2012_1210_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 2 of 3 Bidder, lining method Base Bid Subtotal Segment 1 + Segment 2 Alternate 1 Temporary Watermain- Segment 1 Alternate 2 Additional Access Pits Fer-Pal Construction USA LLC (CIPP) $1,141,337.00 $26,450.00 $21,000.00 Michels Corporation (CIPP) $1,136,488.00 $59,000.00 $98,266.00 Veit & Company, Inc. (Spray-on) $ 621,886.10 $102,870.00 $0.00 Segment 1 is the cost to complete lining on Transit Avenue; Segment 2 is the cost to complete lining 35 on Rice Street. 36 Using the spray-on lining technology, it is possibl e to complete the project without using a 37 temporary watermain system; however, temporary wa ter is needed when the CIPP method is used. 38 City staff reviewed the project areas, and felt that it is possible to complete the segment on Transit 39 Avenue without temporary watermain. Tempor ary watermain on Segment 1 was included as 40 Alternate 1 so that staff could evaluate several opti ons with the bids. If temporary water is not used, 41 boil notices would be required to property owners affected by the project until disinfection tests 42 pass, which is typically 48 hours. The City woul d provide bottled water to affected properties for 43 consumption during this period. The cost of th e temporary water system submitted by Veit would 44 add significant costs to the project. Staff reco mmends pursuing the project without a temporary 45 water system; however, if it is determined that temporary water system is needed, staff will seek 46 quotes from other contractors. 47 During the bidding process, some of the bidders indi cated they would need to dig more access pits 48 than staff had identified on the plans. In order to best understand the additional costs, staff issued an 49 addendum adding Alternate 2, allowing contractors to indicate the number of additional pits they 50 would need and the cost of each pit. 51 Veit & Company, Inc. submitted their bid based on using the spray-on liner produced by 3M. This 52 is a newer technology that has been applied in several other states in the U.S., including Maine, New 53 York, and Pennsylvania, as well as Canada and Europe, but has not yet been applied in Minnesota. 54 Staff has been working with 3M to learn about and understand the process used with the spray-on 55 method. The projects 3M has completed to date ha ve been successful, without issues arising post-56 construction on the watermain or services. However, since this is a newer technology, 3M has 57 offered to provide the City an additional warranty over and above the standard contract warranty to 58 assure the City of 3M’s commitment to their product and process of watermain lining. 59 P OLICY O BJECTIVE 60 It is city policy to keep utility infrastruc ture in good operating condition, utilizing current 61 construction technologies that keep service di sruption during construction to a minimum. 62 F INANCIAL I MPACTS 63 We received three bids for the Watermain Reha bilitation Project. The low bid submitted by Veit & 64 Company, Inc., $621,866.10 is within the budgeted amount for this project and within the watermain 65 budget for 2012 and 2013. This work is funded by Watermain Infrastructure Funds. 66