Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
VII-2 - Resolution - Award Contract City Hall Masonry Restoration Project
111PriorLake, MN LittleCanada, MN Roseville, MN –Corp. #2 22 #1 CityCouncilMemorandum To: MayorHicks & CityCouncilMembers From: JustinFortney, CityPlanner Date: July23, 2018 Item: ContractAwardfortheCityHallMasonryRestorationProject CAROUNCILCTIONEQUESTED CouncilisrequestedtoadopttheattachedresolutiontoawardacontractfortheCityHall MasonryRestorationProject BIACKGROUNDNFORMATION thThebidswereduefortheprojectonJune28 at2:00p.m. Unfortunately, onecontractor’s courierattemptedtosubmitthebidproposalat2:01p.m. whichwasnotacceptable. Staffwas notabletoaccepttheenvelopecontainingthebid. Asummaryofthebidsarelistedbelow. Bidder BaseBid Alternate1 Alternate2 TotalBid BuildingRestoration $581,942 $23,360 $273,035 $878,337 AdvancedMasonry – $699,266 $19,500 NA $718,766 Doesnotinclude #2 InnovativeMasonry – $259,434 $14,000 $198,000 $471,434 ColumnExplanation BaseBid Replacementofsomeidentifiedbrick, stone, andmortarrepointing Repaircracksinstone Removeandreinstalllights, guttersanddownspouts Repointlimestoneonannexaddition Cleanhistoriclimestoneandapplyawatersealer Installheattapetoguttersanddownspouts Repairsitecondition Alternate #1 Cleanhistoricbrick. Therearesuckersandvinesstillattachedinareasfromtheirremoval in2007, lightstainingfromdeterioratinglimestonefeatures, limitedsectionswithsome mildew, etc. Thisalternatewasaddedbecauseithasmoreofanaestheticimpactrather thanperformance. Thisitemdoesnothavetobeincludedintheproject. Sincecleaningof thebrickdoesnotofferandperformanceormaintenancebenefits, staffrecommendsnot addingthisitemtotheprojectatthistime. Thiscouldbeaddedtotheprojecttowardsthe endifthereareminimalchangeordersoratalaterdate. Mostofthestainingonthe buildingislimitedtothestonework, whichwillbecleanedaspartofthebasebid. Alternate #2 Excavate, repoint, waterproofhistoricfoundation, andregradethesite. Themortar VII-2 betweenthefoundationstonesofthehistoricfoundationhasdissolvedovertheyears. Thestonesdonotappeartohavesettledoratagreatriskoffailureinthenearfuture. The largestconcernismoistureandevenwaterinfiltrationfromtheoutsidethroughthevoids inthefoundation. Thebuildinghasahighamountofhumidityfromthemissingmortar. Thefoundationhaslikelyneverbeenrepointedfromtheoutsideandonlysomeareas havebeenrepointedfromtheinside. Whilerepointingthefoundationwallsfromthe insidemayoffersomestrength, itdoesnotaddressthemoistureinfiltrationandmayeven trapmoistureinthefoundation, therebyspeedingthedeterioration. ThisalternatewasaddedbecauseitwasdifficultforourconsultingfirmCDG CollaborativeDesignGroup) toestimatewhatbidswouldbesubmittedforthisportion. Iftheproposedworkwasprohibitivelyexpensive, wewantedtohavethisamount separatedsotherestoftheprojectcouldcontinuewithoutthedelayofgoingbackfor bids. Thisitemalsodoesnothavetobeincludedintheproject. Therearesignificantcostsavingstoperformingthisitemwiththeproject. Thereisthe economiesofscalesincetherewillbealargerepointingprojectontherestofthe building. TheBiddidcomeunderbudgetandundercompetingbids. Eightcontractor attendedthepre-bidmeetingandonlytwo (andpossiblytherejectedbid) were comfortablebiddingonthefoundationwork. Thereisalsoalineiteminthebasebid called “generalconditions”, this $90,000itemcoversthecontractor’sexpenseinthe repairofthesiteandputtingitbacktopre-constructioncondition. Althoughitisunder thebasebid, themajorityofthedisturbancewillbefromthefoundationwork. Sothatis alargecreditforthefoundationrepair. Ifweputthefoundationrepairoff, wewouldlose thesecreditsandeconomies. Wehavebudgetedforthisitem, butagaintherecould alwaysbeunforeseencontingencies. Thisiswhythearchitectalsorecommendsanowner having20% additionalfundsavailableforthistypeofwork ($39,000). Ifweelecttonotrepairthefoundationatthistime, thearchitectrecommendsrequesting thatthecontractorrevisethequotetoonlyincluderegradingofthesite. Weshouldatthe least, preventasmuchwaterinfiltrationaspossiblefromgettingtothefoundation. ThecityhassecuredaMinnesotaHistoricalSocietyStateCapitalProjectsGrantfor $212,187, whichwastheremainingfundsintheirgrantaccount. Atleasthalfoftheprojectfundingmust bematchedbythecitysolastyearwehadbudgeted $236,374asamatch. Thetotalamount budgetedwiththegrantis $448,561. TheestimateforthisprojectwasultimatelydeterminedbyCDGtobeabout $550,000. CDG hasinspectedthebuildingandidentifiedallthemajorareasofrepair, butduringtherestoration processtherewillbemanysmallareasandindividualrepairsnecessary. Therequestforbidsrequiredtheunitandfootcostforthetypicalrepairitems. (Asan example, IMRstatestheirunitcostforreplacingonedamagedbrickis $15.00) Thearchitect willdeterminewhatadditionalworkshouldbedonealongwithourchangeorderprocedure. Thecontractor’spriceforthoseitemsisalreadyincludedinthebidandcontract. Duetothese VII-2 smallerareasthatwillbeaddedtotheprojectaschangeorders, thearchitectalways recommendstheownerhavingupto20% contingencyfundsavailable ($51,886). P-BCQROSTIDONTRACTORUALIFICATIONEVIEW IMR (InnovativeMasonryRestoration, LLC) wasthelowbidderforthebasebidandboth alternates. TheysubmittedfourrecenthistoricprojectsofasimilartypeincludingRedWingCity HallandtheSheldonTheater (2015-2016). StaffspoketoShawnBlaney, DeputyDirectorof PublicWorksforthecityofRedWingwhorantheprojectswhereIMRperformedsimilarwork. Mr. Blaneysaidhewashappywiththeirwork. Staffspecificallyaskedaboutchangeorderson theproject. Mr. Blaneysaidthereweresomechangeorders, buttheywerenecessary and reasonable. CDGperformedreferencechecksonIMRandreportthattheyhavedonegoodworkonpast projectsandhaveworkedononeofCDGsprojectsafewyearsago. AccordingtotheCDGlead onthatproject, IMRwasgoodtoworkwithandtheirlevelofworkwasgreat. CDGalsoreached outtoIMRtodetermineiftheyarecomfortablewiththeirbidamountandiftheyfully understoodtheentireprojectscope. IMRrespondedthattheyarehappywiththeirbidandthey fullyunderstandtheprojectandtheywillbereadytobeginaroundAugust1st. SRTAFFECOMMENDATION StaffisrecommendingthattheCityCouncilmoveforwardinadoptingtheattachedresolution awardingthecontracttoIMR (InnovativeMasonryRestoration, LLC), intheamountof 259,434forthebaseprojectand $198,000foraddingalternate #2, thefoundationworkand regradingofthesiteforatotalof $457,434. Thiswillrequireanadditional $8,873offundsto bebudgetedforthisproject, inadditiontothe20% contingenciesfortheproject. ATTACHMENTS Resolution - ContractAward VII-2 2 PriorLake, MN LittleCanada, MN Roseville, MN –Corp. CHITYOFASTINGS DC,MAKOTAOUNTYINNESOTA RN. ESOLUTION O RRBAC2018CHMESOLUTIONECEIVINGIDSANDWARDINGONTRACTFORTHEITYALL ASONRY RPESTORATIONROJECT WHEREAS, pursuanttoanadvertisementforbidsfortheCityHallMasonryRestorationProject, where bidswereopenedonJune28that2:00p.m. asadvertisedandtabulatedaccordingtolaw, andthe followingbidswerereceivedbythedeadline: Bidder BaseBid Alternate #1 Alternate TotalBid BuildingRestoration $581,942 $23,360 $273,035 $878,337 AdvancedMasonry – $699,266 $19,500 NA $718,766 Doesnotinclude #2 InnovativeMasonry – $259,434 $14,000 $198,000 $471,434 and WHEREAS, thecity’sconsultantCDG (CollaborativeDesignGroup) hassufficientlyresearchedInnovative MasonryRestoration, LLC (IMR) pastprojectsandreferencesasthelowestbidder, andfoundtheyhave performedsimilarworkintherecentpasttothesatisfactionoftheirclients, and WHEREAS, itappearsthatInnovativeMasonryRestoration, LLCisthelowestresponsiblebidder. NOW, THEREFOREBEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFHASTINGSASFOLLOWS: 1.TheMayorandClerkareherebyauthorizedanddirectedtoenterintoacontractwith InnovativeMasonryRestoration, LLC. 2.Thetotalamountofthecontractisherebydeclaredtobe $457,434includingthebasebid andalternate #2. rdADOPTEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFHASTINGS, MINNESOTA, THIS23 DAYOFJuly, 2018. Ayes: Nays: PaulJ. Hicks, Mayor ATTEST: JulieFlaten, CityClerk SEAL VII-2