Laserfiche WebLink
Heritage Preservation Commission Minutes <br />May 15, 2025 <br />Page 2 <br />Commissioner Dietz stated she wanted to see the proposals laid out side by side to lessen her confusion <br />with the details of each proposal. <br />Councilmember Calva noted this was his first experience with the RFP process. He thought the proposals <br />would have provided more detail, so he liked that HGA provided a few specific ideas for their proposal. <br />Commissioner Griffiths stated the Mend proposal stood out the most for him because of they paid <br />attention to detail by using the words "historical," "European/Hungarian," "Indigenous," and "value." He <br />felt their proposal was most in line with the city's vision. He stated he thought the HGA water feature was <br />interesting. <br />Chair Lindberg provided an indigenous history regarding which Native Americans were present during the <br />timeframe of Elk River's birth. <br />Mr. Carlton stated all three did a good job with their proposals; he liked that HGA included two designs. He <br />noted HGA's deliverables were unclear and didn't have a step-by-step process. He felt Bolton & Menk were <br />very detailed with their deliverables and clearly outlined those items; he felt they were the best value. Mend <br />Collaborative was a close second, they were very clear and articulate with their deliverables. <br />Commissioner Tuckey felt the spelling errors in HGA's proposal were details that did matter, considering <br />the cost involved, and felt it also mattered that a key requirement was also overlooked. <br />Commissioner Campbell asked if they should go back and provide the firms an opportunity to clarify some <br />of the commission's questions. <br />Mr. Carlton stated he could follow up with them to request clarification. He also asked the commission for <br />two volunteers to be involved with the project and work with staff and the consultants once chosen, along <br />with Councilmember Calva. Commissioner Campbell and Tuckey requested to work on the subcommittee. <br />Mr. Carlton stated he will schedule phone calls with the firms and include the volunteer commissioners to <br />ask any additional questions. He stated he would like the City Council to review the HPC's selected contract <br />at their June 2 meeting. <br />Councilmember Calva asked if it was out of line for us to ask the firms for more details about what they <br />thought the project could look like. <br />Mr. Carlton thought it would be more appropriate to ask about the deliverables. A design could be <br />formulated and orchestrated further along the process. If any commissioners had additional questions, <br />he requested they email them to him. <br />Commissioner Griffiths noted his choice of .firms would be in this order: Mend, HGA, Bolton & Menk. <br />5.2 Downtown Small Area Plan <br />Mr. Carlton stated a final committee meeting will be held next Tuesday to determine if the plan is moving <br />forward to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Adoption of the plan is not <br />required and could be temporarily shelved. The commission discussed some parts of the plan, such as the <br />proposed parking ramp and the effect of the discontinuation of the Northstar Commuter Rail service. <br />1 I E I E I 11 <br />NATURE <br />