Staff seeks rejection of $544,440 guardrail bid for Hedge Lane bridge; county to rebid with revised schedule

Miami County project manager Matt Oler asked the Board of Commissioners on June 18 to reject the sole bid for the FAS 270 Hedge Lane bridge guard replacement after the single competitive bid came in at about double the engineer’s estimate.

Oler told commissioners that Icon Structures submitted a bid of $544,440.60 when the engineer’s estimate was $262,300, or roughly 107% higher than the estimate. Oler said this was the second solicitation (the first produced no bidders) and that county practice has been to reject bids substantially above the engineer’s estimate.

“Maybe we can discuss some of the nitty gritty,” Oler said, and recommended rejecting the bid and rebidding the project with an altered schedule to make it more attractive to contractors. He proposed shifting work to winter months—allowing a December start and a June completion date—so contractors could fit the project into slower parts of their schedules.

Oler described the on-site condition: multiple overlays over time have raised the road surface so the existing guardrail now sits below the road elevation and is not crash-worthy. The project will require substantial grading because modern crashworthy guardrail standards require sloped areas behind posts (Oler described needing 10-to-1 slopes for an eight-foot run behind posts, then transitions to 3-to-1 slopes), increasing the scope beyond a simple rail replacement.

Commissioners and staff discussed alternatives. One option discussed was milling down the roadway approach to restore the original elevation and then replacing the guardrail; Oler said that would still not produce a crashworthy barrier and could convert the job into a larger pavement reconstruction project if deeper base work is required. County staff also noted that broader construction demand tied to earlier federal infrastructure funding has kept contractor schedules full.

Oler said the bid opening was held at 9 a.m. on June 10 and that Icon Structures was the lone bidder. He recommended the commission reject the bid and reissue the request with a revised schedule and possibly alternative repair scopes; the transcript records staff’s recommendation but does not show a formal roll-call vote on the rejection during the study session.

Staff will provide cost estimates for the milling-and-replace option and for a full road-repair alternative and will bring revised bidding documents back to the commission if they choose to reject and rebid.