Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews RFQ for new storage/garage and considers combining fire and rescue facilities
Summary
Committee members discussed results of an RFQ for a proposed 43-by-85-foot storage/garage (two finalists remain, plans estimated at 6% of project cost and 2% oversight) and debated whether to build large enough to house rescue vehicles, with a motion to convene department heads to study consolidation.
The Emergency Services Committee reviewed a request-for-qualifications for a proposed storage/garage and discussed whether the new bay should be large enough to hold both fire and rescue vehicles.
An agency official reported the RFQ closed Feb. 13 with six engineering firms responding; four were screened out for not following guidelines and two finalists visited the site. "The one response I got, cost for plans and drawings was 6% of the total cost of the project. Oversight of the entire project was another 2% of the cost of the project," the agency official said. He added that an informal dollar estimate from the firms was still pending and that the proposed footprint was 43 by 85 feet with six bays, which could be negotiated down depending on price.
Committee members asked whether the procurement was an RFQ or a bid and about comparable projects; the official said an RFQ lets the engineering firm manage bidding and hire contractors and pointed to similar recent projects (Westmoreland, Millersville, Oak Grove, Smith County) that informed the selection of the finalists.
A committee member suggested building the bay at full length and width so rescue vehicles could be housed there as well as fire apparatus, arguing consolidation might be more efficient and would replace an aging facility. The agency official and others said consolidation would require department-head planning and logistics, including vehicle locations and counts.
To advance that work, a committee member moved to authorize a meeting of department heads and designated participants to study consolidation and report back; committee members indicated verbal assent but no formal roll-call vote or outcome was recorded in the transcript.
The committee did not adopt a final design or budget in the meeting; members asked the agency official to return with firm price estimates and recommended scheduling any consolidation discussion before the upcoming budget process.
