BID board rejects bid for alley project

Gray Hughes

After receiving one bid for the alley paving project for the alley running in between Elm Street and McGregor Street behind the Hill City Senior Center, the Hill City Business Improvement District Board (BID Board) rejected the bid.


The BID board will now go out to bid the project again after given authorization by the Hill City Common Council at the council’s Monday meeting to do so.


“We had the bid opening last week,” said Brett McMacken, city administrator for Hill City, at the BID board’s meeting March 5. “We had (city engineer for Hill City Kale McNaboe) look at the bid, and we only had one contractor bid.”


That bid, submitted by Simon Contractors out of Rapid City, was for $472,062 while the engineer’s estimated cost for the project was $264,933.50. The cost over-run had the BID board approved the bid from Simon would have been $207,128.50.


The largest markup in cost would have been for the cost to mobilize Simon Contractor’s staff to get to Hill City. The cost of the asphalt, too, was a large cost for the project.


McMacken said McNaboe was planning on talking with Simon Contractors to figure out why its bid was larger than the estimate. McNaboe will also talk with the other contractors who took out bid packets (McMacken said there were three) to establish why they did not place a bid for the project.


One possible reason why the bid was higher than the estimate was that the project was slated to be done during the spring with an end date of mid-June, McMacken said, which might not have given contractors enough time to do the project during the busy construction season.


“That’s my thought,” said Tim Johnson, a member of the BID Board.


Shane Schriner, a member of the BID board, said he talked with a contractor who worked with concrete. Schriner reported that the contractor said asphalt is more expensive, so if the board went with concrete the overall cost of the project would be lower.


Concrete, too, is more durable than asphalt, Schriner added, and stands up to the weather better than asphalt.


McMacken said Schriner could be correct, that the use of asphalt is driving up the cost of the project.


Hill City mayor Kathy Skorzewski said she was at the bid opening and she said her thought was at the time was she was afraid this project would turn into another sidewalk project.


“Concrete would be more cost effective,” she added.


Dennis Krull, a member of the BID board, wanted to know what the timeframe would be for the project since he and the other members of the BID board believed that the short timeframe and June finish date impacted the overall cost of the project.


Johnson suggested 12 months to complete the project, to which Krull said that is “very do-able.”


However, after more discussion on the matter, the board decided to give the project a completion date of the end of 2020.


Ultimately, the BID board voted 4-0 (Schriner, Eileen Hamm, Johnson and Krull were the only members of the BID board present at the meeting) to recommend to the common council rejection of the bid and rebid with an option of either concrete or asphalt and a completion date of the end of 2020.


At its meeting, the Hill City Common Council agreed with the BID board and voted 4-0 to reject the bid and to go out to bid once again.


Before the discussion on the bid rejection, the BID board reviewed the plans for the Hill City Senior Center renovation.


“We have most of the design and mechanical plans in this latest plan,” McMacken said. “It should be available for bidders by March 15. If that holds true the question is, what is the comfort level in recommending going out for bid?”


While the city is responsible for doing the renovation and addition to the building, the senior center will do the kitchen upgrades.


“We anticipate (to spend) around $72,000 on the kitchen,” said Dale Householder, president of Hill City Senior Center.


The BID board voted 4-0 to recommend to the Hill City Common Council putting the senior center renovation to bid.


The Hill City Common Council voted 4-0 to uphold the recommendation, and the project will go out to bid.

User login