HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/09/17 Item 09 �
. -}::,:�� CITY COUNCIL
. � - AGENDA STATEMENT
,�
_ �
- - . � �� �`�� CITY OF
CHULA VISfA
9/17/13, Item /
ITEDI TITLE: RESOLliTIO\' OF THE CITY COUi�CIL OF THE CITY OF
CHIJLA V1STA ACCEPTING BIDS AND AR'ARDIi�'G
CONTRACT FOR THE "PAVEA4ENT \-fINOR REH.ABILIT.ATION
FY12/li CHIP SEAL (STL38S)" -PROJECT TO TC
CONSTRUCTION CO. IN THE AMOU�'T OF �1;20�,967,
REDUCING THE STL39� CIP BUDGET BY 51�2;�6� IN
PROPOSITION 1B FLT\'DS AI�TD APPROPRIATI�'G THE
EQUIVALE�'T AD40U1T TO STL388, A1rAIVING CITP COUl�'CIL
POLICl' �7�-01 A\'D AliTHORIZING THE E?{PENDITURE OF
ALL A�%AILABLE CONTI\TGENCl' FU`NDS NOT TO EXCEED
S 180;89�.0�
SUB�IITTED Bl': DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC \1'ORI�S I�
ASSISTA\'T DIRECTOR OF E\'GINEERING',xU
VJ�
REV'IE��'ED BI': CITl' \4.A\'AGE�.�r J3
ASSISTA\T CIT 4A\AGE�
4/STHS VOTE: YES � NO ❑
Stinti�'LaRl'
On Julv 31. 2013. the Director of Public \4'orks recei�ed three (3) sealed bids for the "Pavement
A4inor Rehabilitation FI'12/li Chip Seal (STL3S8)" project. lipon re��ie�ring bids, staff initiall�•
determined that t���o out of the three bids did not meet all the qualifications contained in the
specifications because at least �0 percent of the ���ork did not appear to be performed b�� the
Prime Contractor. Ho���ever; based on subsequent clarifications and in consultation ���ith the
Citti� Attorne}�`s office; staff detennined that the apparent low bidder met these qualifications.
E\`�'IRO\�7ENTAI. REVIE���
The Director of De��elopment Services has re��ie�ved the proposed project for compliance �ti�ith
the California Em�ironmental Qualit�� Act (CEQA) and has determined that the projects qualif��
for Class 1(b) and Class 1(c) cacegorical exemptions pursuant to Section 1�301, Existing
Facilities; of the State CEQA Guidelines because the project consists of maintenance or repair
��ork to existine public street facilities im�olving ne�liQible or no espansion of an existine use.
Thus. no further en�ironmental revie��� is required.
RECO�tD1ENDAT[ON
Council adopt the resolution.
9-1
9/17/13, Item�
Page 2 of A
BOARDS/COA4b11SSION RECOA4n4ENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The Public Works Department recendy advertised and opened bids for "Pavement D�inor
Rehabilitation FY12/13 Chip Seal" (STL388). Streets �n�ere chosen for STL388 throueh the
City's Pavement n4anagement System. Work induded the removal and replacement of
deteriorated sectious of pavement (dia-outs) and the application of the asphalt chip seal surface
treatment.
Special Provisions of the Contract Specification for this project incorporates the Standard
Specifications for Public A�orks Construction ("Greenbook"). Section 2-3.2 Self Performance
states, "The Contractor shall perform, with its own organization, Contract work amountiog to at
]east 50 percent of the Contract Price eacept that any designated "Specialty Items" may be
performed by subconvact and the amount of any such "Specialty Items" so performed will be
deducted from the Contract Price before computing the amount required to be performed by the
Contractor N�ith its o��m organization.' The 50 percent requirement is also stated in Part 2;
Section 2-3 Subcontractors of the City`s specifications.
On July 31; 2013, the Director of Public Works received three (3) bids for the "Pavement D�inor
Rehabilitation FYl2/13 Chip Seal (STL388)" project. The following bids were received. These
are presented with stafPs initial calculation of the percentage of work being proposed by the
prime contractor.
CONTRACTOR % PRIME BID
CONTRACTOR
1 TC Construction Co. 44.89% $1.205.967.00
2 Intermouutain Slurry Seal Corp. 46.51% est. $1,359,559.00
3 KCEI Construction Inc. 81.63% $1.597.777.70
As noted above; hvo out of the three contractors appear to be performing less than 50 percent of
the wark (Interniountain Slurry SeaPs bid indicated that Item #9, Public Convenience and Safety
[Traffic Control], would be split bet���een the Contractor and Subcontractor, but the eaact split
was not specified). All the bids are below the Engineer's estimate of $1,785,060. However,
there is a gap of alinost $400;000 (32.4%) between the apparent lowest bidder and the third
bidder.
City staff subsequently sent a letter dated August 12, 2013, informing all contractors tbat the
City was planning to reject all bids. After receiving this letter; AR Hernandez of TC
Construction inquired as to �vhy the Cit�� had decided to reject all bids. The City advised him of
its calculation of the work being done by TC Construction as the prime contractor. TC
Construction subsequentl}' submitted additional information to the City demonstrating that they
9-2
9/17/13, Item �
Page 3 of�3
v,�ould be performino some portion of the work on the items that were identified as items the
subconuactor ��ould be ���orl:ins on. Afrer revie«�ine these items, staff requested additional
information, and had follo��-up discussions �iith �4r. Hemandez. :4frer revie���ine all
information and consultin2 �+�ith the City Attome� s office, staff has concluded that the
additional information pro��ided b} \4r. Hernandez dazified; as opposed to modified; TC
Construction's orieinal bid, in such a �va�� that staff is comfonable that TC Construction's
orieinal bid reflects that TC Construction ���ill be performine in e�cess of�0% of the «�ork as the
bid specifications requue. This conclusion allo��s the Ciri- to proceed �rith its awazd of the
contract to TC Construction instead of havine to readvenise the project and solicit ne�� bids.
The Cirv Attome�� concurs that: under the cireumstances, this approach is reasonable and
defensible. Future bid pachaees N°ill be modified to more eapressly request percentage
allocations of���ork to be done b� subcontractors in order to reduce the chance for this ambieuit}
in similar situations.eoine fornard.
The lo�� bid submitted b�� TC Construction Co. is belo��� the Eneineer=s Estimate of 51,78�;060
bv S�79;093 (or approximateh 32.�% belo��� the Engineers Estimate). The contractor has
satisfactorily performed construction projects of similar scope for the Cin in the past and has
determined their ��rork to be satisfactor��. The Contractor`s License \io. 402��9 is current and
active. Staff has determined that their bid package is complete, �vith no errors and omissions:
although a clarification regardine prime versus subcontractor ��'ork allocation ���as required as
discussed above.
Under City Council Policv No. �74-01, the Director of Public \\'orks; under this contract can
onl�� authorize a ma�imum cumulati�e chanee order(s) of �73;000 plus �% of the original
contract o��er S1 million or approximatel�� 583,298.3� totai ��ithout Council appro��al. If
appro�ed; the proposed resolution n�ould increase the Direc[or of Public \Vorks' cumulative
Chanse Order authorin to appro��e change orders, as necessarv, up to the contineenc� amount of
�180.89�.0�. �.hich is an increase of 597,�96.70 o�er Polic�� No. �74-01. Increasine che
contingenc�� funds �ti�ill allo�� staff to continue the project nithout delav should unforeseen
circumstances resultine in increased project costs arise durina the course of construction; as ���ell
as make adjustments to bid item quantities. Unforeseen conditions indude such items as ucilin�
conflicts; hazardous materials, une�pected underground conflicts: etc. If the contineencv funds
aze not used, thev ��ill be retumed to the project fund balance.
This project is atypical in that it has two large bid items that are customarily performed in
separate contracts. These items are the dio-outs and the chip seal. In order to minimize the
possibilit�� of a reoccurrence of a similar bid result; the City ma�� also modifi� the specifications
to lower the �0 percent requirement for projects that ha�e a similar mi� of items in the future.
DECISION A�AKER CO\TFLICT
Staff has revie��ed the propert�� holdines of the Citv Council and has found no propem� holdings
���ithin �00 feet of the boundaries of the propenies �+�hich are the subject of this action. Staff is
not independently a��are; nor has staff been informed bv am� Cit�� Council member, of anv other
fact that mav constirute a basis for a decision maker conflict of inrerest in this matter.
9-3
9/17/13, Item 9
Page 4 of 4
CURRENT 1'EAR FISCAL IA'IP9CT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the General Fund associated with this action. All construction
and Citv staff costs associated with this project will be funded by Proposition 1B funds and
Proposition 42 funds. The follo«�ine is a summary of anticipated project costs and available
funding:
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount $1;20�,967.00
B. Contingencies (approa. l�%) $180;89�.0�
C. Staff Time, Material Testing and other Costs (approx. 15%) $180,895.05
CON5TRUCTION TOTAL �L�67,7�7.10
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. STL388 (Prop 42 Traffic Congestion Relief Fund) $1,699,734.00
B. STL39� (Prop 1B Hiefi��ay Safety Fund) $142,�6�.00
TOTAL $1.842.299.00
Note that the Proposition 1B funds must be expended by June 30, 2014, per statutory
requirements.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Upon completion of the project, the improvements ���ill tequire onl�� routine Citv street
maintenance. Since the improvements are anticipated to increase the life of the streets included,
there should be a positive fiscal impact.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter dated August 12, 2013 to TC Construction Co.
2. List of Streets included in project
3. Contractor's Disclosure Statement
Prepared by: Eli=abeth D4. Chapp, Project AAanager, Public Id'orks Departmen� �
J:�EngineerWGENDA\CAS2013\09-17-13\REPORT-P\4'-STL388 a�vardFlNALrah.doc
9-4
�t�// ��-r�ErtT � ;
� I
�
aTroF De artment of Public Works
CEiU(AVISfA p
;
.qu�USt i?, ?oi� ;
F;ie;sTr.-�ss i
TC Constntction �
105�0 Prospect A��enue �
Santee. CA 92071 �
Am�: Austin Cameren, Secretary
NOTIFICATION Oti RESliLTS OF BIDDING ON PROJECT STIr388 i
Thank you for participatina in our bid opening on JuJy 31, 20li for fhe project,
"Pavement Minor Rehabilitation FP12/13 (Chip Seal) in the Cit}� of Chula Vista, �
Califomia (STL-3S8)". \��e recei.�ed three bid packages. i
Unfortunately, in rzvie�t2ng the bids; we found that a majority of the bids were �
uuresponsive. After consulting �3�ith the City Attorney's office, we detemuned tha2 the �
most equitable �r-ay to deal with this situation would be to reject all bids and to rebid this �
project at a later date. r1s stated in the Proposal Requiremen[s and Conditions and the
Cit}•Charter, the Ciiy reserves the right to reject any and all proposals.
A�e are planning to �o to Council with this recommendation on September 10, 2013. If
you liave any further questions on this issue,please contact Elizabeth Chopp, Senior Civil
Engineer, at (619) 691-i046.
�
i
Ul(Y��'? �r""V ,
��'ILLIr1M S. VALLE
CIT1' ENGINEER '
i
Ce: Frank Rivera, Principal Civil Eueineer
Elizabeth Chopp, Senior Civil Engineer '
I
�
I
�
0:1Fa�gineerin�4V1 ProivaISTUSTL3S8 Pavemen:Minor Rehab FYI?-13V+113\Lzner on Rejueing Bids reedoc .
I
n 'neerin -?76 Fourth Avenue Chala\5sca C4 91510 (619) 691-5021 tax (619) b91-Sli: _ . I
E g' � ' � ��tvw.thulavistaca.gov
OperaHons-7800?�4axn'e11 Road,Chula Vista,CA 41911 I (619) 34rJ7-6000 iax (619) 397-6259 -
9
���c+�r�r �
J
Q a �
W v v,
N r rc w �
d o w ; p � � p � >
� Q � � w � g Q >
= W � m � ) w j > a F w � K
U O p W � Q y N W W U y Z
Z } O 2 J Z Ya Y > J > �
Q W O � � W J � Q p Q �
M F ¢ z p w Q > > � r- r r z c�
T y 6 � (� � m Q � N N 2 H F j p
(�J 2 ti Y 0 2 Y Q O Z W Q Q O O m Z
� a x a tt
�
LL a �
0
Z c�i v� w
a �
p � p � � � o
F 2 0 � > c r o o � > �
OO Q o w � �n � w � 3 i r W
Q 00 Z U' y j p �n F v. rc > a F- r z � x
J J O m z � a r ° � � .Qi u a a � U p ? a
m (/� � ° � ¢ � w a o a � v�i v�i � ° w o
Q J U i x o a O v�i O y w w � o a m w
W % u u � o
O J
� 0 r
� w =
d' z
p o a a o
Z r o 0 o a o z � >
W � p K V } Z
� W � (n �n v� Q Q i Q � � p
� Q 3 � Y Y Y N V� Q V Q U �
� 1� 2 W o' J � J p p p w �
Z N � 1- f 1- ♦ f I- W U' ¢ � K d
.. Wc � N �A N N 1/ N 2 Z Q Q Q F F W R W �
C � W W W W S S O O O K R F OU � � N
�f,� M #
1 * * �
Q N UJ �O N � �
a
9-6
An��� �
City of Chula�'is;a,C.A �
i/]al's Concx;,;spx;fication
t
CTTY OF CHUZ.A VLSTA DISCLOSLTRE STaTEDfENT j
Pu.*suant to Councii Policy 101-01, prior:o any acuon upon natters ihat will requi;e discreaonary acrion �
by the Council,P12nniag Co=nmission and a11 other offici21 bodies oi ihe C:t�•, a staiement of disclos�:re of �
ce.z;- oa-nership or fisancial interes`s, p2}znents, o; caa:ipai�n conmb�.nions for a City o`Chula Vista
elecrion must be 51ed.The followine informarion musz be disclosed:
7. List the natnes of all perons haviag a financia] interest in the property tha: is the subject o=the
applica:ior.or the con�-ac[, e.g.,owner, applicant, contractor, subcon-uacYor, material supplier. �
�//� i
(
�
2. If any person* ideatified pursuani to (1)above is a corporation o:partnership, list the names of all
indi�zduals with a 52000 investment;n the business (corporation/p2tnership)enuh�. �
i
�1�� '
i
I
;
3. If any person* identvled pursuan;to (1) aSove is a non-profit or�anization or wst, 1st the names
of any persen >env�a as d'uector of tl�e non-profit organizauon or as trustee or beneficiazy or
trustor of tne trust.
,�/>F ;
,
�
�
�
� 4. Plezse identify every person, incl�ding aay a�ents, empioyees, consultants, or independent !
contractors you have assi�ed to represent yoa before the Ciry in this matter. ;
���
(
5. Has any person�` associated wi•h chis con�act had any finaacial dealings with an ofncial** of the i
City of Chuia Vista as it relaYes to this conhact within the p2st 12 r.�onths? Yes_I�o ✓ �
� i
28 j
Pa'.emeni Dlinot Rehabilitatlon(Chip Seal) !
STLi85
9-�
City of Chula Vista,C.4
� 7/10/13 Contract Sperification
If Yes,briefly describe the nature of tbe financial interest the official **may have in this contracf..
6. Ha��e you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12)months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council?ATO ✓Yes_If yes,which Council member?
7. Have you provided more tl�an�340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of
Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) mont6s? (This includes being a source of income, money to
retire a le�al debt, gift, loan, etc.)Yes_ No�
If Y"es, which of6cial**and what.was the oature oi item provided?
��'
Date: �7'3 / • / /G�����
Signature of Contractor/Applicant
++ICS?7.c� c�!-/YLE.4v.�1 �,��
Print or type name of Contractor Applicant
* Person is denned as: any indi�zdual, firm, co-partnership,joint venture, association, social club,
&ateroal organization, corpwation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city,
_. municipality, disttict, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as
a unif.
** Official i�cludes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Plannin� Commissioner,
Member of a boazd, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff inembers.
29
Pavement Minor Rehabifitarion{Chip Seal)
9-8 STL388 .
RESOLUTIO\� \�O. 2013-
RESOLUTIO\ OF THE CIT1' COUI�CIL OF THE CITI' OF
CHLiLA VISTA ACCEPTL��G BIDS ?L\D A���ARDL�G
CONTRACT FOR THE "PAVE\4E\�T MI�OR
REHABILITATIO\ FI'12/li CHIP SEaL (STL38S)°
PROJECT TO TC CONSTRliCTIO\ C0. I\ THE A\40U�T
OF S1?Oi.967. REDliCI��G THE STL39� CIP BliDGET BY
S142S6� I\ PROPOSITIO\' 1B FUITDS A.\D
APPROPRIATING THE EQliIVALE\T .��40L1�T TO
STL3S8. \�JAIVIi�G CITI' COU�CIL POLICI' �7�-01 A\�D
AUTHORIZI\�G THE E�PE\�ITliRE OF ALL AVAILABLE
CO\T1��GE\'CY FU1DS NOT TO EXCEED S1S0.89�.0>
�VHEREAS, Cin staff prepared specifications for the "Pavement �4inor Rehabilitation
FI'12/l.i Chip Seal (STL388)" project and advertised the project on Jul�� 12, 20li; and
�VI-IEREAS; in accordance ���ith the Standard Specifications for Public «%orks
Construction ("Greenbook') and Part 2,,Section 2-3 of the specifications; the Contractor shall
perform. ��ith its o��n organization, contract ���ork amounting to at least �0 percent of the
contract price; and
WHEREAS, on Julv 31. 2015, the Director of Public R%orks received three (3) sealed �
bids for the "Parement �4inor Rehabilitation FI'12/13 Chip Seal (STL388)" project, as sho«n in
the table belo��: and
CONTRaCTOR % PRIDIE CO\TR-ICTOR TOT_�I:
SliB��IITTED
1 TC Construction Co. 44.89% 51.20�.967.00
Z Intermountain Slurr} Seal Corp. 46.�1% est. 51_3�9.3�9.00
3 KCEI Construction Inc. 51.63% 1597J77J0
\V"HEREAS, the appazent IoN bidder; TC Construction, subsequentl� pro�ided additional
information and clarification to the Cit�� that demonstrated that the� ��ere in compliance �vith the
�0 percent requirement, to the reasonable satisfaction of staff and the Cit�� Attome�; and
R�HEREAS, staff has verified the references and the ��ork performed b�� the contractor
on previous projects and has found their�rork to be satisfactor�. and
J:Wnome.��FI\Al.RESOS A�D ORDI\`A\CES�20I3\09 I7 liUtESO-P\�'-.4w�;d STliSSFI\AL.doc
9/11/2013 4:30 PA�I
9-9
Resolution No.
Page 2
WHEREAS. an increase in the Director of Public Works' cumulative chanee order
authority from Council Policy �74-01 to the contingency amount will allow the staff to continue
the project without delay should unforeseen circumstances resultin� in increased project costs
arise during the course of construction; as well as make adjustments to bid quantities.
NO��, THEREFORE; BE IT RESOLVED that the Ciry Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby (1) accept bids and a��ard a contract for the "Pavement �4inor Rehabilitation
FY12/13 Chip Seal (STL388)" Project to TC Construcuon Co. in the amount of$1,20�;967 in a
� final form appro��ed bv the Ciri� Attorney, (2) reduce the STLS95 CIP budget by �142.�6� in �
Proposition 1 B funds, (3) appropriate the equivalent amount to STL388, (4) waive City Council
Policy �74-01, and (�) authorize the eapenditure of all available contineency funds not to exceed
�180,89�.05.
Presented by: Approved as to form bv:
�
O
Richard A. Hopkins en Goo9ins
Director of Public Warks �t}�Atto�'ney
1:�P.ttome��\FINAL RESOS A�\D ORDI\ANCES\2013\09 17 13\RESO-P�6'-Award STL38RFINAL.doc
9/ll/2013 3:18 Pb9
9-10