CR 94-230 Award Of Contract Phase II Nine Mile Creek
- - - -"-
\ 'I
0
0 f
. December 15, 1994 o "- council Report: 94-230
P K \
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE
PHASE II NINE MILE CREEK IMPROVEMENTS
prol?osed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: "Move that council
ado~t Resolution 94-113. Awardinq Bid for the Phase II Nine Mile Creek
Improvements to Schield Construction in the amount of $87.902.91. fI
Award of this bid includes the base bid and alternate bid as listed
below. The award of the alternate bid is contingent upon receiving
all the necessary approvals for that work.
Overview.
Bids were opened on December 8, 1994 for the Phase II Nine Mile Creek
Improvements. Four Bids were received and are tabulated below. The
low bidder was Schield construction.
BIDDER TOTAL BID ALTERNATE
SChield Construction $ 83,372.91 4,530.00
Ryan contracting Inc. $151,800.00 7,500.00
. G.L. contracting $168,128.90 6,750.00
R.J. Valek Construction $182,910.00 13,125.00
Engineer1s estimate $1201000
primary Issues to Consider.
0 Why is there an alternate bid?
0 Should award be made to Schield Construction?
0 Is the Bid reasonable?
0 How will this project be funded?
0 When can construction begin?
Supportinq Information.
0 Analysis of Issues
0 Resolution 94-113
0 Recommendation letter from RCM
/
/ f
".K"".~..,..r~___~/ t I--",;~ "} / \..
. Lee Gusta:ftson,
Public Works Director
.
Council Report: 94-230
Page 2
. Analvsis of Issues
0 Why is there an alternate bid?
All of the work, including the alternate bid, basically involves
channel excavation. An alternate bid was used to bid a specific
type of work that was not needed to achieve the overall goal of
reducing the low flow problems. This alternative work does
however greatly assist in future maintenance efforts by making
the channel excavation easier. The alternate work is also a bid
item that would be funded by the Watershed District.
The only reason this work was bid out separately and not included
in the base bid is that this work requires additional approvals
from state agencies. staff did not want to include this work in
the base bid since it was not absolutely necessary, and take a
chance this work would not get approved thereby delaying the
entire project. Bidding it out as an alternate allows us to
include it if it is approved, or leave it out if it is not
approved.
0 Should award be made to Schield Construction?
ReM and Associates have reviewed the bids and checked
qualifications and have found Schield Construction to be a
. reputable contractor. Staff therefore recommends that the
contract be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Schield
Construction.
0 Is the bid reasonable?
This bid is extremely reasonable. The low bid is $37,000 lower
than the engineers estimate, and $67,000 lower than the second
low bidder. staff met with the low bidder to review the bid and
make certain he could do the work at his bid price. The low
bidder indicated that he was still comfortable with his bid and
saw no reason for concern.
0 How will this project be funded?
This project will be funded almost completely by Watershed
District Funds with the exception of some minor work. This
funding scenario is similar to the other creek improvements that
were completed over the last few years. As with all the creek
improvements, the city will pay the costs up front, and get
reimbursed by the Watershed District in 3-4 years.
0 When can construction begin?
Construction will probably begin the third week of January. It
. is anticipated that most all of the work will be completed by
March 1.
--- - -- -- ---
. CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 94-113
RESOLUTION FOR BID AWARD
PHASE II NINE MILE CREEK IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, bids were received for the Public Works Addition on
December 8, 1994, and
WHEREAS, four bids were received and the bid of Schield
Construction, in the amount of $87,902.91, is the lowest
responsible bid for the Phase II Nine Mile Creek
Improvements, Project No. 94-15.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Hopkins, Minnesota, that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
authorized and directed to enter into a contract with
SChield Construction, for and on behalf of the city.
Adopted by the City Council of the city of Hopkins this 20th day
of December, 1994
.
Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor
ATTEST:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
.
---- ---- .-------- ..-- -- ------- ---- -
12114194 10: 14 "fi'612 935 8814 ReM ASSOCIATES l€:J VU,,"I VV,,"
. December 14, 1994
Mr. Lee Gustafson, P E.
Director of Public Works
City of Hopkins
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
RE: Nine Mile Creek Ditch Maintenance Project
Hopkins, Minnesota
City Project No. 94-15
ReM Project No. 10162.08
Project Award
Dear Lee:
<lzgorn I would like to recommend award for the above referenced project to Schield
Construction Company. The base bid amount is $83,372.91.
rieke As you know, \Ye met \\lith the Contractor to discuss his plan of operation for this
carroll
muller project. He seems to understand the wetland impacts on the project and is aware
.aSSodatesl inc. ofllie limitations on his construction operations. I checked several of his references,
en~neers
a~ itects and each of them indicated that Schield Construction has performed good work on
land surveyors their projects.
equal opportJJnrty
employer The Alternate Bid item for construction of the sedimentation basin will be
constructed contingent upon approval by the regulatory agencies. At this time, I
recommend awarding the base bid portion of the project only. The Award should
state that the City reserves the right to include the alternate bid item at a later date,
contingent upon reguJatory agency approval, and retain the unit bid price for this
work.
Please call with any questions.
Sincerely,
M!~de=---
Project Manager
RIEKE CARROLL MULIER ASSOCIATES, INC.
MCA;ka
. 10901 red circle drive c: James Gessele, City of Hopkins
box 130
mlnnetonka, minnesota 55343
612"935~6901
fax 612-935-8814