Laserfiche WebLink
2550 University Avenue W . | Suite 400N <br /> St. Paul, MN 55114 <br /> Main 651.644.4389 + Fax 713.965.0044 <br />HRGREEN.COM <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />June 7, 2023 <br /> <br />Mr. David Swearingen <br />Public Works Director/City Engineer <br />City of Arden Hills <br />1245 West Highway 96 <br />Arden Hills, MN 55112 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Arden Manor Park and Floral Park Improvements | PW-20-PARK-003 & PW-22-PARK-001 <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Swearingen, <br /> <br />On May 22nd, 2023 the City Council received plans and specifications for the Arden Manor Park and Floral Park <br />Improvements project, City projects PW-20-PARK-003 & PW-22-PARK-001, and authorized advertisement for <br />bids. <br /> <br />On June 5th, 2023 the City of Arden Hills received bids for the Arden Manor Park and Floral Park Improvements <br />project. The results were verified by City-consultant, HR Green. Three (3) bids were received and ranged <br />between $816,523.35 and $1,323,468.51. The following is a bid summary: <br /> <br />Peterson Companies, Inc. $ 816,523.35* <br />Urban Companies LLC $1,001,085.00 <br />Parkstone Contracting LLC $1,323,468.51 <br /> *Adjusted bid total by $0.40 (rationale below) <br /> <br />A discrepancy of $0.40 was found in the bid of Peterson Companies, Inc. between the Arden Manor Park base <br />bid amount written on the bid form and in the actual sum of the total costs for the bid items. As described in <br />Section 10 of the Instruction to Bidders in the Project Manual, the corrected sum governs and is included herein. <br /> <br />All three bids were higher than the engineer’s estimate of $489,617.63. The low bid price was 67% higher than <br />the engineer’s estimate. All the bids were accompanied by the required bid bond. <br /> <br />After a thorough review of the bids received, we feel that the engineer’s estimate did not adequately represent the <br />approximate construction costs that could have been anticipated. Most cost history sources referenced in <br />development of the engineer’s estimate were two to four years old, and inflation was inadequately accounted for. <br />Also, one of the cost history sources referenced was MnDOT average bid prices , however MnDOT projects are <br />generally larger and roadway-oriented, and the economy-of-scale applied to the engineer’s estimate for small- <br />quantity items was insufficient. <br /> <br />Due to the spread between high and low bidder we also reviewed the following items to try to identify cost risks <br />that could show up during construction. The quantities of the ten highest cost items for each park were reviewed <br />for any significant under-estimates, and the plans and specs were reviewed for incidental items that may have <br />had a significant indirect impact on bid costs, but nothing significant was found. Other possible hidden costs such <br />as dewatering or temporary shoring needs were reviewed, but nothing significant was found either, so the large <br />spread may be attributable to Contractor-specific means and methods. <br /> <br />The costs for one bid item in the Peterson Companies, Inc. bid for both parks is of note. Mobilization is about <br />one-quarter of the total bid amount for each park, which is more than typical, however mobilization can be highly <br />variable between Contractors as it is with these bids, and it is difficult to attribute the mobilization cost to any <br />particular factor(s).