Renaissance Architecture: Record, Qualities, Types

Posted by Jiles on June 17th, 2021

Amsterdam Again Seeks Bids For Church St. Work™

File photo/ Traffic on Church Street in Amsterdam. The Common Council approved a resolution rejecting the recently returned Church Street reconstruction bids and re-advertise the project during a brief special meeting on Wednesday. The meeting was called after city officials learned the packet soliciting bids issued by the city in March failed to notify bidders of state requirements attached to the grant funded projects. Under Executive Law Article 15-A, municipalities, sponsors and recipients of state-issued grant awards over a certain threshold must comply with MWBE requirements to provide opportunities on state contracts for minorities and women. The requirements for state Department of Transportation funded projects are triggered for commodity procurements of more than ,000 and construction contracts of more than 0,000. The bid packet issued by the city did not list MWBE requirements and the returned bids did not meet those qualifications, necessitating their rejection. The action comes a week before the council was expected to award a contract for the Church Street reconstruction project during the next regular meeting on Tuesday. The project designed by M.J. Engineering will involve the full-depth pavement reconstruction of approximately 0.85 miles of Church Street from Forest Avenue to Clizbe Avenue. The city in 2018 was awarded a 0,000 grant through the state Dormitory Authority and million grant through DOT to cover the cost of the project. Peter Luizzi and Bros. Contracting emerged as the apparent low bidder with a submission of .26 million when bids were opened on April 27. Two other bids were also filed - Delsignore Blacktop Paving Inc. for .68 million, and Rifenburg Construction for .94 million. The qualifications of the returned bids were subsequently reviewed by M.J. Engineering, as the city’s consultants, in coordination with City Engineer Mike Clark. A recommendation for the contract award was submitted to DOT for the state’s concurrence before action by the council. It was during this review that the oversight in the bid packet and subsequent responses was apparently discovered. Cinquanti said the oversight was unintentional and occurred despite the review of the bid packet by the consulting firm M.J. Engineering, city officials and DOT. The mayor said it was likely taken for granted that all of the state requirements were included due to the state’s involvement in the project, indicating more thorough reviews will be performed going forward to avoid such future oversights. The city has been working with M.J. Engineering on Church Street since 2018 when the firm was awarded a ,000 contract to study the roadway and design the project. The city subsequently agreed to pay the firm ,500 to update plans after the city received a 1,785 grant from the state Department of Health through the Lead Service Line Replacement Program in 2019 to replace residential lead service lines connecting homes to the city water main. The city will allocate roughly ,000 from the award to replace any lead service lines running to homes along the section of Church Street slated for reconstruction to avoid disturbing the roadway again in the future. The city will continue working with M.J. Engineering for the duration of the project’s eventual construction after the council approved a resolution during the May 4 meeting to enter a supplemental agreement with M.J. Engineering to provide construction administration and inspection services throughout the reconstruction of Church Street for a cost not to exceed 5,000. The DOT funding for the reconstruction of the local highway required the project to be designed to state standards and will require the city to ensure the work is completed according to state specifications and construction practices. The engineering firm will supply both an engineer and an inspector who are National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies certified to provide the necessary oversight for state compliance. While he acknowledged the current situation occurred due to an error, Cinquanti said the city now has an opportunity to try to cultivate a more competitive bidding atmosphere to try to secure proposals within the available grant funding after each of the original bids came in over budget. “I wasn’t happy with the first bids at all,� Cinquanti said. The impacts of the pandemic have increased the cost of construction materials and labor, Cinquanti noted, yet he remains confident that the city can secure improved bids and complete the project this year. “I would have loved to have gotten this all squared away when the original bids came in, but the bids that did come in were higher than we anticipated, therefore we had to spend time trying to make them fit into what we were budgeting for the project and then when we found out about this technicality that made it more complex,� Cinquanti said. If bids still come back over budget later this month, Cinquanti said the city will do what is necessary to reconstruct Church Street. The mayor has indicated there may be other state funding sources the city could access to cover any funding gaps, while the city engineer has suggested arc church builders possibly using a portion of the Consolidated Local Street and Highway Improvement Program funding provided annually by DOT. Although typically used for road repaving, Clark has said CHIPS funding could be applied to the project to repair a local highway over which the city has jurisdiction. “We’ll do whatever we have to do to make sure that it’s done right,� Cinquanti said. The road reconstruction is aimed at correcting issues with a section of Church Street that emerged following a previous reconstruction project that was completed in 2008. After that work wrapped up, nearby residents discovered that the passage of heavy vehicles along the roadway caused their homes to vibrate, sparking fears the activity would cause structural damage.