are a few minor navigational instrument

[1:12:43] approach improvements that go along with extending the runway

[1:12:43] that there's basically just accommodate

[1:12:43] the new pavement and new thresholds nothing significantly

[1:12:43] new in terms of those and then there is a component

[1:12:43] of the project to expand the fixed base operator aircraft

[1:12:43] parking apron which is currently undersized for the amount

[1:12:43] of activity that the jets so this is a comprehensive look

[1:12:43] at all of the elements of the proposed project I won't go

[1:12:43] into each of them I think you the objectives covered most

[1:12:43] of them in the upper right hand this this graphic is

[1:12:43] in your in your meeting packet in the upper right hand corner

[1:12:43] is a list of all of the different actions that are part

[1:12:43] of this project and we have to kind of put together a very

[1:12:43] detailed list in order to get FAA clearance environmental

[1:12:43] clearance to to proceed with those project elements and this

[1:12:43] this graphic here shows that the red dotted line where

[1:12:43] our approximate area of ground disturbance associated with

[1:12:43] the project is so we did thorough field studies for those

[1:12:43] areas to make sure there was nothing that was being impacted

[1:12:43] significantly um and then kind of the larger airport we looked

[1:12:43] at for some of the categories such as historic structures

[1:12:43] and things of that nature so um do you have any questions about

[1:12:43] specific project components I'd be happy to answer those um

[1:12:43] after the presentation here so the environmental review process

[1:12:43] is required under both federal and state law

[1:12:43] for this project so under the federal National Environmental

[1:12:43] Policy Act or Nepa the FAA is the responsible agency

[1:12:43] for a federal environmental assessment that must be

[1:12:43] completed because it's for a number of reasons one is

[1:12:43] occurring on federally obligated airport property number two

[1:12:43] requires an update to the airport layout plan and number

[1:12:43] three there's federal funding that the Mac will be seeking

[1:12:43] for project that requires the federal environmental assessment

[1:12:43] as well and then under the state Minnesota Environmental Policy

[1:12:43] Act or Nepa there is also what's called the State Environmental

[1:12:43] Assessment Worksheet and the Mac itself is the responsible

[1:12:43] government unit for that and EAW so several months from now

[1:12:43] we'll talk about we'll come back

[1:12:43] to the committee with the Mac's finding for approval under that

[1:12:43] state law so we're completing both of those processes

[1:12:43] concurrently in a combined document that addresses all

[1:12:43] of the requirements of both laws um here's our projected timeline

[1:12:43] so we are um nearing the end of the preparation of the draft EA

[1:12:43] we intend to publish later this month we just completed a legal

[1:12:46] sufficiency review with the Federal Aviation Administration

[1:12:48] last week so we're making some final adjustments based

[1:12:52] on the FAA general counsel comments that we received

[1:12:54] so that everything is all buttoned up for the publication

[1:12:57] um and then again as Colin mentioned or talked about we

[1:13:00] will have a public meeting and some other opportunities

[1:13:02] for input coming up so the general method

[1:13:07] so the general method of determining

[1:13:09] environmental effects under Mepa is you

[1:13:11] have a preferred alternative and you compare it to a no action

[1:13:14] alternative and you look at the marginal change

[1:13:16] between no action and preferred.

[1:13:18] Are no action alternative for this project under the EA

[1:13:21] is just reconstructing the runway as is.

[1:13:24] Compare with the impacts of that would be to the runway

[1:13:28] and all of the other things that are proposed.

[1:13:30] As it says here no action alternative.

[1:13:33] Maintain the existing airfield and runway lengths

[1:13:37] this is a list of all of our environmental resources

[1:13:41] in a fair amount of detail and all of these

[1:13:45] are regulated under various special purpose laws.

[1:13:48] The Mepa is the umbrella law if you

[1:13:51] will so for the Clean Air Act we do an air quality emissions

[1:13:56] inventory to determine when national air quality standards.

[1:14:02] Under FAA guidance and we determined

[1:14:05] that there is no significant impact aircraft

[1:14:07] noise for the project.

[1:14:09] There are a few listed species that we did studies

[1:14:12] for particularly related to the tree removal

[1:14:16] because there are some endangered bats during removal

[1:14:20] of those trees.

[1:14:21] There is a small amount of farmland conversion on airport

[1:14:24] property which is regulated by the Farmland Protection Policy

[1:14:28] Act.

[1:14:29] Are not significant there is a number of federal laws

[1:14:33] we have to look at hazardous materials sites

[1:14:35] and make sure there's none of those sites being disturbed

[1:14:37] by the project there are not any based on our studies.

[1:14:41] Coordinate with the State Historic Preservation Office

[1:14:44] which we've done as part of this project to establish there are

[1:14:47] no significant historical um resources that are affected

[1:14:51] by the project land use compatibility we took a look

[1:14:54] at what the new airport zoning will be for the runway a Mac

[1:14:57] Planning and Development intends to do a new airport zoning

[1:15:01] ordinance following the environmental assessment kind

[1:15:03] of concurrent with the design and construction of the project

[1:15:06] there is currently not an airport zoning ordinance now

[1:15:08] so that's something that we kind of take an initial look at with

[1:15:11] the environmental assessment under the Clean Water Act we

[1:15:13] have to do a wetland delineation there are about a half acre of

[1:15:16] wetland impacts associated with the project and that's a stream

[1:15:19] that you see here in the picture that is on airport property this

[1:15:22] is an intermittent stream so it's only only has water in it

[1:15:25] during the spring thaw and major storm events so there aren't any

[1:15:29] significant um you know aquatic resources associated with

[1:15:32] the stream we've been working very closely with our partners

[1:15:34] at the Army Corps of Engineers Minnesota DNR and other state

[1:15:37] and federal agencies as well as the local Watershed District

[1:15:40] to make sure that we're getting their input on how the stream

[1:15:43] relocation will occur um and we worked with SE on a alternatives

[1:15:47] analysis because they're the design engineer as well as the

[1:15:50] environmental compliance consultant for the Mac Terracon

[1:15:52] on a comparative stormwater analysis to make sure there's no

[1:15:55] change in the water quality and then finally there are a few

[1:15:59] things with the state requirements that we also have

[1:16:01] to do in terms of a climate assessment and looking

[1:16:04] at cumulative potential effects of this project with other

[1:16:06] projects on the airport that are planned and other projects

[1:16:09] in the community so those are things that are part of this

[1:16:13] document as well so with that I'll hand it to Colleen thank

[1:16:16] you Evan nice to be here with you all today thank you Evan

[1:16:19] nice to be here with you all today I wanted to talk a little

[1:16:21] bit about

[1:16:22] our engagement plan.

[1:16:23] We worked with Michelle Ross and her group

[1:16:25] to develop a stakeholder engagement plan that was right

[1:16:29] sized for air like airport central component

[1:16:31] to our engagement plan was an agency Technical advisory panel.

[1:16:36] We wanted to proactively engage with the agencies who

[1:16:39] would have a role in ensuring that the location would

[1:16:43] be permissible and acceptable to all of those groups.

[1:16:46] We have coordinated with the DNR and the Army Corps of Engineers

[1:16:50] and the township and the watershed several US

[1:16:55] federal agencies such as Fish and Wildlife.

[1:16:59] USDA Wildlife Services and the EPA.

[1:17:01] We've been meeting with that group

[1:17:03] and coordinating with that group.

[1:17:04] We have met with them twice so far.

[1:17:06] We are scheduled to hold a third meeting in October with them.

[1:17:10] In addition to that we have several individual agency

[1:17:13] meetings to make sure everybody is coming along

[1:17:16] and we have any concerns covered with our plan.

[1:17:19] And then additional correspondence

[1:17:21] as we have provided some of our interim documents

[1:17:24] to them for their review and comment.

[1:17:27] All of this to make sure that we are getting ahead

[1:17:29] of any questions or concerns so that when

[1:17:32] we get to the public comment period

[1:17:34] we are not surprised by anything that these agencies might

[1:17:37] have to say.

[1:17:39] In addition to that we were there in June

[1:17:43] and we will be back there this Thursday

[1:17:44] to give them an update following that meeting

[1:17:47] we will have a public open house at City Hall following

[1:17:50] that is again this Thursday from 6 to 7.

[1:17:55] And then we will be looking toward our public comment period

[1:18:00] which is planned from September 20th 9th to October 30th that

[1:18:04] will be an opportunity from the public to review the document

[1:18:08] and share any comments questions or concerns that they have

[1:18:11] on the document period during the public comment period we

[1:18:14] will be looking to hold a public meeting and to support all

[1:18:18] of this we have worked with Michelle and the marketing group

[1:18:20] to put together a project website that has a lot

[1:18:23] of information that we have been working on.

[1:18:26] Our next steps so our next steps from this as I mentioned

[1:18:30] the public meeting this week and then pending Mac Commission

[1:18:34] approval on September 22nd we will be publishing our draft de

[1:18:38] a a W which would run September 29th through October 30th.

[1:18:44] Again the public hearing at PD n e on Monday October 5th and then

[1:18:50] later in the year we would be back once we finalize submitted

[1:18:55] that to the FAA wait for their finding and then we will be back

[1:19:00] looking for the Mac decision on the EAW document.

[1:19:03] With that I will turn it back to Bridget.

[1:19:07] >> Yes thank you very much and so with that the request

[1:32:24] for today is to get the authority to publish the draft

[1:32:27] document and put that out on the street for a public written

[1:32:27] period.

[1:32:27] Designate this group as the hearing officers

[1:32:27] as we typically do for any of the environmental assessment

[1:32:27] worksheets that we do.

[1:32:27] At your meeting in October and then authorize the Executive

[1:32:27] Director CEO for his designee to execute the necessary documents

[1:32:27] does anybody have any questions Commissioner school thank you

[1:32:27] chair Bridget I asked this question once before but I

[1:32:27] don't remember exactly the the answer um we're going off

[1:32:27] to 4850 on the runway length and I think it was the roadway

[1:32:27] to the south east corner there that prevents us from going out

[1:32:27] to the state maximum of 5000 what is that 150 foot shortfall

[1:32:27] limit us on aircraft for the future um Chair

[1:32:27] and commissioners so in the airport planning business we

[1:32:27] refer to 5000ft as kind of a magic number for certain types

[1:32:27] of aircraft operators and

[1:32:27] that's kind of driven by insurance requirements for some

[1:32:27] of the more demanding and expensive types aircraft types

[1:32:27] um so 5000ft is a significant number in terms of the ability

[1:32:27] of some aircraft operators particularly those with you know

[1:32:27] a certain insurance policies to use the airport um so there is

[1:32:27] a limitation there however you know the intent of this project

[1:32:27] is really to accommodate some of those smaller business jet

[1:32:27] and turboprop aircraft um and you know so that Air Lake really

[1:32:27] is you know not one of the I forget the exact term it's one

[1:32:27] of the smaller relievers in the system this would be the longest

[1:32:27] runway at any of the three smaller relievers Lake Elmo

[1:32:27] Crystal or Lake um and we do expect

[1:32:27] that there will be a significant increase in activity

[1:32:27] at the airport because there will

[1:32:27] be you know significant operational improvements

[1:32:27] with that additional length for a lot of users who would like

[1:32:27] to use the airport today but can't so a follow up question

[1:32:27] are we hoping in the future that this takes some pressure

[1:32:27] off flying cloud that is part of the that

[1:32:27] is part of the purpose of the project is to kind of spread

[1:32:27] the activity across the reliever system

[1:32:27] that minimizes congestion both near and on the ground.

[1:32:27] I just want to add to that thank you Mr. Chair I just

[1:32:27] want to add to that.

[1:32:27] System and so the way that this project is laid out

[1:32:27] is we're able to maintain that system in its current location

[1:32:27] um and because this airport has that opportunity for instrument

[1:32:27] landing practice primarily for pilots and things

[1:32:27] that it will be a an excellent um I don't want

[1:32:27] to say replacement but substitute for those wanting

[1:32:27] to fly in and out of flying cloud okay that's helpful I just

[1:32:27] wanted to add okay that's helpful I had to ask

[1:32:27] the question about 4850 versus 5000

[1:32:27] and make sure that we are not being short sighted

[1:32:27] and not going out where we are going to wish that we had

[1:32:27] 5 or 10 years from now.

[1:32:27] Because we can't get the aircraft into the air

[1:32:27] like that we wish we could.

[1:32:27] If I may chair and commissioners um so that was looked at as part

[1:32:27] of the long term comprehensive plan relocating Cedar Avenue

[1:32:27] so it's Cedar Avenue that's on is kind of limiting factor

[1:32:27] on the east side and it's a railroad on the west side

[1:32:27] that's a limiting factor that's really you know driving that

[1:32:27] 4850 length Uh the railroad is not going to move moving

[1:32:27] a railroad to do an act of Congress from what I understand

[1:32:27] um moving Cedar Avenue it's possible is it feasible probably

[1:32:27] not Cedar Avenue is a major thoroughfare for the county

[1:32:27] and the city um and relocating it they have plans to expand it

[1:32:27] to four lanes at some point in the

[1:32:27] future through this area um relocating it would just be

[1:32:27] quite the undertaking um and there has been a lot

[1:32:27] of development along the Cedar Avenue corridor since the LTC

[1:32:27] was completed um such that um you know the real estate in that

[1:32:27] area has really increased in value to a point where you know

[1:32:27] it's it's a huge would be a huge loss to the community in terms

[1:32:27] of you know the economy to to develop that for another purpose

[1:32:27] thank you um I have a question so we're anticipating more

[1:32:27] activity do we have any sense of where the community is have we

[1:32:27] heard issues or is that the public hearing we'll hear about

[1:32:27] right so chair we

[1:32:27] are again as Colleen talked about holding a public meeting

[1:32:27] on Thursday um we don't anticipate any significant

[1:32:27] controversy this airport is in a fairly either you know rural

[1:32:27] to the south it's industrial and commercial to the north you know

[1:32:27] there are no you know residents that we expect to have any um

[1:32:27] we'll find out obviously at the meeting and at the public

[1:32:27] hearing but we don't expect there to be any significant

[1:32:27] controversy or opposition to the project based on what we know

[1:32:27] today any other questions can I get a motion and a second

[1:32:27] I'll move second Commissioner and Commissioner Garland

[1:32:27] for second all in favor aye aye opposed motion passes thank you

[1:32:27] thank you thank

[1:32:27] you now we'll move to the next business item this preliminary

[1:32:27] CIP program Bridget I assume that's Heather okay Good

[1:32:27] afternoon now forgive me Uh Chair Ginsberg chair Lawrence

[1:32:27] commissioners I am for the record Heather lady director

[1:32:27] of airport development project initiation we have new

[1:32:27] microphones and they're a little funky um I wanted to start today

[1:32:27] I'm here today to present our preliminary CIP for the 2027

[1:32:27] to 2033 segment and I wanted to start with an orientation

[1:32:27] to the information in your packet and some of the slides

[1:32:27] that we have today um it'll be a refresher for some of you

[1:32:27] who've been around for a while and Uh introduction to some

[1:32:28] of the new members of

[1:32:28] our committee um I know that this is a pretty dense item

[1:32:28] in our packet and so some orientation to what we have

[1:32:28] in front of you I think can be helpful for you in understanding

[1:32:28] what it is we're in front of you with um so we have this seven

[1:32:28] year cycle that we develop annually um seven year plan that

[1:32:28] we do on an annual cycle forgive me um early spring we receive

[1:32:28] project proposals from staff from stakeholders um from my own

[1:32:28] staff and colleagues on airport development updating information

[1:32:28] as they're working on projects they're discovering things that

[1:32:28] we need to address things like that all of that comes in to me

[1:32:28] and my small but

[1:32:28] mighty team um to vet Uh new scope and um start to put

[1:32:28] together estimates and assemble this preliminary draft we bring

[1:32:28] that to you in September um and sorry sorry just before this

[1:32:28] we're starting our CIP working group cross functional group

[1:32:28] with our staff to all of my staff to work through what

[1:32:28] our priorities are what our urgencies are are there things

[1:32:28] we've missed all of that um after we formalize this draft

[1:32:28] and bring it to you then we're collaborating with finance

[1:32:28] and grants in developing our final draft making sure that

[1:32:28] we're aligning fiscal capability with the needs

[1:32:28] and the Prioritizations we're also running through

[1:32:28] the assessment of environmental effects process which Bridget

[1:32:28] will address

[1:32:28] after me um the effect of municipalities review

[1:32:28] and comment period met Council has some review um opportunities

[1:32:28] in here as well as going through a list of project labor

[1:32:28] agreement recommendations for which projects we recommend that

[1:32:28] we do I expect to bring that to you in December with the final

[1:32:28] draft sometimes we come in October with the PLA list

[1:32:28] and this round I expect it to be more the typical December um

[1:32:28] and forgive me I'm speeding up a little bit because I know

[1:32:28] in between you and lunch so if at any point you're like wait

[1:32:28] you sort of said something but didn't get all the way through

[1:32:28] feel free to raise your hand and ask

[1:32:28] me any questions I can slow down but I don't want to take us too

[1:32:28] too long so our primary vehicle for outlining this seven year

[1:32:28] plan is a spreadsheet view and this is page one of that from

[1:32:28] your packet like I said a dense amount of information for you

[1:32:28] to process so how do I organize that spreadsheet we organize

[1:32:28] the list of projects first by category of which there are nine

[1:32:28] for example end of life replacement projects I t um

[1:32:28] reliever airports long term plan all of those categories next we

[1:32:28] have a subledger which is sort of a combination of location

[1:32:28] as well as cost recovery opportunities um that were that

[1:32:28] aligns with our financial

[1:32:28] systems so there's that and then we have our project name um

[1:32:28] alphabetical unless I've accidentally slotted one in late

[1:32:28] in the game out of order but I do try very hard to keep them

[1:32:28] alphabetical so you can find them again later um across

[1:32:28] the top the columns are the year of the project so you have 27

[1:32:28] on the left is our year one 2033 is your seven yes I'm already

[1:32:28] in 27 if you ask me what year it is today I it must be 27 already

[1:32:28] right um and the way that we can that we receive authority from

[1:32:28] you to spend from that um is really focused on those first

[1:32:28] three years the um what

[1:32:28] we call the funded portion of the CIP year four through seven

[1:32:28] is all Mac stuff effort um a little bit of operating budget

[1:32:28] to help us put together some of the big CIP members sometimes um

[1:32:28] but no significant design effort in those last four the first

[1:32:28] three years are supported by our consultants and our contractors

[1:32:28] so a project in year one during 2027 not quite yet Uh they

[1:32:28] complete their bid documents they can solicit bids we award

[1:32:28] contracts and construction may begin and may continue

[1:32:28] on for years you've been hearing about some really big projects

[1:32:28] today those are going to go much longer than the calendar year

[1:32:28] that those dollars are shown in in our

[1:32:28] CIP are you to projects um our consultants can work on final

[1:32:28] design can work on existing conditions of investigation

[1:32:28] but we don't bid and award the contract in that year two um

[1:32:28] but we're getting ready to do that when it moves into being

[1:32:28] year one and then year three we can do studies we can do

[1:32:28] preliminary and schematic design and get those things going

[1:32:28] as well as verifying some of our budgeting assumptions from

[1:32:28] earlier all right any questions on that part all right

[1:32:28] so we'll dive into our preliminary 27 to 2033 CIP here

[1:32:28] you see the total requests by year um unlike a lot of previous

[1:32:28] September drafts are 2033 is not the smallest of

[1:32:28] our program um we're getting better at anticipating needs

[1:32:28] farther and farther out I'm not great yet but we're getting

[1:32:28] better we're also tracking some big stuff out in 2031 and 33

[1:32:28] which is the tram replacements those are still dialing in as we

[1:32:28] wrap up those studies um but we're starting to carry those

[1:32:28] dollars and will align those better as we carry on um

[1:32:28] and the early year things may slide across two you'll see 28

[1:32:28] is our biggest um some of that is based on really big projects

[1:32:28] we have scheduled in 28 but some of that is also that a lot

[1:32:28] of the new requests start their life being vetted looking

[1:32:28] at 2028 that's the fastest

[1:32:28] that our teams can get those projects done they may slide out

[1:32:28] as we work on prioritizing and leveling out some of that CIP

[1:32:28] so this September draft may be a little bit more optimistic than

[1:32:29] um what you'll see in December as those um spread out

[1:32:29] our largest category in 27 is the end of life replacement

[1:32:29] category it shows dollars and 27 for the beginning of the boiler

[1:32:31] and chiller replacement and MC expansion which you heard a lot

[1:32:35] about already um 28 and 29 also have dollars associated with

[1:32:40] that so you see those pretty big light blue bars um we also

[1:32:48] in the sorry I have to get that a little bit closer our long

[1:32:53] term

[1:32:53] plan project category is that dark blue you see in 27

[1:32:58] that's for Uh some preliminary relocations prior to green

[1:33:03] and gold demolition um and we still have some fees in 27

[1:33:10] for looking at an operational improvements at terminal two we

[1:33:13] do not have construction for that funded in this program

[1:33:17] at this time um but want to do some other groundwork to be

[1:33:21] prepared should we decide that that needs to happen um

[1:33:25] our maintenance and facility upgrades shown in yellow

[1:33:28] includes a replacement of the end of life fueling facility

[1:33:32] on the north side of campus and general office building

[1:33:35] renovations and a modest expansion so here's 2027

[1:33:42] projects just by category again same color coding to

[1:33:48] help orient you a little bit Uh starting at the bottom end

[1:33:53] of life replacement project is where airfield pavement

[1:33:56] reconstruction happens as they reach the end of their useful

[1:34:00] lives IT projects or projects that are generally driven

[1:34:02] by our IT team even though all of our projects almost some

[1:34:08] paving doesn't have any I.t but that's starting to not even be

[1:34:12] 100% true anymore um so the the orange category is really

[1:34:18] initiated by and driven by our IT team um noise mitigation we

[1:34:25] keep on its own category for the consent decree long term plan

[1:34:31] projects um support the planning efforts of our team

[1:34:34] and the capital construction projects that come directly from

[1:34:38] our long term plan

[1:34:39] maintenance and facility upgrades tends to cover new

[1:34:43] buildings or additions and significant system improvements

[1:34:46] ongoing maintenance a little bit self-explanatory those things

[1:34:51] that we're doing routinely that we budget annually for work

[1:34:55] in those categories and address most urgent needs for them Uh

[1:35:00] tenant projects tend to enhance our leasehold facilities

[1:35:04] our relievers tend not to have the high quantity of work as MSP

[1:35:10] that so we typically just separate those into two

[1:35:13] categories the long term comprehensive plan projects

[1:35:15] similar to MSP they come right out of our long term plans

[1:35:19] or support the planning efforts and then maintenance

[1:35:22] and facility upgrade is kind of everything else

[1:35:25] for the relievers so just a quick and I'll do this

[1:35:32] kind of fast sprinkling of big projects around the campus this

[1:35:37] year Uh we have a fair amount of pavement reconstruction

[1:35:40] but in more focused areas so we have the deicing pad

[1:35:44] and the first of five phases of replacing the older terminal

[1:35:51] to apron um that was actually existing apron when they built

[1:35:55] the terminal five plus years ago and it is due for replacement

[1:36:03] so we're waiting until we get new gates for the north

[1:36:07] expansion before we start taking two at a time um to do the apron

[1:36:12] and the bridges moving then south and get through all

[1:36:15] of that we have work at Uh Taxiways Hotel and Juliet we

[1:36:21] have a west cargo facility development um

[1:36:25] the exact process for that is still under review by staff

[1:36:28] but we're carrying um in case we take that on entirely Uh we have

[1:36:34] reconstruction on East 62nd Street Uh that's a project that

[1:36:39] we will be pursuing envision certification on which is

[1:36:42] a civil work Uh sustainable design and construction program

[1:36:48] Uh we show the Geo and the fueling facility at the North

[1:36:53] campus those are just some highlights you noticed in here

[1:36:59] probably there's a rather long list um bridges that will be

[1:37:03] replacing this year on concourse C we have 4 or 512 and 27

[1:37:09] and then at terminal two in concert with that pavement

[1:37:13] replacement I mentioned is H eight and nine no sorry nine

[1:37:17] and ten um because it's big I wanted to include it the EMC

[1:37:27] replacement or expansion and boiler chiller replacement you

[1:37:31] already heard way more detail on that than you probably need

[1:37:34] to hear again so we'll keep it brief I did want to mention that

[1:37:38] the CIP values will incorporate what the GMP is from that

[1:37:45] project but it's not just the GMP that will be in the CIP

[1:37:49] the CIP needs to cover other consultant fees and things like

[1:37:52] that like it does for any of our projects um and then

[1:37:58] in preparation for the demolition of green and gold

[1:38:00] as I mentioned before we do have a project in 2027 to move

[1:38:07] electrical critical systems services utilities

[1:38:10] there are antenna arrays there are there's a wireless

[1:38:15] distributed antenna system for like cellular um there's a hub

[1:38:20] room there that needs to relocate there's some specialty

[1:38:23] parking that needs a new home before that demolition can

[1:38:26] happen so we have a project Uh slated for 27 to facilitate that

[1:38:31] and help us move forward into demolition and replacement

[1:38:35] in that area and then our relievers we have um about $40

[1:38:42] million worth of projects the most significant being the er

[1:38:48] lake runway Uh reconstruction and expansion which you've also

[1:38:51] heard plenty of so I don't need to go into those details for you

[1:38:56] but that's the big effort at the relievers this year next year Uh

[1:39:02] next steps

[1:39:03] we will accept comments from the affected municipalities we will

[1:39:08] complete the assessment of environmental effects process it

[1:39:12] will cover that Uh over the coming months we'll work

[1:39:15] together with finance and work through a funding plan analysis

[1:39:19] we'll work with staff and the project stakeholders to align

[1:39:22] the CIP project listing and funding plan we'll identify

[1:39:26] projects that meet the criteria outlined in the PLA policy

[1:39:29] and bring that list to commission for approval

[1:39:32] and we'll return in December with a final draft of the 2027

[1:39:37] 2033 CIP including an aligned funding plan from finance

[1:39:43] so today excuse me we ask that you recommend that the full

[1:39:49] commission accept the attached preliminary 2027 to 2033 capital

[1:39:54] Improvements Program for

[1:39:55] purposes of conducting the affected municipalities review

[1:39:59] and the assessment of environmental effects process

[1:40:02] and authorize staff to proceed with those processes with that

[1:40:08] I'll stand for any questions thank you it was a great

[1:40:11] overview and particularly for all the new commissioners

[1:40:15] we're very thorough are there any questions Commissioner

[1:40:19] Lawrence Uh chair the Uh I'd like to chair I think excellent

[1:40:26] presentation thank you very much I would personally and I think

[1:40:31] other commissioners might appreciate if having seen this

[1:40:36] in September in Uh we could see a preliminary breakout

[1:40:44] of what's in those bars Uh not everything which is in each bar

[1:40:51] and you might think of a different cut off but I would

[1:40:56] think about as

[1:40:57] a cut off Uh any projects which are going to be done money wise

[1:41:05] in Uh 27 which are at or above 50 million spent in 27 and any

[1:41:16] which are spending less than that in 27 but over the course

[1:41:21] of three years or to the degree you know it like five years Uh

[1:41:28] which are greater than 100 million now off the top

[1:41:32] of your head could you just say I guess there are blank number

[1:41:36] of 50 million projects in 27 and blank number of if we start

[1:41:43] in 27 we're effectively committing more than 100 um I

[1:41:53] would say at 50 million there's less than a handful in 27 I

[1:42:00] don't have a specific count um

[1:42:03] but less than five that's all I need and I could do that in I

[1:42:09] could do that right after the meeting by running through

[1:42:12] the spreadsheet but yeah well it's not so much the number

[1:42:14] of any in any event it's what they are and a bit more detail

[1:42:20] for the Commission to understand what they are

[1:42:23] and what's involved can you give me a estimate of beyond 27 what

[1:42:31] when we're committing to 27 or effectively committing

[1:42:34] for longer term and I realize that the actual plan is a three

[1:42:39] year plan so we will certainly know that but there are others

[1:42:43] like the boiler replacement you know then Uh which we discussed

[1:42:48] some length earlier that was

[1:42:50] like in 500 and went went out for chairman Bridget thank you

[1:42:57] Mr. Chair Chair Lawrence um I appreciate your request and I

[1:43:01] think October would be a good opportunity to bring back

[1:43:04] an information item to kind of outline some of these larger

[1:43:07] projects for you that are currently in the CIP

[1:43:10] in the short term we can certainly do that yeah and yeah

[1:43:14] and again the longer ones because very often there's some

[1:43:19] not something you're effectively committing to doing the whole

[1:43:24] thing Uh and I understand it we will see the three or projects

[1:43:30] but there are some which we've talked about ones that have go

[1:43:35] out even further so thank you for committing to that any

[1:43:40] other questions and I appreciate it um there's been a action item

[1:43:47] could I get a first and a second so moved by Chair Lawrence

[1:43:54] second second by Chair Zimmer um all in favor say aye aye all

[1:44:00] opposed passed thanks again Heather thank you yep we have

[1:44:06] one final action item all right thank you Mr.

[1:44:11] Chair thank you for hanging with us today we saved the one that

[1:44:14] absolutely had to happen in September for last so I

[1:44:16] apologize for that um the state Minnesota state statutes um

[1:44:22] dictate an environmental process that we are required to go

[1:44:25] through every year so we bring forth a preliminary CIP

[1:44:28] in September um for approval we put that out on

[1:44:31] the street we give affecting municipalities 60 days to review

[1:44:35] the document and offer any comments um there's also

[1:44:38] the assessment of environmental effects which is basically

[1:44:41] a super high level ensure that we are completing

[1:44:44] the environmental processes that are required by projects before

[1:44:47] we're starting any construction on them and so that report is

[1:44:51] a summary we complete that report in early October put that

[1:44:55] one out on the street for 30 days the two processes run

[1:44:59] concurrent um we do ask for I'm sorry we are required to have

[1:45:03] a public hearing and so we're looking to have that in November

[1:45:07] as we typically do every year for this process and then come

[1:45:11] back to you in

[1:45:12] December with a final CIP as well as the hearing

[1:45:15] officer's report for the environmental process so what

[1:45:18] we're asking for you today specific to the process is that

[1:45:24] this committee PD be designated as the hearing officers

[1:45:28] for the public hearing that staff be granted the authority

[1:45:31] to publish a draft document for the 2027 to 2033 CIP um

[1:45:37] for review and comment and authorize staff to proceed with

[1:45:42] these processes Uh can I get a anyone any questions can I get

[1:45:48] a first and second so moved by Commissioner Gartland

[1:45:53] Commissioner Beeson all in favor say aye aye all opposed motion

[1:45:57] passes I want to thank the committee for sticking this out

[1:46:02] there's a lot of stuff to

[1:46:03] get done and it was it was really

[1:46:05] important I'd like to thank the individual from GE done

[1:46:08] for showing up and I'd also like to thank

[1:46:11] the staff for extraordinary work up and down

[1:46:14] the agenda so with that unless there's any other comments

[1:46:17] or questions we're going to call this adjourned thanks

Planning, Development and Environment Committee

Agenda

Transcript