Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-09-17; City Council; 2204-1; Traffic signal installation - El Camino RealI T_HE CITY OF CARLSPAD, -CALIFO_RN IA r. -Agenda Bi 11 'do. d Referred To: Date Sept. 17, 1974 A? Subject : Submitted By: Traffic signal installation - El Camino Real Public Works and La Costa Avenue Administrator - Statement of the Matter In November, 1973, the City entered into an agreement with the County of San Diego to participate in the construction cdsts of a traffic signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. The agreement provided that the City shall reimburse the County for one- half share of all costs. The actual amount of the City's share would be determined after award and completion of the contract, but in no event should the City's share exceed $21,000, unless otherwise provided in a subsequent agreement between the City and County. Based on bids received and cost of equipment on hand, this project is now determined to cost $50,263. The County has requested that the City deposit $21,000 in conformance with the agreement, and redraw the agree- ment to provide for equal sharing of final contract costs. The La Costa Land Company has deposited with the City $22,000. If the City were to redraw the agreement, we would have to raise an additional $3, loot A. County letter B. staff'repbrt . If the Council wishes to participate in the full construction costs of this signal, their action should be to instruct the staff to authorize the County to proceed with the award of the contract and to enter into negotiations to redraw the agreement, providing for one-half of actual . construction costs. - , I .. AB. No. . .. . . Date: Sept. 17, 1974 .. % .. .. .. .. .. City 1.lanager's Recommendation .. . . n Concur with staff: Adrhinistrator's memo, failure to proceed at this time would pogtpone the signal kndefinitely, even to the' .. Council concurs with the staff recommendathn, the As pointed out in the Public Works - possible exclusion of County paGticipation. If the 'action should be to instruct the staff ta enter into negotiations to redraw the signal agreement providing - for one-half the actual construction cost; with the . understanding that the County will proceed with the .. . award qf the contract. .. The necessary budget-adjustment will be brought back to the City CounSil with the redrawn agreement- after the negofiations are completed. * -. -. .- .. c Counci I Action 9-17-74 The staff was instructed to authorize the County to proceed with the award of the contract and to enter -into negotiations to redraw the agreement, providing for one-half of actual constructiOn costs. .. .. -. t .. . -. .. . .- - COUNTY O! YANDIEGO - . PU~LIL ,JO;RKS AGENCY SI r Department of County Engineer ~ %- a. hOWARO M. TAYLOR County Engineer Cwaty Uporations Cmter, 5555 Ornlarrt Artnw San Diqs.Califomi~ 92123. . . . . . Telrpktw: $95-5111 August 19, 1974 Mr. Robert C. Frazee, Mayor 1 City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue 1- Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr- Frazee: . -, City-County Agreement for the Construction of a Traffic Signal . and Safety Lighting System at the Intersection of El Camino Real (Al3B) and La Costa Avenue (A21) in the Vicinity of Carlsbad . 73, an agreement was executed by the City of Carlsbad, acting by and through the City Council, and by the County of San Diego, actfng by and through the Board of Supervisors, for the construction of the above subject pro&- ject, On August 15, 1974, bids were opened for the project, and are summarized as I. -~- --- i follows : I .I .. DBX, Inc., dba Perry Electric = $32,663.00 Wilcox Electric, Inc. dba Arrow Electric = 35,456.00 American Electric Contracting Corp. .. - = 43,795.00 .. Based on the low bid, the signal cost is estimated to be* '' Construction (Contract) Standards (County furnished) Controller (County furnished) Engineer in8 (County f urnishdl) ' Total Estimated Cost . $50,263.00 It is the intent of the County to approve and award to the low bidder, DBX, Inc., dba Perry Electric. made by September 15, 1974. In accordance with the Contract Document, award must be ? - iRO5PS - - - . . . Construction Engineering. . . . . . . . Engincerinz Sarriccs . . . . . . . . . Fictd Opratims . . . . . . . . . Planmw & W Oavdoplrmt .I .- .- 9 - (1 -2- I. I 4 Mr. Robert C, Frazee, Hayor August 19, 1974 It is requested that you deposit $21,000.00 with the County as Carlsbad's share, in accordance with the agreement. It is further requested that a subsequent agreement between the City and County be drawn, to provide for equal sharing of the final project cost. I .. HMT:PAH:in Paul O'Shea; Jim Davidson .. .. . . .. .. .. . . .I . MEMORANDUM September 9, 1974 TO : City Manager FROM : Public Works Administrator SUBJECT: Traffic Signals at El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue The County of San Diego submitted a letter dated August 19, 1974, concerning City participation in the installation of a traffic signal at La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real. They indicated that the total cost of construction would be $50,263 and requested that the City submit the $21,000 agreed to in that agreement authorized by City Council Resolution 3268. In addition, and as authorized by the agreement, they requested that a subsequent agreement between the City and the County be drawn to provide for equal sharing of the final project cost. In response to your memorandum dated August 26, 1974, I prepared a letter to the County Engineer which was submitted along with the check for $21,000. In that letter, I pointed out the stated limit on the City's participation and expressed an opinion that no further agreement was necessary. Subsequent conversation with County personnel and with Mr. Howard Taylor, the County Engineer, revealed it is a standard technique to include a provision for renegotiation of the agreement to allow for variations in project costs. It was further pointed out that, because of increases in construction costs, the 14 projects approved for construction by the County would not be sufficiently financed and that 4 of the projects would probably be rescheduled in future budgets. The subject project is number 14 on the priority list but, since the County had made commitments to us and to the La Costa Land Company, they would be willing to include this project in those to be constructed this year. However, if the City were unable to come up with the cash to finance one-half of the construction costs, this project would be one of those postponed for future budgeting. The County has already purchased controllers to be used in their budgeted signal projects. Therefore, if this program were to proceed, the signal at El Camino Real and La Costa could be in and operational by the first part of the year. The La Costa Land Company has deposited with the City $22,000 towards the cost of construction of the signal. If we were to participate in a renegotiation of the agreement, we would have to come up with approximately $3,000 more. This money could either come from reallo- cations from present City budget or from a request to the La Costa Land Company. There will be an additional financial impact on this City, as another signal will have to be added to our maintenance contract. This cost could be absorbed in the present City budget. City Manager Sept. 9, 1974 Page 2 SUMMARY We have two choices: we can either agree to participate in the redrawing of the agreement and pay for one-half of the signal installation costs, or we can decline and have the County postpone this signal installation until future budget. If the City Council wishes to have this signal installed now, then their action should be to instruct the staff to enter into negotiations with the County for redrawing of the agreement and to come back with a report as to the source of the additional monies. Ronald A. Beckman RAB/de cc: Tim Flanagan