Laserfiche WebLink
was ordered on December 19, 2000, and bids were received Wednesday, January 3, 2001. <br />Twelve (12) bids were received and ranged from $37,350.00 - $146,334.00. The low bid <br />submitted from Wickenhauser Excavating, Inc. for $37,350 is below the engineer's estimate of <br />$40,000. Staff has talked with the contractor and it appears that after talking with the property <br />owners requiring flowage easements and the status of the jurisdictional transfer of the County <br />ditches that the project will not occur until next winter. The contractor is willing to extend his <br />bids to next year contingent upon similar weather conditions or the City can reject all of the bids <br />and m-bid the project next fall. Also as part of this project, a permit will have to be obtained <br />from the WMO, DNR and USACOE. The WMO permit will not be obtained until the joint <br />powers agreement is signed. The DNR and the USACOE only require a letter explaining the <br />project and have indicated, preliminarily, that there should be no problems from their <br />perspective. Bidding this project again once the appropriate signature are obtained will be a <br />minimal cost and will ensure that any changes that the City encounters through the easement <br />negotiations can be included in with the contract. It was staff's recommendation to reject all of <br />the bids and re~bid this project next fall once all of the appropriate signatures are received. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen inquired as to why the City wouldn't ask the low bidder if they <br />would honor their bid for the next construction season. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson replied that staff has contacted them about keeping the bid for the next <br />construction season and they have agreed to do so. He explained that the problem is that the City <br />has not resolved whether or not mitigation should be done and for that reason the project may <br />change. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that his concern is that the economy is more competitive right <br />know and the City may not be able to receive such a competitive price if the project is re-bid next <br />year. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson replied that the contractor was willing to extend the bid if all conditions <br />stayed the same. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if the contractor would extend their bid without the City <br />issuing a contract. <br /> <br />City Engineer Olson replied that he thought they would, but noted that when a contractor extends <br />a bid they also issue a bid bond which will stay until the bid is rejected, which is not fair to the <br />contractor. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that he is concerned that if they extend the bid the project would involve <br />numerous change orders. <br /> <br />Councilmember Anderson expressed concern that there is such a large variation between the bid <br />amounts. She inquired if there was some confusion as to the scope of the project when the <br />project was bid. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee/February 20, 2001 <br /> Page 4 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />