13 - Laserfiche WebLink

would be $105,000 and in Alternative 2, $126,000 After more discussion about the value of not removing existing parking spaces, a motion was made to recommend Alternative Three as the preferred alternative The motion passed unanimously As a point of clarification for the City Council, the cost estimates for all three alternatives are "all-in" cost estimates, meaning they include more than the hard construction costs The cost estimates include design, construction, material testing and inspection They also include a 10 percent contingency to cover any unforeseen conditions encountered during construction In all, these "soft costs" add approximately 20 percent to the construction contract amount Therefore to compare these cost estimates to the cost of the contract for the courts in the location shown in the masterplan, it is necessary to add soft cost to the $494,353 Goodland bid amount This results in a cost of approximately $593,000 for the canceled project, which can be compared directly to the cost estimates for the three alternatives presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission CONCLUSION While staff originally recommended Alternative 1 based primarily on cost, staff is also supportive of the Park and Recreation Commission recommendation of Alternative 3 There would be no loss of parking in Alternative 3 and at least one of the new courts would be located internally to the park in an area that has little use by neighborhood members or tennis court users Submitted by Reviewed by Approved =►y //rIL / Stephen Ki patnck Tina Olson Nelson Fialho Director of Engineering Director of Finance City Manager Attachments 1 Alternative 1 concept plan and cost estimate 2 Alternative 2 concept plan and cost estimate 3 Alternative 3 concept plan and cost estimate Page 5of5