Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />! <br />i <br />! <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />CASE <br /> <br /> RE~I~E BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR IMPROVEMENT <br /> PROj,I~i~T ~91-14 (WOOD POND PROJECTS STREET CONSTRUCTION <br /> ',~::r :~'ND CENTRAL PARK PARKING. LOT. PAVING) <br /> ! ! By: Steve Jankowsk~, City Engineer and <br /> ~ i Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator <br /> <br />Background~ <br /> <br />Improvem~.t '~'_oj~. t g91-14 involves providing the curb, gutter, street and trail improvements to <br />the Wood P ~c~l~l P~jeets subdivision. In addition, an alternative bid was solicited for the paving of <br />the Cent~al~P~k p~king lot, since both projects are primarily paving projects. The bids were <br />opened on Th'~sc[~,y, April 9, 1992. <br />Eight contraCt~irs S~bmitted proposals on the work with the lowest bidder being Bauerly Brothers, <br />Inc. in the a~, ~unt~of $182,277.20. A copy of the bid tabulation is attached along with the bid <br />schedule ,fr0.~ B~d~erly Brothers, Inc. It should be noted that Schedules A, B and C amount to <br />$156,0181 c~ ~ to the Engineer's estimate of $183,735. This amount will be financed by <br />assessment~ i~ aiti~t the Wood Pond Projects improvements. Schedule D, which represents the <br />cost of pav!~ the!Central Park parking lot, was bid at $26,259.50 compared to the Engineer's <br />estimate of~ $~ ],3~0. Funding for this project will come from the $40,000 earmarked for this <br />project in' th~ 1~992 ~a.rks and Recreation budget funded from the Park Trust Fund. <br /> <br />The pavir~g Of :he Central Park parking lot was discussed at a recent Budget Committee meeting. <br />At that me~in z, alconcern for local government aid reductions and the resultant impact on the <br />General Fut~d~ ~as!discussed. As Council is aware, this project, funded from a dedicated trust <br />fund, hasl a l~a n~~ derived primarily from park dedication fees with the stated purpose of park <br />development, · '~g this fund to provide a subsidy to the General Fund would not be good public <br />policy give~-t ~'Sburce of the dollars within the fund. Further, the bid is 66% of the budget <br />allocation be~a ~f being able to leverage the larger project. <br />Council Aati on:~ <br /> <br />Motion to adopt RJgsolution 4/92-04- receiving bids and awarding contract for Improvement <br />Project g91, i ~i (extension of street improvements for Chestnut Hills, Chestnut Pond, Cedar Hills <br /> e W, ~:ls Additions and paving of Central Park parking lot). <br /> <br />and Windemc~ <br /> <br />City Adn~,' '~tr~tor ~ <br />City Engineer i <br />Proj <br />Finance Officer? <br /> <br />CC:04/14/92 <br /> <br /> <br />