Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff recommend roofing, flooring, HVAC and emergency water-heater projects amid asbestos abatement needs
Summary
Facilities staff recommended multiple low bids: flooring at Jenny Barker and Plym (Star Commercial), roofing sections at Florence Wilson (Diamond Roofing, ~$211,000), Garfield Early Childhood HVAC (Tetro Plumbing, ~$898,127), and an emergency hot-water heater replacement at the high school (Tetro Plumbing, ~$118,397); asbestos abatement at flooring sites requires separate quotes.
Garden City Public Schools staff presented a string of facilities recommendations and contract bids, asking the board to approve or consider action on several summer projects and emerging repairs.
For deferred flooring at Jenny Barker and Plym, the administration recommended Star Commercial Flooring as the lowest responsible bidder (Jenny Barker bid approx. $64,982; Plym approx. $65,113). Staff noted both campuses require asbestos abatement for existing tile and glue; initial abatement quotes exceeded earlier estimates and the district is soliciting additional bids and considering whether to separate abatement into its own procurement.
On roofing, a planned full replacement at Georgia Matthews proved to have additional deck and conduit issues that would expand timeline and cost. Staff pivoted to bidding sections A and D at Florence Wilson plus a band-room roof; Diamond Roofing returned the lowest responsible combined bid of approximately $211,000 and staff requested board approval to secure materials and schedule for summer work.
An emergent need at the high school — a long-troubled centralized hot-water system — produced a low responsible bid from Tetro Plumbing for $118,397 to install multiple on-demand heaters to improve reliability across a large campus.
Garfield Early Childhood’s HVAC replacement returned a low responsible bid of $898,127 (Tetro Plumbing), which is under the district’s $1.1 million estimate; staff recommended moving forward with the full scope.
Administrators said many projects came in under other budgets this year and that contingencies and savings from other projects will be used to cover arising needs; they also described standard unit-price provisions and a 15% contingency cap on construction overages. Several items were presented for board consideration and some were on a first read or recommendation list pending formal approval.
