Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/05/27 Item 14 '!;. " COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item 14 Meeting Date 5-27-80 ITEM TITLE: Resolution /PllllRejegting bids for the dredging of three lakes at the Chula vista Municipal Golf Course SUBMITTED BY, CHy engineer ~ (4/5th, '0<" '0> "'-"-I At 2:00 p.m. on May 14, 1980, in the Council Chambers in the Public Services Building, the City Engineer received sealed bids for "Dredging Three Lakes at the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course, Chula Vista California". The scope of the project consisted of dredging the lakes and taking the material to designated areas on the Municipal Golf Course. RECOMMENDATION: That Council reject the bids. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: Bids were received from three contractors as follows: 1. DiMent's Backhoe Service 2. Cabrillo Crane and Rigging Contractor 3. Ursa Corporation $43,200.00 83,578.50 88,425.00 The low bid submitted by DiMent's Backhoe Service is below the Engineer's estimate of $43,875 by $675 or 1-1/2%. The Engineer's estimate was based on conversations with two prospective bidders who had given the staff a price for removing the material of between $3.50 and $4.00 a cubic yard. Staff assumed $3.25 per cubic yard. A previous bid for doing this work two years ago was at a unit price of about $2.66 a cubic yard to have the material removed. Any bid lower than $55,000 would have seemed reasonable to us for performing the proposed work. The low bidder has presented evidence to staff that he made an error in his computations in preparing the bid. Basically, he assumed he could remove 750 cubic yards of material a day rather than 750 cubic yards a week from the lakes. This would result in a significant difference in the cost of doing the project. He has indicated to staff that he does not own the type of :equipment necessary to do the job, but was planning to rent it. A person owning the equipment can afford to do the project at a much lower cost. Staff is convinced that this particular bidder could not perform the work for the amount bid. He has requested that his bid be withdrawn and not be accepted by the City. He has also indicated that if awarded the bid, he would not sign the contract. If he refused to sign the contract within the time specified in the bid documents, the City could keep his bid bond ($4,320). However, the City Atto~ney believes. that if he went to court, he could get a portion of his money back if he could show that he made an honest mistake in preparing his bid. . Continued Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) 7 0 I I --z.,.. _._<._"', EXHIBITS Agreement____ Resolution~ Ordinance Plat Notification List Other ENVIRONMENTAL OOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on I I I I I I I I I I I . .; I I ! I , I I I , I , y' ! ., Page 2, Item 14 Meeting of 5-27-80 The process of awarding the contract and the time allowance for the bidder to sign the contract could delay the readvertising of the project from 2 to 4 weeks. This much delay could seriously affect the watering of the golf course. We believe the bid by the second low bidder to be too high and therefore request that the Council reject all bids for the dredging of the lakes. In addition, adequate funds are not available to award the project to the second low bidder. Prior to rebidding the dredging of the lakes, we will be investigating other possibilities for clearing the material from the lakes. These include: 1. City renting or leasing equipment and using its personnel. 2. City relocating one of the lakes to a new position on the golf course, thereby eliminating the need to dredge one of the lakes. After these investigations are completed, we will be making a recommendation to the City Council as to what means should be used to remove material from the lakes in the golf course. FISCAL IMPACT: None SLH:fpw!JR008 r . : ::- 0' "J .j'h,~ c-:;t\' (....v;', .:1 "'\f' - .. ~ _I '..... "' j ....' '_. . I~ '.' " C'I'II'I'~ V'""I'~ C;'I'if'I..,!'a', ~;;.\ '...~.:.l, ~.."J, II i Dated S - a-7~R(J l.;~_................~.~_.. J 0 I )V