Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakeville to seek separate bids for two parking‑lot projects; prevailing‑wage rules and drainage differences noted
Summary
The Parks Commission agreed to issue two separate procurement solicitations — one to pave a karate‑studio parking area funded from park funds and a second for a soccer parking lot funded by the town — and discussed prevailing‑wage issues, drainage design and a one‑week bidder response window.
The Town of Lakeville will reissue two separate bids for parking-lot work at a town park, the Parks Commission decided, after discussing procurement language, prevailing‑wage sensitivity and drainage designs.
The commission asked staff to send the solicitations to a list of local contractors using the existing engineering plans, to update dates, and to explicitly exclude fencing, paving and line‑painting from the scope where the commission does not intend to pay for those items. Commissioners said three respondents had indicated they were lone proprietors (and therefore might quote without prevailing‑wage rates) while others signaled they would include prevailing wages in their bids.
Why it matters: The two jobs use different funding streams and have distinct drainage needs. The karate‑studio parking area will be paid from park-commission funds set aside for that project, while the soccer parking lot will be funded by town budget allocations connected to police and field access. Commissioners said the karate lot’s drainage plan requires a center drain and piped connections that will likely necessitate paving to preserve drainage integrity, whereas the soccer lot will be a regrade with culvert work along the edge and may not require immediate paving.
Staff told the commission they will give bidders a one‑week response window and stipulate a completion deadline at the end of the month; several contractors indicated availability to complete work in March or early April when many firms start larger seasonal projects. Commissioners also noted cost differences between contractors who will include prevailing wages (quoted at a much higher hourly labor rate) and sole proprietors, which could make a large difference in overall price.
Ending: The commission instructed staff to finalize the two separate solicitations and to coordinate scheduling so projects do not conflict with spring field use, then to return with bid results for award consideration.
