Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-04-27; City Council; 15160; Faraday Avenue Extension Grading & DrainageAWARD OF CONTRACT FOR FARADAY AVENUE EXTENSION, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE, PROJECT NO. 3593 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 99 c Iqb accepting bids and awarding Project No. 3593 for the construction of Faraday Avenue Grading and Drainage Improvements, to W. R. Connelly, Inc. ITEM EXPLANATION: This project involves the rough grading of Faraday Avenue from its existing westerly terminus to Cannon Road. Features of the construction include the grading of the roadway, construction of backbone drainage system and installation of two pedestrian undercrossings. Construction is expected to take seven months. On January 5, 1999, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for the Faraday Avenue Extension (Rough Grading and Drainage) and directed the City Clerk to advertise for construction bids. On March 18, 1999, thirteen (13) bids were received. The lowest responsive bidder was W. R. Connelly, Inc. TABLE 1 BIDS AND ESTIMATE (: , CONTRACfO&, ‘, ;, i !:.i:fJ@T&: _ : . 1. W. R. Connellv. Inc. I $1.580.057.72 2. c. w. Poss, I&. $1,584;411 .OO 3. Sukut Construction $1,591,055.00 4. Greg J. Harris Const. $1,609,895.00 5. E. L. Yeager Const. Co. Inc. $1,665,743.00 6. Foss Environmental Serv. $1,689,184.00 7. Signs & Pinnick Inc. $1,699,245.00 8. C. A. Rasmussen, Inc. $1,711,360.00 9. GCI Construction, Inc. $1,757,241 .OO IO. Summit Contracting $1,972,318.04 I 1. Reed Thomas Co. Inc. $2,054,369.20 12. Temoleton Enaineer $2.056.886.00 Staff reviewed the bid documents and revealed the following: The bid submitted by Sierra Pacific West, Inc., contained several math errors, In addition, on March 22, 1999, a letter requesting relief from the bid was submitted due to an unforeseen mistake in the bid calculations. On April 6, 1999 a spreadsheet detailing the errors was provided. Item 5 Clearing and Grubbing had not been transferred correctly from the bidders worksheet to the Bid Schedule. Staff reviewed the submitted information and found Item 5 Clearing and Grubbing required the addition of $183,799. The lump sum price is intended to be $276,024.00. Math errors were made in the following items: Item 6 (-$52.42), Item 7 (-$411.94), Item 8 (-$143.61), Item 9 [$7’;143,), Item 21 (-$10.72), Item 22 (-$997.75), Item 23 (+$1.07), Item 27 (-$I .20) and Item 39 . . Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. I i, 16 0 Items 12, 16, 19, 24, 25, 26, 31, 32, 38 and 43 also had minor errors, each less than $1 .OO. The corrected total is $684.76 less than that submitted with the bid. The corrected total with the change to Item #5 is $1,565,285.10. Staff recommends that Sierra Pacific be relieved of its bid because of mistakes. The bid submitted by W. R. Connelly, Inc., contained a multiplication error in Item 38 that resulted in a bid total $200,000 less than the actual bid total. The correct bid total is $1,580,057.72. Sukut Construction, Inc., did not completely fill out the Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items Form. They did not complete the Contractors State License No. And Classification and did not complete the Bid Item table. In addition, the unit prices were not written out on the bid forms. The bid is non-responsive. Greg J. Harris Construction submitted a bid that did not accurately add the total. The grand total of the bid is $20,000 higher than that submitted in the bid. The actual total is $1,609,895. The bid submitted by E. L. Yeager Construction Company, Inc., contained a multiplication error in Item 12. The number entered in the total column was the unit cost and not the unit cost multiplied by the number of items. The total cost is $59,490.00 higher than the cost entered in the column. The bid total indicated in the bid documents of $1,665,743.00 is correct. Signs and Pinnick submitted a bid that did not include the written out unit prices on the Bid Schedule. The Designation of Subcontractor and Amount of Subcontractor’s Bid Items Form Column 2, 3 and 4 of the Bid Items table were not completely or correctly filled out. The bid is non-responsive. The bid submitted by C.A. Rasmussen, Inc., contained a multiplication error in Item 9. The number entered in the total column was $28.00 less than the actual unit cost multiplied by the quantity. The corrected Item 9 total is $36,708 and the corrected bid total is $1,711,360.00. GCI Construction, Inc., did not correctly complete column 3 from the Bid Item Table on the Designation of Subcontractor’s Bid Items Form. The bidder put in the item total and not the amount of work to be completed by the contractor. Since staff could determine the work done by subcontractor to verify the 50% rule, the error is non-material and the bid responsive. Summit Contracting submitted a bid that contained a math error in the total. The actual bid total is $3,000 higher. The corrected bid total is $1,972,318.04. Templeton Engineers submitted a bid that contained an error in Item 26. The corrected total is $8,496. The total of all bid items is $70,395 higher than the bid total resulting in a corrected bid of $2,056,886. The Designation of Subcontractor’s Bid Items Form was not correctly completed and the bid non-responsive. The bidder did not complete the item numbers the subcontractor bid on and several other items in the Bid Item Table. The contractor’s license number was not completed on one of the forms. Before recommending that the City Council find that the deviations are immaterial defects, staff considered whether the deviations could provide an advantage to the erring bidder over the other bidders, be vehicles for favoritism, affect the amount of the bid, influence potential bidders to refrain from bidding, or affect the ability to make bid comparisons. Page 3 of Agenda Bill No. E 5.1 m Staff used the following fact to make the recommendation: In accordance with the “Notice Inviting Bids”, wherein it states that “In case of an error in the extension of a unit price, the corrected extension shall be calculated... and compared on the basis of the correct totals.“, the corrected extension of unit prices provides a total project cost of $1,580,057.72, which is the total amount of bid in words submitted by W. R. Connelly, Inc. Staff recommends that Council makes the determination that the award of the contract serves the best interest of the public and award the contract for the Faraday Avenue Grading and Drainage Project to W. R. Connelly, Inc. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Planning Director has determined that the requested action is consistent with prior CEQA review. The project was reviewed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, approved on September 8, 1998. Significant environmental impacts identified by those CEQA documents were determined to be mitigable to levels of less than significant. All permits from the resource agencies have been received. FISCAL IMPACT: The Engineer’s Estimate for the construction cost is $1,450,000. A breakdown of the project costs are as follows: Design !$350,000.00 Construction $1,580,057.72 Inspection/Administration (10% of the Construction Costs) $158,000.00 Soils (5% of the Construction Costs) $79,000.00 Construction Contingencies (15%) $237,009.00 TOTAL $2,404,066.72 Sufficient Community Facilities District No. 1 funds are currently available in the project account. EXHIBITS: 1. Location Map. 2. Resolution No. qs* /Y k accepting bids and awarding Project No. 3593 for the construction of Faraday Avenue Grading and Drainage Improvements to W. R. Connelly, Inc. 3 NOT TO SCALE PROJECT NAME FARADAY A VENUE PROJECT EXHIBIT EXISTING WESTERLY TERMINUS TO CANNON ROAD y&? 1 \ViN BY. SCOTT EVANS. CARLSBAD : Y 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 99-146 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FARADAY AVENUE EXTENSION ROUGH GRADING AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. PROJECT NO. 3593. WHEREAS, bids have been received by the City of Carlsbad for the construction of said project; and WHEREAS, Sierra Pacific West, the apparent low bidder, made a timely request for relief of bid due to math errors and based on the review of the documentation the request is approved; and WHEREAS, the low bid received to construct said project submitted by W. R. Connelly, Inc., is responsive; and , ..e WHEREAS, funds in the amount of $2,404,066.72..are available for design, construction, administration, and inspection of said project; and WHEREAS, Subsection 3.28.172(c)(i) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code authorizes the City Manager to approve change orders in the amount equal to the contingency set at the time of the bid award. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That Sierra Pacific West is relieved of the bid. 3. That the low bid of $1,580,057.72 submitted March 18, 1999 for Project No. 3593 for construction of the Faraday Avenue Extension rough grading and drainage improvements is hereby accepted and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute a contract therefor. 4. That the award of this contract is contingent upon W. R. Connelly, Inc., executing the required contract and submitting the required bonds and insurance policies, as described in the contract, within twenty (20) days of adoption of this resolution. The City Manager may grant reasonable extensions of time. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5. That a construction contingency in the amount of $237,009 is hereby approved. 6. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to approve construction change orders up to $237,009. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council qeld on the 27th day of April , 1999 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Hall, Finnila, Nygaard and Kulchin JTTEST: ,- ‘_ 4LETHA L. RAiTENKRANZ, City Clerfi I ^.’ .~ (SEAL) ”