Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/04/03 Item 4 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ill ~\~CI1YOF . -{ ~"'~ CHULA VISTA 4/3/07, Item-1- ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENTITLED "CMP STORM DRAIN PIPE REHABILITATION PROGRAM PROJECT, PHASE IV" (DR-169) AND TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS FROM CIP "WESTERN CHULA VISTA INFRASTRUCTURE" (GG-188) TO DR-169 FOR SAID PURPOSE RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE CMP STORM DRAIN PIPE REHABILITATION PROGRAM (DR-169) PROJECT, PHASE IV AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS IN THE PROJECT SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: DIRECTOR OF GENERAL S~CES '0s;'0r-. INTERIM CITY MANAGER (ji 4/STHS VOTE: YES X NO - BACKGROUND As part of an ongoing program to rehabilitate corrugated metal drainage pipe (CMP) throughout the City, staffhas identified a number of storm drain facilities, which are deteriorated and are in need of rehabilitation. CMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program (DR-169) Project, Phase IV will remove and replace those drainage facilities at six locations, which are in need of rehabilitation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 (c) (Existing Facilities) categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. RECOMMENDATION 1. Council adopt the resolution establishing Capital Improvement Project entitled "eMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program, Phase IV" (DR-169), and transferring existing funds from "CIP Western Chula Vista Infrastructure" (GG-188) to DR-169 for said purpose. 4-1 4/3/07, Item If Page 2 of 4 2. Council adopt the resolution accepting bids and awarding contract for the CMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program (DR-169) Project, Phase IV and authorizing the Director of Public Works Operations to expend all available funds in the project. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION CIP ESTABLISHMENT The City's Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) rehabilitation program was budgeted for in the FY 2004/2005 budget process and is part of the Western Chula Vista Infrastructure Financing Program whereby $3,000,000 was designated for CMP RehabilitationlReplacement. Phase I (DR-I64) of the CMP Rehabilitation Program involved the survey by closed-circuit televising (CCTV) of approximately 88,000 lineal feet of the City corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm drain system. This program allowed the inspections, condition assessment, rehabilitation recommendations, and rehabilitation prioritizing of the City's CMP pipelines. This program allowed City staff to identify several locations that needed immediate attention due to potential for risk of public safety and/or damage to public or private property. Among these locations, Staff is recommending the establishment of a new capital improvement project specific to providing the needed rehabilitation to drain facilities, at six locations, which are now deteriorated. The approval of the resolution will authorize the transfer of existing funds in the amount of $971,406 from CIP GG-188 "Western Chula Vista Infrastructure" to DR-169 (Phase IV) for said purpose. This project will replace approximately 917 linear feet of CMP. The project will rehabilitate six locations of the City's system of corrugated metal storm drain pipes (Attachment 1). The general scope of the project involves the removal and replacement of existing corrugated metal pipe, including all labor, material, equipment, tools, transportation, mobilization, traffic control, removal and disposal of existing improvements, and other work necessary to construct the project in accordance with City standards. BID ACCEPTANCE On March 14, 2007, General Services staff received and opened bids from six (6) contractors as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT 1. Palm Engineering Construction - San Diego, CA $446,950.00 2. Tri-Group Construction - Poway, CA $450,722.00 3. New Century Construction -:Lakeside, CA $458,300.00 4. MJC Construction - Bonita, CA $466,928.00 5. Burtech Pipeline, Inc. - Encinitas, CA $595,385.00 6. Ortiz Corporation - Chula Vista, CA $600,000.00 4-2 4/3/07, Item~ Page 3 of 4 The apparent lowest bid by $446,950 is approximately 0.80% above the Engineer's estimate of $443,400. The Engineer's estimate was based on average prices for similar types of work completed during the last two years. References provided by the contractor have been reviewed and their work record found to be satisfactory. The Contractor's license is current. After reviewing the low bid, staff recommends awarding a $446,950 contract to Palm Engineering Construction, Inc., San Diego, California. The apparent second and third lowest bid, by Tri-Group Construction and New Century Construction, are rejected due to the presence of mathematical errors in the bid proposal. Approval of tonight's resolution will authorize City staff to expend all available funds and increase the value of the contract as necessary due to unforeseen circumstances. Unforeseen circumstances may cause an increase in quantities beyond what was anticipated during the preparation of the project specifications. A typical "unforeseen circumstance" situation occurs during the removal of the existing CMP pipe and we may find field conditions different from proposed improvement plans and specifications. As a result, additional material is required to rehabilitate the project site and may lead to a necessary "Change Order" to the contract. This is a typical situation with all CMP rehabilitation projects. According to City Council Policy No. 574-01, if a change order exceeds the cumulative contract change order aggregate amount allowable to be approved by the Director of Public Works Operations, City Council approval is required. However, approval of tonight's resolution will increase the Director of Public Works Operations' authority to approve change orders as necessary up to the total funding available. The Director of Public Works Operations is authorized to expend $34,286.50 for change orders regarding this project. At this time, staff is recommending that the Director of Public Works Operations approval limit be increased beyond the amount permitted by the above referenced council policy for an additional amount of $55,103.50 (Available Contingency $89,390 - $34,286.50). Any savings on the identified costs under Fiscal Impact may potentially increase the approval limit amount as necessary to expend all funds. CONTRACT AMOUNT REVISION The contract documents allow the City to decrease or increase the unit quantity for the rehabilitation of additional pipes without a change in the contract unit price bid by the Contractor. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Attached is a copy of the contractor's Disclosure Statement (Attachment 2). STAFF COSTS Rehabilitation projects are typically more complicated than new construction because more controlling factors exist. The research is more extensive because little or no information exist on older pipes and surrounding improvements. Right of way and easements determination, location of property lines and access to the project sites become issues that take more time than usual. Many times the pipe to be rehabilitated is under private & public improvements such as landscape & irrigation, fences, retaining walls, concrete pads, steep slopes, utilities and other 4-3 4/3/07, Item~ Page 4 of 4 improvements that require more design time to address all issues specific to the site (see Attachment 3). The total pre-construction staff costs were $325,066. In addition to pre-construction activities, increased staff time is also required to inspect these types of construction projects because of the same issues. $65,000 is estimated for construction inspection, geotechnical investigations and administrative staff. $25,000 is estimated for survey staking and $20,000 for design support during construction. The controlling factors stated above are all within each rehabilitation area and directly affect the staff cost for this project. All these different staff components total $435,066. All funds not used will be returned for use in other locations as necessary. DECISION MAKER CONFLICT Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the property, which are the subject action. FISCAL IMPACT At this time, staff recommends a transfer in the amount of $971,406 to establish capital improvement project DR-169 and provide the necessary funds to complete the project. FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION A. Contract Amount $446,950 B. Contingencies (20% of contract) $89,390 C. Staff Time Cost (approx % of total): Planning/Environmentall/Public Work! GIS (2.5%) $10,444 Survey Work (33.5%) $146,756 Design/Project Management (42%) $182,936 Right of Way (4%) $18,029 Construction Inspection (14.5%) $62,928 Geotechnical Report/Soil TestinlZ (3.5%) $13,973 TOTAL $971,406 FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR PROJECT A. Transfer from in GG188 Western Chula Vista Infrastructure Program $971,406 TOTAL $971,406 There is no impact to the General Fund as the funds for these improvements have been provided for as part of the Western Chula Vista Infrastructure Financing Program. Upon completion of the project, the improvements will require only routine City drainage maintenance. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 - Table I - Location & sizes of drainage pipe to be replaced Attachment 2 - Contractor Disclosure Statement Attachment 3 - Staff Cost Summary Prepared by: Luis A. Labrada, Associate Civil Engineer, General Services M:\General Services\GS Administration\Council Agenda\DR169 CMP REHAB\DR169rev6.doc 4-4 i!: " z W ..J Iii .<: o "0 <:: '" " 0. .is. UJ D- o I 10 ~ ~ z w ,. ,. o <J ~ <:: "0 .!!2 '" 0; .5 a: :::; u :;" ~ '" <:: ~ .x " G: ~"" .2 0 (J) 3: "0 '" <:: " '" 0 ~ ~ o.!'l -g1i5 '" :Jl ~ "E "' " :J: W 0: w .. ii: 0.. :::; U . <Xl ~ z o :1 <J o ..J '" ~ <:: " > '" .<: <:: " " a> <0 ~ .0", :s .5 "0; !Ii .~.~ ~ l:Q 00 0 = ::IE .- _ ~-:: ~ ~-E~ E W E (tJ (J IU g; e~a.g t; -- (j) u, r &! ~~~.? t; 6 0 ~"'ii) :.;::; E.'x c ~Q5Q)~ ..3:C~"5 ~.I T"" ~I ;; .l!! '" " ~ "' ... ~ ;; " u. '" " <:: :;j <Xl a> '" "0 <:: '" " 0. .is. 0.. U 0:: "0 <:: '" UJ 0.. o I 10 ~ ~ <:: ,5 .j; " 0. .is. 0.. :::; U . <Xl ~ '" <:: '" "'"" 'x 0 " 3: " '" " " .!'lo c." ~ fij "0= <:: " '" " Q) .!!.l > E o ~ E " ".<: 0::0 0.. :::; u . <Xl - " <:: " " > <( '" ~ u ~ E " '" C)c:~ <::"'- t;.9~ 'x -2- "E_ E~~ e.:: .- -"'-e -<:: " '" 3: " E-2C) :;;-.5 BQi]i ..9:c~ '" <:: .9 tl .E '" <:: o " oS 0. .is. UJ 0.. o I :;" ~ ~ <:: ,5 .j; " " '" c. i!2 "0 <:: '" " 0. .is. 0.. :::; U ~ " ~'" .~ ~ 0;" .~ e " " > <:: 00 E" " '" 0::'0 0.. :::; U ~ ~ '" '" :s: .1! OJ I "0 <:: '" " u '" ii: ~ " > a:: "'~ "OoE "- '" iIl~" o.E,l:; e '" '" c.~g. E 1ii:::- e j ~ -0<:: -"0 '" "'~.<: <:: - u 0"- ._ 0 ~ 5~2 o..! cg -' " <:: '" ;; " u. '" " <:: :;j ... '" ;; " u. ]j <:: :;j ... ... "0 <:: '" " ~ '" " i! " <:: o " "0 <:: '" UJ 0.. o I . <Xl ~ ,5 .j; 13 '" c. i!2 "0 <:: '" 0.. :::;" U 0 . 3: <Xl '" ~ " ",15 .5 c: 1i):m 'x 8 ~ .!!.l > E ~ (0 ".<: 0::0 0.. :::; u . <Xl ~ " " <:: " ~ '" '" " o ",,,, ~.9 "'- 'x E_ " ill " ffi-=~ E~~ 03:" J::OQ) ."0 t:_ '''It::::-= E B..92~t'lJ :;::.5 l!:! e N.cuU; o :s :5 a. -1002. ... ;; " u. ]j <:: :;j '" '" ~ Iii .<: o "0 <:: '" " 0. .is. UJ 0.. o I . '" ~ 3: " <:: ,5 .j; " " '" c. i!2 "0 <:: '" " 0. .is. 0.. :::; u 1-." ~ 0 g>3: :;: en '" " .x 15 " <:: ~~ o " E " Q) .fa O::E 0.. :::; u 1-. ~ " " <:: " ~ o <:: ::i: <0 ... ",,,, ~.9 "'- 'x E " '" c::~= '" - ~ q"O .goill lL).:!:,...c- c Q5 "'C E .Q"2~m '5:Q 8.~ u ... 0 a. o ::J .... ::J ...J U 0._ "' 4-5 ATIACHMENT. ;; " u. '" " <:: :;j ... a> '" :;" ~ ~ <:: .!!2 '" 0; .5 "0 <:: '" " u '" C. i!2 "0 <:: '" " 0. ii: 0.. :::; U . <Xl ~ '" <:: ~ .~ " <:: o "0 <:: .lB '" "0 <:: '" " " 0. > .- o 0. EU ,,> 0::0.. 0.. :::; U . <Xl - J!l .in " :::; ~ '" U "0"''' " 0 '" "'- '" 8. E.S o '" ~ a.e-c- (U1i).s~ E eel!:! 0:1:0- .... 0 C (I) ~:s.8g- <0 ~ c:: '5 i l!:! .Q 0 (I) ::J -cOts 1] ill g. 2 0_...._ -I 0 c./n <0 j Z "0 <:: '" - c .. E .. u '" 1i " 0:= " 0. ~ u: ...i ... ~ '" II ~ I- I ~ ~ i ~ ~ -E. i M . ~ ~ ~ e. p'F.A.CHMENT z, City of Chula Vista Disclosure Statement , , Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed, The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Po.su~nbrz.i " ...... 2. .-. ..' .-. . If any person. identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the nameS 'of all individuals with a $2000 investment in'the business (corporation/partnership) entity. ~\ADr.-+ \TreqS-lI'e'r 'RJ.~ ~ ~'rihfz 1 ..... 3. If any person. identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust; list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. ~/A- 4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. ~J.t ~hbL.i 5. Has any person. associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official.. of the City ofChula Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months? Yes_ NoX- ~/A. 21 C:\Documents and Settings\LuisL\Desktop\DR169\DR 169 con~ocumcnts final.doc If Yes, briefly descnbe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract. ~ fA-- 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? No ~ Yes _ If yes, which Council member? 7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.J.Yes _ Np.~ . . '.. _ ." If Yes, whi~h official** and what was the nature of item provided? ." N/A- Date: \JA'rdr\ \4 ~l f4 .." ..... Signature of Contractor/Applicant ~'tU\ ~n'raz\ Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant * Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. ** Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member ofa board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members. 22 C:\Documents and Settings\LuisLlDesktopIDR169\DR 169 conf1.re11locuments finn1.doc Attachment 3 Service Estimated Cost Survey $121,756 ------------ Design and $162,936 Project Mgmt Location Description 169 & 163 Glenhaven Way Easement and Right-of-Way (ROW) determination difficuit due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult due to private fence over existing easement, etc. drainage easements never been field surveyed; shown oniy on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground and depleted on plans. 602 & 608 Carla Avenue Easement and ROW determination difficult due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult due to private fence over existing easement, etc. drainage easements never been field surveyed, shown only on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground and depicted on plans. 92 Rivera Place Easement and ROW determination difficult due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult, steep slope within project site, project site located in two different subdivisions, survey require more effort easement located within three subdivisions, drainage easements never been field surveyed, shown only on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground. 1561 Ocala Court Easement and ROW determination difficult due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult due to private fence over existing easement, heavy brush cover, drainage easements never been field surveyed, shown oniy on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground, steep slope within project site. 46 Minot Avenue Easement and ROW determination difficult due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult due to private fence over existing easement, drainage easements never been fieid surveyed, shown only on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground depicted on pians, steep slope within project site. 1073 & 1065 Calle Mesita Easement and ROW determination difficult due to scarce property monumentation information, property access difficult, steep slope within project site, project site located in two different subdivisions, survey require more time to tied down both subdivision, drainage easements never been field surveyed, shown only on maps, project required easements to be located in the ground, heavy brush cover, steep slope within project site. Three preliminary (titie) reports required due to drainage easements. Project located adjacent to City/County Boundary. 169 & 163 Glenhaven Way Field conditions different from old improvement plans. Pipe to be design close to an existing concrete block wall. Pipe to be discharge into an existing concrete line channel. Channel needs repair due to the connection of proposed pipe. 602 & 608 Carla Avenue Existing surface drainage pattern inadequate, design on new curb inlets necessary for installation of propose pipe. Pipe will be place between adjacent properties with fences, and power poles obstruction. 92 Rivera Place Field conditions different from old improvement plans. Existing surface drainage pattern inadequate, portion of poposed drainage pipe will be located on a steep slope. Special . skuctural des ion for modified outlet reouired. Service Estimated Location Description Cost Design and 1561 Ocala Court Field conditions different from old improvement plans. Project Mgmt Portions of drainage pipe will be located on a steep slope. (cont'd) Special structural design for modified outiet required. Special connection require to connect to existing concrete line channel. 46 Minot Avenue Existing surface drainage pattern inadequate, design on new curb inlet necessary for installation of propose pipe. Pipe will be place between adjacent properties with fences. portion of pipe will be located on a steep slope. Special structurai design for modified outiet required. 1073 & 1065 Calle Mesita Field conditions different from old improvement plans. Portions of drainage pipe will be located on a steep slope. Special structural design for modified outlet required. Slope repair required due to illegal discharge from a swimming pool '"construction located downstream of the proiect. $7.928 Various Field design support, construction pians and specification review. Right-of-Way $18,029 Various Three easement acquistions for one construction location. Aoent Geotechnicai $3.973 1073 and 1065 Calle Mesita Geotechnicai engineering report for slope repair study. Study Enoineer not anticioated. Geographic $7,404 Various GIS support during the engineering design phase. Information Systems (GIS) Environmenta $2,535 Various Review of environmental requirements for construction site -- . I locations. Public Works $304 Various Public Works Operations suport during the engineering design phase, review of construction olans. NPDES $200 Various Review of NPDES requirements for construction site locations. Su btotal $325.066 4-9 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ESTABLISHING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENTITLED "CMP STORM DRAIN PIPE REHABILITATION PROGRAM PROJECT, PHASE IV" (DR-169) AND TRANSFERRING EXISTING FUNDS FROM CIP "WESTERN CHULA VISTA INFRASTRUCTURE" (GG- 188) TO DR-169 FOR SAID PURPOSE. WHEREAS, as part of an ongoing program to rehabilitate corrugated metal drainage pipe (CMP) throughout the City, staff has identified a number of storm drain facilities, which are deteriorated and are in need of rehabilitation. CMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program Project (DR-169) will remove and replace those drainage facilities at six locations, which are in need of rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, staff is recommending the establishment of a new capital improvement project specific to providing the needed rehabilitation to drain facilities, at three locations which are now deteriorated; and WHEREAS, the general scope of the project involves the removal and replacement of existing corrugated metal pipe, including all labor, material, equipment, tools, transportation, mobilization, traffic control, removal and disposal of existing improvements, and other work necessary to construct the project in accordance with City standards; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project, DR-169 CMP Rehabilitation Project, qualifies for a Class 2 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the State CEQA Guidelines because the new facilities will be reconstructed on the same site as the facilities replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. WHEREAS, there is no impact on the General Fund as the funds for these improvements have been provided for as part of the Western Chula Vista Infrastructure Financing Program; and WHEREAS, staff recommends the transfer of existing funds in the amount of $971,406 from CIP GG-188 "Western Chula Vista Infrastructure" to DR-169 for said purpose; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby authorize establishing a capital improvement project entitled CMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program Project (DR-169) and transferring existing funds in the amount of $971,406 from CIP "Western Chula Vista Infrastructure" (GG-188) to DR-169 for said purpose. Presented by Approved as to form by Jack Griffm Director of General Services ~~~$\\... Ann Moore City Attorney 4-10 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ACCEPTING BIDS, AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE "CMP STORM DRAIN PIPE REHABILITATION PROGRAM PROJECT, PHASE IV (DR- 169)" PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS TO EXPEND ALL AVAILABLE FUNDS IN THE PROJECT WHEREAS, as part of an ongoing program to rehabilitate corrugated metal drainage pipe (CMP) throughout the City, staff has identified a number of storm drain facilities, which are deteriorated and are in need of rehabilitation. CMP Storm Drain Pipe Rehabilitation Program (DR-169) Project, Phase IV will remove and replace those drainage facilities at six locations, which are in need of rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, on March 14,2007, General Service staff received and opened bids from six contractors as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT 1. Palm Engineering Construction - San Diego, CA $446,950.00 2. Tri-Group Construction - Poway, CA $450,722.00 3. New Century Construction - Lakeside, CA $458,300.00 4. MJC Construction - Bonita, CA $466,928.00 5. Burtech Pipeline, Inc. - Encinitas, CA $595,385.00 6. Ortiz Corporation - Chula Vista, CA $600,000.00 ; and WHEREAS, the low bid by Palm Engineering Construction of $446,950 is $3,550.00 (0.8%) above the Engineer's estimate of$ 443,400.00; and WHEREAS, based on average prices for similar types of work completed during the last three years, and upon review, staff recommends awarding the contract in the amount of $446,950.00 to Palm Engineering Construction; and WHEREAS, references provided by the contractor have been reviewed and their work record found to be satisfactory and the Contractor's license is current; and WHEREAS, the apparent second and third lowest bid, by Tri-Group Construction and New Century Construction, are rejected due to the presence of mathematical errors in the bid proposal. 4-11 WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 (c) (Existing Facilities) categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further environmental review is necessary. WHEREAS, there are sufficient funds to fully offset all costs associated with the construction of this project, with no impact to the General Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby award a contract in the amount of $446,950.00 for the construction of the CMP Rehabilitation Program in the City of Chula Vista, California" (DR-169) project to Palm Engineering Construction and authorizing the Director of Public Works Operations to expend all available funds in the project. Presented by Approved as to form by ~"h..~~\l\ Ann Moore City Attorney Jack Griffin Director of General Services 4-12