Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-07-15 - Board of Trustees Special Meeting Minutes SPECIAL MEETING VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET WEDNESDAY—JULY 159 2009 — 7:30 PM AGENDA EDGEWOOD DETENTION BASIN BOARD: Mayor Joan L. Feinstein Trustee Michael S. Brown Trustee Patricia Sanders Romano Trustee Paul S. Rosenberg Trustee Dean P. Santon STAFF: Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Dave Burke, Assistant to the Village Administrator Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planner Dolph Rotfeld, Village Engineering Consultant Mayor Feinstein explained this was more of a work session to allow the Board to review the bid results and ask questions of Mr. Rotfeld as the bids came in much higher then the projections. This evening is not about the merits of the project because this Board has already gone through the pros and cons of the project and decided to move forward with it but at the same time this board has to make decisions on a financial basis. This is a workshop, not a public meeting, but the public will be allowed to speak. This is the first meeting but will not be the last— it is the first of the discussions since the bids have come in. Mayor Feinstein explained that the lowest bid received was $833,000 and that the Village has received an extension to May 31, 2010 to do the project. If the Village decided to award to the lowest bidder, the Village would have to put up $615,000. In the Mayor's opinion, she believes the bids are too high. Mr. Rotfeld has performed an analysis of the 6 bids and will go through each one with us and the board will ask questions. Mr. Rotfeld started by stating that he was also surprised at the high numbers. He has gone through the unit prices and did not find anything that looked too out of the ordinary. They looked at what we could change that would not materially affect the project especially in regard to flood control. 1 of 8 Mr. Rotfeld thinks the chain link fence would be an item for the board to decide on as to if the fence needs to surround the entire basin or not. Eliminating the articulated concrete wall would cut $86,000 dollars but would require the removal of an additional 18 trees. The articulated block that is behind the Shiller's property could be replaced with rip rap on the two entering streams. With these two items it would be a $126,000 savings so far. Additional savings for discussion would be on the plantings — the savings could be in the general screen plantings, wetlands plantings and reducing some of the larger caliper trees and shrubs — potential savings of $60,000 - $70,000. Mayor Feinstein added that in changing the landscape plan it would change the visual aspect of the project. Mr. Rotfeld believes we can attempt to get additional funds from the State. This project is job read and that may help in trying to acquire more funding. He also suggested sitting with the lowest bidder and working with him to make additional changes and save additional dollars. Mayor Feinstein stated that this board added a lot to this project such as plantings and fencing, and agrees that we should attempt to get additional funding. She does not particularly want to scale back on the project but wants to take the time and see what other financing is out there. Mr. Rotfeld agrees adding that environmental facilities has money and the Governor's office produces a list of projects none of which are shovel ready as this one is. Mayor Feinstein asked if we are able to save, hypothetically, $200,000 — what is the project going to be like compared to what we sent to bid. Mr. Rotfeld responded that the visual aspect would be different but the operation would be the same. Mayor Feinstein cannot support this project at $831,000 but if at some point the Village is able to get additional funding or scale it back to a number that is approachable, she still wants this project to move forward. Trustee Sanders-Romano asked if there a way to break this job up so that the landscaping is done by a different landscaper, construction by another, etc., and if in doing that it would produce a savings. Mr. Rotfeld responded that it was possible. The landscaping could be left for last and it would be cheaper to hire a professional landscaper to do just that aspect of the project rather then including it in the total package. He also added that another potential savings is if when they start digging and there is no rock, then they would not be paid for that part of the project. They only get paid for what they actually remove. This is not a lump sum bid and the specifications were a best estimate based on borings and soil testing. 2 of 8 Trustee Rosenberg asked about the items that might go up in cost instead of down and asked if the quantities listed were conservative numbers for bidding purposes. Mr. Rotfeld responded that there were really no costs that could escalate. The rock excavation removal is really the only unknown but unlikely. Trustee Sanders-Romano agrees with Mayor Feinstein in that she could not support the project at the lowest bid price and has a naive hope that there is a way to message this to come in closer to the Village's number. Would like the board to consider bidding things out separately like the digging/excavation/landscaping. Mr. Rotfeld responded that to do that, the only thing you can do is the landscaping. He cautioned that in doing that it may produce potential savings but may cause other problems as well such as minimum wage law for example — all government jobs are prevailing wage. Mr. Bradbury, Village Administrator advised the Board that there are limited areas we can search out for additional funding and believes we will run out of options pretty quickly. We would have to see if we can get the financing and how quickly and can we expend funds ahead of time and get reimbursed or maybe look at the time line and revise it and see if we can get an extension from the state and if it is even needed. Mr. Bradbury added that it may not even be necessary to throw these bids out because sometimes you can negotiate with the lowest bidder. Trustee Santon agrees and would like to identify areas where we can cut adding that the possible changes Mr. Rotfeld suggested could bring the amount into the upper $600,000 range. Trustee Rosenberg agrees it is too expensive even with the possible reductions that Mr. Rotfeld addressed. He added that we must take into consideration the cost of interest on the bond as you still have to pay it out over time. He also would like to find out if grant money is available but does not believe we are in a position to make a decision further then that. Trustee Brown asked if this project could be redesigned to do away with blasting and save a substantial amount of money. Mr. Bradbury responded in doing that you would need a larger basin. Mr. Rotfeld added that would cause a 15-20 percent loss in the capacity of the basin but you would leave the rock which would produce $100,000 savings. Trustee Santon added that he also thinks the fencing should be reconsidered as we have several detention basins in the village with no fencing. 3 of 8 Trustee Brown also agrees that he sees landscaping as a separate project and that the bulk of the landscaping can be done on a phase in basis where each year you can dedicate a certain amount of money to it. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planning Consultant, added that very often when a project is designed and then relooked at to save costs, the cost saving measures often produce more maintenance that has to be done down the road and should be considered. The culvert, for example, will require additional maintenance and an operating budget as well. The project that was bid is reasonable and sustainable. Mr. Bradbury added that the box culvert is easier to clean and the upfront costs should be considered versus the future maintenance cost. Mayor Feinstein wants to find additional money and would like Mr. Rotfeld to do an analysis/break down of what was discussed here tonight. She also would like to look into Trustee Brown's suggesting regarding no blasting and finally an analysis of the plantings. Mayor Feinstein would like to have a conversation now regarding blasting for the residents. Mayor Feinstein asked Mr. Rotfeld about blasting and brought up the King Street fields which also had the presence of the Tennessee pipe gas line but asked him to explain the process of blasting. Mr. Rotfeld explained that the procedure of blasting is obviously a liability to the community and that is why you hire a professional licensed blaster. There are pre blast procedures which conform to municipal and New York State codes. The King Street Ball Field was blasted practically on top of the 24 inch gas pipeline. The project in Port Chester right now blasted about 20 feet from a home. You record every blast — records the seismograph readings—can determine what the distance is—how much they can drill — how much they can shoot. Most claims have been damage that was not done by the blasting but by pre existing conditions and that is why the blasting company wants to get in the homes to take pictures, to protect himself. Mayor Feinstein asked how long — assuming we do it — will it take to complete the blasting as opposed to the chipping method. Mr. Rotfeld responded that he could not even guess but the chipping will take up to 6 times longer. Mr. Bradbury added that for King Street the blasting was done in two days with set up one day and blasting the next. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed added that blasting is always a concern of the residents and a valid concern. There are codes in place both on state and local levels and the attention to detail this village takes should put the resident's fears at rest. It is a much more precise procedure today then what it was. The impacts are far less, there is far less dust, limited noise, where chipping is noisy and goes on for weeks. The clear choice is blasting because of the precision. 4of8 Mayor Feinstein reiterated again that she would like to exhaust all means of additional funding and have further analysis done by Mr. Rotfeld. Mr. Bradbury will get started on that right away and provide the board with continual updates and will confer with Mr. Rotfeld on the spreadsheet analysis and a report on the basin reduction and staging the trees in phases and how it will impact the financing. Mr. Rotfeld will meet with the lowest bidder and try and negotiate some of the items explaining that you can talk to the lowest bidder but you cannot change the scope f the work. Mayor Feinstein will now open up the floor to the residents. Ms. Jane Elin, 30 Meadowlark Road, addressed the board stating that she has lived here for 35 years and is not in favor of the plan and believes it was irresponsible on the part of the board to believe that they could get a low bid while putting so much into the plan. She suggested not doing business with Bilotta Construction as she has had bad dealings with them before. Mayor Feinstein responded that the board put things in to make the project aesthetically pleasing. In the last few months projects that the Village put out to bid came in substantially lower because contractors were hungry for work. Ms. Anu Malhotra, 22 Meadowlark Road, addressed the board stating that she understand that the board spent a lot of time and energy to do the right thing and does not believe that we should sacrifice anything at this point. The Village promised the residents the basin would look good and she is requesting the board take a hard look at what they are considering giving up because the return on the investment has to make sense. She would like the board to stick to the original plan and not skimp. Mrs. Marilyn Yarnell, 28 Meadowlark Road, addressed the board and asked who would be responsible for any damages that might occur from blasting. Mayor Feinstein responded that the Village and the contractor would be responsible. Mr. Harvey Schiller, 26 Meadowlark Road, responded that was not correct, that only the Village is protected according to what he was told by Mr. Bradbury. In addition, Mr. Schiller's insurance agent advised him that as residents we are not protected at all from any damage except what is on the homeowners policy. Trustee Brown explained that you are not getting insurance of your own to cover this, the contractor hired will have to purchase insurance naming the village as additional insured and will be drafted to protect anyone who is damaged, property or personal, from the work they are performing on the site. If something happens you put a claim in, the contractors insurance investigates and the extra insurance is the Village of Rye Brook which would be the fall back. Insurance is in place and the Village hopes no damage will be done but if it does, that's what insurance is there for. All precautions will be taken. 5 of 8 Each contractor and sub contractor will have insurance; any damage caused by the blasting will be covered. Mr. Dom Accurso, 10 Whippoorwill Road, asked about the option of not blasting and reducing the size of the basin and if there was a way to make it up by going deeper. Mr. Rotfeld explained that was not an option because of the outlet. Mr. Accurso asked if municipal contracts were always unit cost. Mr. Bradbury responded that on this type of project,yes. Mr. Rotfeld added that if this were bid lump sum the minimum bid would have been in excess of$1,000,000 Mr. Schiller asked more questions in regard to the insurance and the way it was worded in the bid specifications. Trustee Brown responded that Mr. Schiller was mixing issues. The contractor is required to send out someone to go video photograph the homes that could be impacted, if the homeowner chooses not to let them in, that is there decision. The Village hires the contractor and we hold the insurance. Mr. Rotfeld added that according to Rye Brook code and state code, the contractor also has to have insurance. Ms. Laurie Schwartzman, 15 Edgewood Drive, addressed the Board and stated that she understands the time and effort that went into this and believes everyone is making sacrifices. There are lots of people out of work and taxes are going up and now you're talking about $1,000,000 project. She believes that if the Village does not have the funding then the project should not be done at all. Mrs. Moscato, 5 Edgewood Drive, addressed the board stating that this project has been in the works for a long time. The fields were done, Loch Lane was done, this projects turn is here. People are suffering and this project needs to be done. He does not want to hear about the aesthetics because there is a need here. Mayor Feinstein responded that this Board knows this project has merits and this is 7 years later and understands her frustration. This Board has not lost site of the reason this project is being undertaken. Mayor Feinstein added that this board does not take lightly the spending of taxpayer money and is even more careful in these economic times. Mrs. Moscato understands all the concerns of all the residents and likes Trustee Brown's idea of doing the job incrementally. She is very pleased that Loch Lane is not suffering adding that everything is channeled behind her house. They have been here 33 years and this detention basin will help everyone and it is very important that this project go 6of8 through. She stated that they have waited long enough and they are suffering with the floods. Lawrence Tobacco, 16 Argyle Road, stated that this seems almost trivial but he has had 4 floods and his premiums have really risen. He does not care about the aesthetics or small cracks in the wall and would like those people to put themselves in his shoes. He gets flooded every time it rains and the brook becomes a river. He understands all the concerns, but he is living with the problem. Mr. Brian Berk, 11 Edgewood Drive, asked if the maintenance was part of the bidding process and asked if the community would get to see the details. Mr. Bradbury responded that the maintenance is the Village Highway Department but at times we bring in outside people. In terms of the spreadsheet, there are copies tonight but you can also get it on the web site tomorrow. A lot of information on the basin is on the Village's web site. Mr. Berk added that he thinks the board needs to weigh doing the project in stages and believes it should be done the best way possible and not skimp. This is a residential neighborhood with permanent homes and that should be considered as well. Mr. Alan Solarz, 51 Rock Ridge Drive, asked about mosquitoes because of the standing water that remains in the basin and what is being done to make sure there is running water. Mayor Feinstein responded that we had the county at one of our meetings and they have reviewed the plan and discussed this particular project and he articulated that mosquitoes are not a concern because there is running water. Mr. Solarz asked who is accountable and recommends that someone take some action to insure there will not be a mosquito problem. Mr. Bradbury responded that West Nile is found in that area already so it would be hard to prove that it was from the basin when the condition already exists. Mr. Rotfeld added that there is 25 times the area on the flat piece of wetlands with more breeding areas then this—the existing conditions are much worse then the basin. Mayor Feinstein thanked the board and the public and the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 pm. 7of8 8 of 8