Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />e <br /> <br />132G Energy Pad Drive <br />SL Pul. UN 5SllIS-S202 <br />Gl2-544.4389 <br />filar. 612-544.9446 <br /> <br />9800 SheIanI ParkWilY, Ste.llI2 <br />Minneapolis, HN 55441-6451 <br />612-54&-8432 <br />Far. 612-544.6398 <br /> <br />OCT - 7 19S3 <br /> <br />ITEM 4.7. <br /> <br />October 6, 1993 <br /> <br />File: 230-137-30 <br /> <br />Mr. Pat Klaers <br />City Administrator <br />City of Elk River <br />13065 Orono Parkway <br />Elk River, MN 55330 <br /> <br />RE: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT <br />U.V. BUILDING <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Klaers: <br /> <br />On September 23, 1993, we opened bids for the proposed disinfection building at the <br />wastewater treatment plant. We received bids from Gridor Construction ($202,900.00) and <br />Barbarossa Construction ($263,000.00). The low bid was approximately twice what we had <br />anticipated for the project. <br /> <br />Due to the high bid, we contacted Gridor Construction to determine the basis for their bid. <br />They provided a breakdown of the major material suppliers and subcontractors which <br />accounted for about half of their total bid. In several cases, Gridor, as the General <br />Contractor, received only one.quote for a particular work item. This lack of competition <br />likely increased the cost. In addition, the project is rather small relative to typical projects <br />of this type so there was a limited amount of interest by general and subcontractors. <br /> <br />We have met with Darrell Mack and discussed the possible options available. In general, we <br />feel that the low bid is too high and it would be possible to break the project down into <br />smaller workable tasks. In effect, the City would act as their own general contractor and hire <br />subcontractors to complete the various work items. Based on our discussion with Darrell, <br />he is comfortable with this approach and we would be available to assist him in obtaining <br />quotes, staking, inspection, and negotiations with suppliers and subcontractors. <br /> <br />We would recommend rejection of the current bids and return of the bid bonds to the two <br />contractors. We would also recommend that the project be turned over the City staff to <br />complete in a timely fashion with recognition of the June 30, 1994, operational deadline. <br />