Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve Kilgore low bid for Canyon Road project after $15,000 correction
Summary
County staff reported three bids for the Canyon Road project; commissioners approved the Kilgore agreement for $10,282,685 (corrected from $10,297,085) and authorized the chair to sign, subject to Pleasant Grove’s pending written approval of select alternates.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board of Utah County Commissioners approved the low bid for the Canyon Road project serving Pleasant Grove and Cedar Hills and authorized the commission chair to sign the agreement at the corrected contract amount of $10,282,685.
County staff told commissioners they received three bids — from Kilgore, Staker and Geneva — and that Kilgore was the apparent low bidder. Staff identified a mathematical error in the paperwork that reduced the contract amount listed on the agenda from $10,297,085 to $10,282,685, a reduction of about $15,000 in the county’s favor. "We have completed the bids for the Canyon Road project in Pleasant Grove and Cedar Hills," an unnamed county staff member said, noting the corrected dollar figure and the discovery of the error.
Staff recommended approving seven ad alternates associated with the project, five of which relate to city utility improvements. Written approvals have been received from American Fork and Cedar Hills; Pleasant Grove’s approval on its alternate was pending on that city’s agenda for the coming Tuesday. Commissioners approved the contract and alternates subject to receiving Pleasant Grove’s written approval of alternates 2, 3 and 4.
Commissioner Lee moved to approve the consent item and authorize the chair to sign the agreement with the corrected amount and the stated conditions; the motion passed by voice vote (3-0). The commission recorded the vote as unanimous in favor. The county did not provide additional budget appropriation details or a project schedule in the discussion on the record.
The contract approval appeared on the consent agenda and was finalized without additional public comment. The county staff contact did not provide the bid tabulation details beyond the three bidders and the seven alternates.
