HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1981/01/20 Item 10
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
'10
Meeting Date
l-?n-Rl
ITEM TITLE:
Resol ution I/)3 9'~ Rejecting bids for
of modifications to the traffic signal
Industrial Boulevard
City Engineer ~
the construction
at "L" Street/
SUBMITTED BY:
(4/5ths Vote: Yes___ No~)
Bids were received for the signal modifications on January 6, 1981. The
low bid was approximately 50 percent over the Engineer's estimate. The
Traffic Engineer believes that the City can save a significant amount of
money by purchasing ~ome of the equipment and rebidding the project.
Therefore it is my
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt this resolution rejecting the bids
for the signal modification and direct staff to rebid the project.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Proposed modifications. to the signal at "L" Street/Industrial Boulevard
include provision of a signalized westbound left turn'phase'and signal
indications for the 'driveway from the future CALTRANS park & ride lot to
the north of the intersection. These modifications require some signal
standard installation and relocation; new detector loops; relocation of
existing freeway directional signs and railroad crossing arms; and
rewiring of the traffic signal controller.
'The Engineer's estimate was $22,800 of which CALTRANS
up to $6,500 for the modifications to accommodate the
park & ride lot. The following bids were received on
had agreed to pay
traffic from the
January 6, 1981:
Lekaunas Electric, Spring Valley
Arrow Electric, Lemon Grove
$33,990.31
35,783.00
Although several bid items were above the engineer's estimate, the task
to modify the traffic signal controller carne in significantly above the
estimate. This is partially attributable to the fact that the
controller manufacturer (Automatic Signal Co.) has'closed all its
western offices and now operates soley from its headquarters in Norwalk.
Connecticut.
Investigation into this matter shows that it would actually be cheaper
to purchase a new generation (microprocessor) controller and cabinet for
this intersection instead of modifying the existing older generation
controller. Additional funds may be saved by modifying the scope of
work (i.e., reuse of some of the existing equipment). If Council
chooses to award the project, it will be necessary for us to return with
a resolution appropriating an additional $16,300.
Continued
10'3 g- "2-
Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
EXHIBITS
Agreement_____ Resolution~ Ordinance_____ Plat_____ Notification List
Other
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached
Submitted on
. .'
Page 2, Item
r.1eeting Date
10
1-20-81
I recommend that the City rebid this project and purchase and provide
the signal controller to the contractor. I expect that this rebidding
procedure will result in a $5-7,000 savings to the"City.
FISCAL IMPACT: There are insufficient funds budgeted to cover the cost
of this project as bid -
CIP Project TS-04
Caltrans participation
TOTAL
$13,000.00
4,690.00
$17,690.00
-33,990.00
$16,300.00
(in accordance with
bids received)
Low bid received
SHORTAGE
Even if the rebidding results in the expected savings of $5-7,000, it
will be necessary to appropriate additional funds to this project.
GRH: fpw/BR004
~
by the City Council of
Chula Vista, California
" 1;
\ D3tSrJ _-.!~aLo.::.g I
t,_~.."_,.._._","..,-",,........___
105'12-