[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