My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution_Award Faust Rd Bridge Replacement_Belsaas and Smith
>
Meetings
>
2023
>
09. September
>
2023-09-05 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
Resolution_Award Faust Rd Bridge Replacement_Belsaas and Smith
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/31/2023 1:10:17 PM
Creation date
8/31/2023 1:09:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
9/5/2023
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Item
Request to Approve a Resolution to Award the Contract for the Faust Road Bridge #88212 Over the Town Ditch Replacement Project (CRP 316-22) and Authorize the County Engineer to Execute the Same
Order
23
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
108557
Type
Resolution
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Washington State <br />Alft <br />�AP Department of Transportation <br />7) Did the bidder make portions of the work available to DBE subcontractors and suppliers to be <br />consistent with the availability of DBEs to facilitate DBE participation? (CFR 49, Part 26, <br />Appendix A,IV.D) <br />The bidder's letter listed a specific work scope consistent with the Engineer's estimate (traffic <br />control, surveying, guardrail, and concrete). The bidder reached out to DBEs that do different <br />kinds of work, but there were a few other scopes of work that the bidder could have pursued, <br />like excavation, bridge deck, and fencing. In the future, the bidder should solicit all the scopes of <br />work available in the project. This could increase the chances of receiving more bids. <br />Conclusion <br />However, the bidder did solicit several of the scopes of work available and met this <br />requirement. <br />8) Did the bidder try to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit, or insurance? <br />Based on the bidder's documentation, solicitation emails sent to the DBEs did not mention any <br />assistance with bonding or insurance. <br />Conclusion <br />The bidder did not provide any information about bonding and insurance. The bidder did not <br />meet this requirement. <br />9) Did the bidder try to assist interested DBEs in obtaining necessary equipment, supplies, <br />materials, or related assistance or services? <br />Based on the bidder's documentation solicitation emails to the DBEs, there was no mention of <br />assistance obtaining materials, supplies, or related services. <br />Conclusion <br />The bidder did not provide any information. They offered the DBEs this type of assistance. The <br />bidder did not meet this requirement. <br />10) Did the bidder effectively use the services of available minority/women community <br />organizations, minority/women contractors' groups, and local, state, and federal <br />minority/women business assistance centers? (CFR 49, Part 26, Appendix A, IV.H) <br />Based on the bidder's documentation, they used the DBE directory to solicit quotes from the <br />DBEs. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.