Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears low bid about $3 million for Edmonds water-main replacement; staff will review bids and return to consent
Summary
Committee B was briefed on bids opened for the 2025 water main replacement project covering roughly 1,500 linear feet; staff reported five bidders and a low bid substantially under the engineer's estimate and said they will complete bid-responsibility checks before awarding the contract.
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Edmonds City Council Committee B received a report Tuesday on bids opened earlier that day for the city’s 02/2025 water main replacement project and was told the low bid came in about $1 million under the engineer’s estimate.
Rob English, city engineer, said the project comprises two bid schedules and replaces about 1,500 linear feet of water main, predominantly 8-inch pipe with some 6-, 4- and 2-inch segments. He said the engineer’s estimate was slightly above $4 million and that staff received five construction bids at the opening earlier that day.
“The low bid was submitted by Shoreline Construction at $3,000,001.46,” English said, noting the bid represented a significant underrun compared with the engineer’s estimate. He reported the second-low bidder at just over $3.2 million and a third close behind; English described the three low bids as “tight” in price. Staff will perform a complete bid review and responsibility check before recommending award.
English said the funding source for the project is the water-utility fund (fund 421) and that construction time is estimated at just under six months of working days. He said staff plans to assemble a proposed construction budget that includes contract administration, materials testing and a management reserve and that the project could appear as a consent item at the May 27 or June 3 council meeting depending on timing.
Committee members asked about the city’s bidder responsibility and responsiveness checks, and English described the standard process: experience thresholds in the bid documents, reference checks, and disclosure of pending claims or issues with other public agencies. He and committee members agreed that staff would include more narrative in the agenda memo explaining the apparent underbid and the vetting process before placing the item on consent.
