CCP 01-23-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . URS MEMORANDUM Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612)370-0700 Fax: (612) 370-13783 To: Michelle Wolfe/Arden Hills Kristine Gigal Arden Hills Tom Moore/Arden Hills Frank Ticknor/URS File: 37951 005 Copy: From: Greg Brown, PE Date: January 17, 2006 Subject: 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project Discussion Background The largest outlay of sanilary sewer funds over the past 7 years has been for the systematic refurbishment and standardization of the City's oldest lift stations. To date, lift stations #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 have been reconfigured with submersible pumps and updated control panels which are SCADA ready. Lift Station #10 was rehabilitated in 1990. Lift Station #14 was constructed new in 1995. Lift Station #3 was rehabilitated at a project cost of $60,000 in 1998. Lift Stations #4 and #9 were rehabilitated at project costs of$140,000 each in 2005. 2006 Lift Station Rehabilitation Project The remaining four lift stations (#1, #11, #12, #13) were combined into a single project which was designed during the fall of2005 and bid on December 20,2005. The project base bid included stations #11 and #13, the project included a bid alternate for stations #1 and #12. The stations identified for base bid vs. bid alternate were based on recommendations from O&M staff. Based upon the low bid received the financial implications of the project break down as follows: The project cost for the replacement oflift stations #11 and #13 would be $355,000 Thc project cost for the replacement of all four lift stations would be $655,000 The budgeted amount for the project in 2006 is $560,000.00 Upon detailed review of the bids and discussion with Contractors, the bids tended to be high only with respect to the actual pump system item. The site work, manholes, valves and electrical work was generally at or below estimated costs. The pump systems were approximately $10,000-$15,000 greater than estimated for each station and significantly greater than recent costs. The reasons for this significant increase were given by the pump supplier as higher costs for tjve year warranties, pass through of manufacturer's cost increases in November, 2005 (15%) and higher labor costs for installation. The City received six bids for the work. Therefore, we believe the costs as bid are accurate reflections of the current market. For this reason, rejecting the bids and rebidding the project (or part thereof) would not likely reduce project costs; there is greater likelihood of higher project costs based upon recent experience with this type of work.