HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-13; City Council; ; Rejection of all Bids Received for the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV Improvements Project Meeting Date: April 13, 2021
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Tim Selke, Parks Services Manager
tim.selke@carlsbadca.gov, 760-434-2857
Subject: Rejection of all Bids Received for the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV
Improvements Project
District: 3
Recommended Action
Adopt a resolution rejecting all bids received for the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV
Improvements Project (Capital Improvement Program Project No. 4608).
Executive Summary
The development of the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV Improvements Project is
identified in the Poinsettia Community Park Master Plan. The project’s proposed amenities
include an off-leash dog park, parking lot and restroom facility.
The City Council approved the contract documents, plans and specifications for the project and
authorized the city clerk to advertise the project for public bids on Jan. 12, 2021 (Resolution No.
2021-001). On Feb. 23, 2021, 11 bids for the project were received. A formal bid protest was
received on Feb. 23, 2021, from Tri-Group Construction. The protest alleged that the three
apparent lowest bidders did not possess the required experience stated in Part 3, Section
13.34.23 - Pre-Engineered Restroom Building of the specifications, “Building installer must be
able to provide references for installation of at least three (3) previous pre-engineered
restroom buildings within the last five (5) years.”
After review of the bid document language, and out of a desire to provide a completely fair
bidding process, staff recommends rejecting all bids, updating the bid documents to explicitly
state the experience requirement and re-advertising the project for bids. Staff recommends the
City Council reject all bids, consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.28.080(I)(3).
Discussion
In 2014, the City Council approved an amendment to the Poinsettia Community Park Master
Plan for the Phase III Construction Project, which included, among other amenities, an off-leash
dog park in a central area of the community park. Before staff asked the City Council to award
the construction contract for the improvements, multiple residents requested the dog park be
moved from its planned location in a grass-laden detention basin, expressing a desire to save
the “grassy bowl” as an unstructured play area. In 2017, the City Council directed staff to revise
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 1 of 7
the plans and specifications for project to remove the dog park and explore its relocation to an
area in Poinsettia Community Park previously envisioned for a multigenerational community
center (Resolution No. 2017-185).
Staff then sought community input on a possible relocation site for the dog park and found that
nearly 80% of the responses supported relocating it to the east side of the park, on a pad south
of the main entrance. Given the community’s expressed support, the City Council authorized
staff to pursue relocation of the dog park as a separate Poinsettia Park Phase IV Project
(Resolution No. 2018-020). On Aug. 21, 2019, the Planning Commission approved the
conditional use permit amendment and coastal development permit for the new project. No
additional correspondence was submitted by the public and there were no speakers at the
public hearing.
On Jan. 12, 2021, the City Council approved the contract documents, plans and specifications
for the Poinsettia Park Phase IV Project and authorized the city clerk to advertise the project for
public bids (Resolution No. 2021-001). On Jan. 14, 2021, the project was advertised for bids. As
a result of COVID-19 restrictions, on Jan. 28, 2021, a pre-bid meeting was held via Zoom, in lieu
of an in-person meeting at the project site. On Feb. 23, 2021, 11 sealed bids for the
construction of the project were received. The bid amounts are reflected in the table below.
BIDDER BID AMOUNT
Palm Engineering Construction Company, Inc. $1,818,675
GEM Industrial Electric, Inc. $1,879,000
3-D Enterprises, Inc. $1,926,000
Tri-Group Construction $1,929,912
Dick Miller, Inc. $1,997,732
De La Fuente Construction, Inc. $2,024,268
Act 1 Construction, Inc. $2,094,162
Byrom-Davey, Inc. $2,284,768
Western Rim Constructors, Inc. $2,286,224
Whillock Contracting, Inc. $2,290,100
Alvarez and Shaw, Inc. $2,409,023
Following the opening of the bids, a formal bid protest was received from Tri Group
Construction. The protest alleged that the three apparent lowest bidders did not possess the
required experience as stated in Part 3, Section 13.34.23 - Pre-Engineered Restroom Building of
the Specifications, “Building installer must be able to provide references for installation of at
least three (3) previous pre-engineered restroom buildings within the last five (5) years.”
Options
After a detailed review of the bid protest and advertised bid documents, staff identified two
options for addressing the protest. Option 1 is to require the three lowest bidders to provide
references, in accordance with the specifications, for the previous installation of at least three
pre-engineered restroom buildings within the last five years. Option 2 is to reject all bids, revise
the bid documents by moving the experience requirement to a more prominent location in the
bid documents and require bidders to provide a list of three qualifying projects within the last
five years, and re-advertise the project for public bids.
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 2 of 7
Option 1 could result in a lengthy process of several months or more. If the low bidders were
unable to provide the required references, their bids would be deemed non-responsible and
rejected. Any bidder deemed non-responsible would have the option of appealing that
determination through an administrative hearing. This process could potentially be time
consuming if multiple bidders are deemed non-responsible and appeal.
Option 2, rejecting all bids, revising the bid documents and re-bidding the project would result
in a three-month delay. After consulting with the City Attorney’s Office, staff recommends
Option 2. This is because this option would provide a fair and timely bidding and contract
awarding process by more clearly notifying all potential bidders of the experience requirements
and providing staff with the information necessary to quickly determine the bidders’
qualifications. Staff is therefore recommending the City Council reject all bids received,
consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code section 3.28.080(I)(3).
If the City Council chooses to take no action, the bids will expire 90 days after the bid opening
date. In that case, the bidding process will not continue, and the project will not move forward.
Fiscal Analysis
The engineer’s estimated construction cost was $1,882,206. Total funding for the Poinsettia
Park Phase IV Project, in an amount of $2,082,140 from the General Capital Construction Fund,
was approved in fiscal year 2020-21. Staff anticipates returning to the City Council with a
request for appropriation of additional funds at the time of award of a construction contract to
address the costs associated with the project’s encumbrances, construction contingency,
construction management services and the purchase of the restroom kit and security cameras.
COSTS AND FUNDING
Public art (estimated) $20,420
Construction cost (estimated) $2,042,205
Construction contingency (estimated) $204,220
Security cameras/cabling (estimated) $25,000
Construction management and inspection staff (estimated) $353,220
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS (ESTIMATED) $2,645,065
TOTAL AVAILABLE PROJECT FUNDING $1,937,995
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION NEEDED $(707,070)
Poinsettia Community Park Phase Iv Improvements Project –
Capital Improvement Program No. 4608
Project appropriation $2,082,140
Project expenditures/Encumbrances $144,145
TOTAL AVAILABLE PROJECT FUNDING $1,937,995
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 3 of 7
Next Steps
Staff will review the bidding provisions and forms for the project, revise the bid documents to
require bidders to provide references for installation of at least three previous pre-engineered
restroom buildings within the last five years at the time bids are submitted, make any revisions
that may provide further clarity and re-advertise the project for bids. The bid solicitation period
will be at least 30 days. Staff will then evaluate the responsive bids received and return to the
City Council with a recommendation to award a construction contract.
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
The recommended action to reject the bids has been determined to be exempt from
environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15270 (a);
which states that the act does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or
disapproves.
Public Notification and Outreach
Public notice of this item was posted in keeping with the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act and it was
available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
1. City Council resolution
2. Bid protest letter, Tri-Group Construction and Development Inc., dated Feb. 23, 2021
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 4 of 7
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-076
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE POINSETTIA
COMMUNITY PARK PHASE IV IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (CIP PROJECT
NO. 4608)
WHEREAS, the development of the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV Improvements Project
is identified in the Poinsettia Community Park Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the project's proposed amenities include an off-leash dog park, parking lot and
restroom facility;
WHEREAS, on Aug. 21, 2019, the Planning Commission approved the conditional use permit
amendment and coastal development permit for the project; and
WHEREAS, on Jan. 12, 2021, City Council approved the contract documents, plans and
specifications for the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV Improvements Project and authorized the
City Clerk to advertise the project for public bids (Resolution No. 2021-001); and
WHEREAS, on Feb. 23, 2021, eleven sealed bids for the construction of the project were
received; and
WHEREAS, following the opening of the bids, a formal bid protest was received from Tri Group
Construction; and
WHEREAS, the protest alleged that the three apparent lowest bidders did not possess the
required experience as stated in Part 3, Section 13.34.23 - Pre-Engineered Restroom Building of the
specifications, "Building installer must be able to provide references for installation of at least three (3)
previous pre-engineered restroom buildings within the last five (5) years."; and
WHEREAS, after review of the bid document language and consultation with the City Attorney's
Office, and out of a desire to provide a completely fair bidding process, staff recommends rejecting all
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 5 of 7
bids, updating the bid documents to explicitly state the experience requirement and re-advertising the
project for bids; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary, desirable and in the public interest for the city to follow the provisions
in Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.28.080 (1)(3), whereby the City Council, at its discretion, may
reject all bids received; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has determined that rejecting all bids is exempt from environmental
review per CEQA Guidelines Section 15270 (a); which states that CEQA does not apply to projects which
a public agency rejects or disapproves.
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 all bids received on Feb. 23, 2021, for the Poinsettia Community Park Phase IV
Improvements Project are rejected in accordance with CMC section 3.28.080 (1)(3).
3.That City Council does hereby authorize the City Clerk to return to the bidders all bid
bonds received.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 13th day of April, 2021, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Hall, Blackburn, Acosta, Bhat-Patel.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Schumacher.
MATT HALL, Mayor
(1 1/14/9iv 6
BARBARA ENGLESON, City Clerk
(SEAL)
April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 6 of 7
EXHIBIT 2
February 23, 2021
Mr. Graham Jordan
1635 Faraday Ave
Carlsbad Ca 92008
TRI-GROUP
Construction and Development, Inc.
Lie. No. 792159
Send via email to
grahamjordan@carlsbadca.gov
and via certified USPS mail
Subject: POINSETTIA COMMUNITY PARK PHASE IV
Bid No. PWS21-1306PKS Contract No. 4608
****** Formal Bid Protest*****
Mr. Jordan,
Tri-Group Construction and Development, Inc. (Tri-Group) is formally protesting
the submitted bids for the low apparent bidder, Palm Engineering and
Construction, Inc, the second low apparent bidder, GEM Industrial Electric, Inc,
and the third low apparent bidder, 3-D Enterprises, Inc. In the case of these 3
bidders, they did not list an installer for the Romtec, Inc. pre-engineered restroom,
with the required experience as stated in Part 3 of Section 13 34 23 of the Contract
Documents.
The referenced Section states " ... Building Installer must be able to provide
references for the installation of at least three (3) previous pre-engineered restroom
buildings within the last five (5) years ... ". We are certain that none of the three
mentioned bidders have that experience within that time frame of five years.
Please contact our office at 858-689-0058 for any questions regarding this matter.
Sincer~// / u/
Hani Assi
Vice President, RMO &
Secretary of Corporation
9580 Black Mountain Rd, Suite L • San Diego, CA 92126 • Office (858) 689-0058 • Fax (858) 689-1594 April 13, 2021 Item #1 Page 7 of 7
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ellen <eejkjk@gmail.com >
Saturday, April 10, 2021 7:39 AM
City Clerk
Strongly oppose dog park at Pointsetta park
All Receive -Agenda Item # r
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date ~ CA VCC ~
CM £ACM ~DCM (3) ~
Pointsetta park has so many children at the park my girls grew up playing at the park.
We have a dog but we strongly oppose a fig park at Pointsetta it is not a good idea because so many children
are in all areas of the park and the chances of dogs biting barking and scaring children is so high.
Please put the park in a park or area that is not filled with so many families.
Ellen Nakamura
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1