HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1979/02/20 Item 15CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No." 15
For meeting of 2/20/79
Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for
ITEM TITLE Resolution 9,~0,~ Third Avenue Street Improvements - Phase I
E Street to F Street and Appropriating Funds
-_ ~ ;
SUBMITTED BY Community Developme t Director/City Engineer via Director of Pub is Works
ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES X NO )
BACKGROUND
The planning and funding process for the Third Avenue street improvements has been a
long and frustrating experience. The project was first proposed for funding through
the Economic Development Administration under the Public Works Bill in 1976, but was
not funded. The project was then included in the City's Community Development Block
Grant program. However, after the change of administration in Washington in 1977,
economic development was no longer an eligible activity under the Block Grant program
and the project was declared ineligible. Subsequent to that, the project was funded
out of City funds (Special Capital Outlay) fora total of $325,000. Due to the
increase in the scope of the project, and the effect of inflation to the original
estimate, the project was funded with an additional $201,000 of Revenue Sharing funds
in fiscal year 78-79.
There already have been expenditures to this project totaling $23,424.95. Most of
this. has been for the recent temporary overlay of the alleys parallel to Third Avenue
between E and F Street ($6,170) and for the change order to the F Street widening
project that installed the decorative stamped concrete to the intersection of Third
and F ($15,000). This leaves a total unencumbered balance to the project of $502,575.05.
CONSTRUCTION BIDS
At 11:00 a.m. on January 25, 1979 in the Engineering Conference Room, the City
Engineer received sealed bids for Third Avenue Street Improvements, Phase I, E
Street to F Street.
(continued on page 2)
DPB:as
f ~/IITTTTA
tJ~ h ! tS 1 I J
Agreement Resolution X Ordinance Plat Notification List
Other Exhibits A & B ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Please see Financial Summary.
(NOTE: Resolution will be prepared subsequent to public hearing
on Block Grant, pending decisions made at the hearing.)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Due to the uncertainties associated with combining the redevelopment areas and the
size of the tax allocation bond issue, staff is hesitant to recommend Alternate
One. Therefore, Alternate Two is recommended.
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDS CONTINUING THIS ITEM TO FEBRUARY 22, 1979.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (1) The CIP committee recommends that if additional funds
are appropriated for this project during this fiscal year, that the funds be appro-
priated from the Residential Construction Tax fund.
(2) Project Area Committee recommends Alternate One. ~'
COUNCIL ACTION
1 ~ _____.. _..__ ~__ .~.-
~ A. '>; 4
r7
r ~t ~'
1. . ~:._a . .. . ,i ,
~~ ~
'~`'~ J` `
Form A-113 (Rev. 5/77)
Item No.' 15
For meeting of
2/20/79
Page 2
The scope of the project includes: demolition and removal of concrete curbs, side-
walks, asphalt pavement, trees, street light, parking meters, and traffic signals
and the installation of textured concrete sidewalks and crosswalks, curbs, asphalt
pavement, drainage facilities, street lights, architectural concrete walls, land-
scaping and irrigation and street furniture.
Bids were received from two contractors as follows:
1. T. 6. Penick & Sons, Inc. $690,714.01
2. Daley Corporation $1,069,209
The low bid submitted by T. B. Penick & Sons, Inc. exceeds the engineer's estimate
by $159,615.01. This low bid is above the engineer's estimate of $531,099 by 30%.
We have reviewed the low bid and find the major area of increased costs between the
engineer's estimate and the low bid to be in the following items of work:. traffic
controls ($23,560), asphalt concrete ($10,556), drainage system ($18,404), electrical
energy and lighting systems ($17,860), ornamental street li hts ($45,402), street
furniture ($7,893), and landscaping and irrigation ($29,19 4 . This represents an
aggregate increase of $152,869 over the engineer's estimate.
The staff and our consultant, Phillips-Reynolds & Associates, have reviewed the bid
and find it to be acceptable. Although some of the bid items were well in excess of
the engineer's estimate, we do not believe that the City could realize a savings if
the project were re-bid.
ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS
The City has many alternatives to consider in proceeding with this project ranging
from award of full contract to the elimination of the project altogether. Several
of the alternatives are outlined here with the accompanying financial obligations.
ALTERNATIVE #1 - Fund the Entire Pro,7ect Now
The total project cost is $758,532 which would require an additional appropri-
ation of $255,957.
Project Costs:
$690,714 Low bid
34,536 5% contingencies
5,000 Utility relocation
28,282 Engineering services (explained on pg.4 )
$758,532 Total project costs
-502,575 Remaining unencumbered
$255,957 Additional funds required
It is proposed that this additional appropriation be loaned to the project from
the Residential Construction Tax fund. As of January 31, 1979, there is a total
of $301,346 that is unappropriated and available in that account. It is proposed
that the loan be repaid to the City through the sale of tax allocation bonds.
If the City is successful in combining the Town Centre Redevelopment Project with
the Bayfront Redevelopment Project, such a tax allocation bond issue can become a
reality some time during fiscal year 79-80. If the legislation in Sacramento
combining the projects is not successful, it may be sometime before the tax
increment in the Town Centre I redevelopment area is of a sufficient amount to
support a tax allocation issue to repay the loan. If the RCT loan is not repaid
in the near future, then these RCT funds would not be available to finance other
City projects or cost overruns.
I tem No . ~ 15
For meeting of
2/20/79
Page 3
Fund a Portion of the Project Now and Complete the
ALTERNATIVE #2 - Pro.iect with Block Grant Funds in FY 79-80
Staff has spent a considerable amount of time with the engineering consultant,
Phillips-Reynolds & Associates, and with the low bidder, T. B. Penick & Sons,
Inc. to determine the most feasible and economical method to reduce the project
in such a way that would have the least overall impact now, and at the same
time provide for the most economical way to complete the project in the future.
With this in mind, several major items can be postponed:
1. Thirty-nine ornamental street lights. Total Savings: $97,858. The pur-
chase of the decorative street lights themselves would be eliminated from
this contract but all the underground work required for their installation
would still be included. This means that the lights can be installed at a
later date without requiring excavation. The existing street lights on
Third Avenue would remain until the purchase of the decorative lights,
and would be tied into the new underground system installed with this con-
tract.
2. Street furniture, benches, trash rece tacles and bic cle racks. Total
Savin s: 26,273. These items require very little labor to install and
are situp y stock items that can be purchased at a later date.
3. Improvements to the intersection at Third and F. Total Savings: $17,410.
The Phase I street improvements on Third Avenue were originally intended
to be installed from a point just immediately south of the intersection of
Third and E to a point just south of the intersection of Third and F. This
change order would shorten the project by eliminating the improvements to
the intersection of Third and F.
4. Cites pays energy cost during construction. Total savings: $2,000. The
specifications for this contract require the contractor to pay the lighting
costs for Third Avenue during construction. This change order would simply
mean that the energy cost would be paid by the City. Funds for energy
costs are already included in the Public Works department budget.
Project Costs:
$690,714 Low bid
-143,541 Deduction by change orders
$547,173 Total project costs
+ 27,359 5% contingencies
+ 5,000 Utility relocation
+ 28,282 Engineering services (explained on pg. 4)
$607,814 Project costs
-502,575 Remaining unencumbered
$105,239 Additional funds required
If the Council selects this alternative, it will still be necessary to appro-
priate sufficient funds for the entire project, i.e. $758,532 which is an
additional $255,957. This can be done with the stipulation that once the
contract is executed, the Council will exercise its option to reduce the pro-
ject by $143,541 with four change orders. The low bidder, T. B. Penick &
Sons, Inc. has tentatively agreed to the change orders.
It is proposed that the $105,239 in additional funds be loaned to the project
from the balance of the Residential Construction Tax fund. As in the first
alternative, this loan would be repaid through the sale of a tax allocation
bond issue.
It is also proposed that the items eliminated from this contract be budgeted
as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program for Program Year
Five beginning July 1, 1979. This means that the Block Grant projects for
~~~~.~J~
Item No. •'15
For meeting of
2/20/79
Page 4
the next three years which the City Council has previously considered and
tentatively approved would be changed somewhat. Essentially, the Block
Grant funds tentatively earmarked for the Third Avenue street improvements
from F to G in fiscal year 80-81 would be moved up to fiscal year 79-80
and used to complete the improvements from E to F. This would mean that a
project slated for fiscal year 79-80 would be postponed to fiscal year
80-81. It is proposed that the drainage project at Third and Parkway be
the project that is delayed for one year. This also means that the total
amount of funds earmarked for the street improvements from F to G would
be reduced by approximately $150,000.
ALTERNATIVE #3 - Reject Bids and Redesi n the Project to Reduce Costs
The thrust behind the Third Avenue Street improvements is to enhance the
pedestrian environment and encourage a stimulation of the retail trade. A
pleasant shopping environment is crucial to the rebirth of the retail commercial
element in the Town Centre, and the design of the amenities in this project is
essential to accomplishing the intended environment. The amenities, however, are
only a portion of the total cost for this project. There are many "traditional"
public improvements that also need to be constructed (e.g. storm drain, updated
and modernized traffic signal, and a modernized underground electrical system
to replace the existing system which is in poor condition). In addition, the
soils conditions within the Third Avenue area are very expansive which require
that certain expensive measures be taken to protect the decorative concrete that
is proposed. These traditional public improvements amount to a significant por-
tion of the total project, and if the amenities are to be constructed in any
form, it will be necessary to include these traditional public works elements
Nonetheless, it would be possible to redesign the project and reduce the cost
somewhat. The net result, however, may not be a cost savings. There would be
additional consulting fees for engineers and landscape architects for redesign,
plus the project would have to be delayed for a minimum of one year. The delay
is necessitated by the time it would take to redesign the project, and because
o.f the effort to schedule the construction to avoid the rainy season and the
holiday shopping season. The twelve month delay may add a considerable amount
to the construction cost through inflation alone. The inflation factor in the
road construction industry in a recent twelve month period was over 35%.
Therefore, a significant reduction in the project scope may not realize any
reduction in project costs in today's dollars.
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICE FEES
The City entered into a contract with Phillips-Reynolds Engineering, Inc. on
October 12, 1976 to prepare the engineering plans and specifications for the "Town
Centre Sidewalk and Alley Improvements." This was a project that was submitted to
the Economic Development Administration for funding under the Public Works Bill.
The project included not only the improvements to Third Avenue from E to G Streets
but also improvements and/or utility undergrounding in eleven alleys. The estimated
cost for the street and alley improvements at that time was in excess of $400,000.
The scope of work as defined was, of course, used as the basis of negotiations for
the consulting services, and the consulting contract of $43,000 amounted to less than
10% of the construction estimate.
Subsequent to entering into the contract with Phillips-Reynolds Engineering, Inc.,
the Redevelopment Agency adopted the Town Centre Design Manual. The criteria for the
design of improvements in the project area as set forth in the Design Manual drastically
changed the scope of the project as well as the design approach. The project was no
longer a typical street rehabilitation project, but a multi-disciplined design project
consisting of master planning of architectural and landscaping treatments. The major
item not included in the original scope was the development of a project Master Plan.
The Master Plan called for the development of an architectural landscape feature with
consideration for handling of pedestrian vehicular traffic, including minimizing the
loss of on-street parking. The details within the Master Plan included the alternates
for street lights, retaining walls, trellises, crosswalk and sidewalk treatment, land-
scaping layout, street tree selection, and a design of a drainage system to provide for
~svs
Item No . ~ 15
For meeting of
2/20/79
Page 5
the development of intersection and crosswalk nodes. Other considerations were
given to a sound system, electrical power system, public telephones, and automatic
irrigation system. Once this Master Plan was adopted in March of 1977, the con-
sultant was instructed to proceed with design. Additional expenses were incurred
by the consultant thereafter because of a re-evaluation of the street light selection
and a re-evaluation of the bus stop locations. In addition, the Third Avenue street
improvements were divided into two phases (E Street to F Street, and F Street to G
Street), and the alley improvements were divided into three phases (certain alleys
were grouped together for bidding and construction purposes).
Due to the significant expansion in the scope of the project, and due to the re-
evaluations during the design phase and the continuous reviews of the project by the
Project Area Committee and the Design Review Board, the consultant was required to
perform extra work not contracted for. Now the consultant is requesting compensation
fora portion of that additional work. Exhibit "A" is a summary of the extra work
performed and the amount which the consultant is requesting compensation. Essentially,
the consultant is requesting full reimbursement for all additional subcontracted fees
(per our agreement, that would be cost plus 15%), plus compensation for one-half of
the extra work performed by the consultant. This amounts to a total claim of $28,281.82.
Exhibit "B" is an itemized explanation of the extra work performed by the consultant.
The total consulting fee for this project would then total $71,281.82 ($43,000 ori-
ginal contract plus $28,281.82 additional charges). Staff feels that the additional
charges claimed by the consultant are reasonable. If you consider the total estimated
construction costs for the street improvements from E to G and all of the eleven alley
improvements, the $71,282 consulting fee amounts to approximately 5 or 6% of the total
construction cost.. It is, therefore, recommended that the consultant be compensated
an additional $28,281.82. However, the City Engineering staff feels that the con-
struction plans for the alleys not yet out to bid require some additional work by the
consultant. They, therefore, recommend that 25% of the additional compensation be
withheld until the alley plans are completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
ALTERNATIVE ONE:
1. Requires additional appropriation of $255,957. Appropriate $255,957 from the
Residential Construction Tax fund as a loan to the Third Avenue construction fund
and authorize expenditure of $28,282 from account number 621-6211-5201 and auth-
orize expenditure of $22,7,675 from account number 621-6211-5569.
2. Additional appropriations are recommended as a loan to the project to be repaid
through a tax allocation bond issue.
3. Recommended source: Residential Construction Tax fund.
ALTERNATIVE TWO:
1. Requires an additional appropriation of $255,957 which would be reduced to $105,239
through the execution of four change orders. Appropriate $255,957 from the
Residential Construction Tax fund as a loan to the Third Avenue construction fund
and authorize expenditure of $28,282 from account number 67_1-6211-5201 and auth-
orize expenditure of $227,675 from account number 621-6211-5569.
2. Additional appropriations are recommended as a loan to the project to be repaid
through a tax allocation bond issue.
3. Recommended source: Residential Construction Tax fund.
4. Recommended that $150,000 of CDBG funds be budgeted to FY 79-80 to complete project.
9~~
PHILLIPS-REYNOLDS ENGINEERING, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERING-LAND SURVEYING
ITEM
Phillips Reynolds Services
Addendum No. 1
Consultant Fees + 15~
San Lo Aerial Surveys
Huxley Clemons Colbourn
Utility Consultants
Parctec
Other Charges + 15%
CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
TOWN CENTRE PROJECT
SUMMARY OF EXTRA IrbRK
AGREEMENT ACTUAL
$28,632.75
1,076.25
$29,709.00 $48,928.75
DIFFERENCE
CLAIM
3,381.00 3,381.00
3,800.00 16,535.40
3,850.00 1,794.00
-0- 7,890.01
2,260.00 2,362.54
$43,000.00 $80,891.70
(50% of difference)
$19,219.75 $ 9,609.87
-0-
12,735.40
[2,056.00]
7,890.01
102.54
$37,891.70
-0-
12,735.40
[2,056.00]
7,890.01
102.54
$28,281.82
71 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE • CHULA VISTA, CA 92010 • PHONE 426-5400 ~ I -" ~ ~ 1
SOS __
PHILLIPS-REYNOLDS ENGINEERING, INC. ~ -
CIVIL ENGINEERING-LAND SURVEYING
February 7, 1979
Job No. 3333
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
TOWN CENTRE PROJECT
BREAKD04JN
ENGINEERING SERVICES:
Survey Crew 3-Man:
19.5 hrs @ $67.50/hr $ 1,316.25
Survey Crew 2-Man:
105.5 hrs @ $47.50/hr 5,011.25
Survey Supervisor:
2.0 hrs @ $22.50/hr 45.00
EDM Equipment•
17.5 hrs @ $17.50/hr 306.25
Principal:
51.25 hrs @ $30.00 1,537,50
Office Engineering:
1,072.0 hrs @ $25.00/hr 26,800.00
Engineering Aid & Drafting:
795.0 hrs @ $17.50/hr 13,912.50
Total Services ......................... $ 48,928.75
EXHIBIT ~
71 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE • CHULA VISTA, CA 92010 • PHONE 426-5400
,~0~
Possible Fundin4 Sources
1. Block Grant: Not available until July 1, 1979.
2. Revenue Sharing: ~rJould reguire a public hearing if more than $131,920 is expended on
this project. Total unencumbered and available as of 1/31/79: $388,660.
3. Gas Tax: Portions of this project are eligible for gas tax funding - the storm drain
($61,550) and traffic signal ($23,650). Total unencumbered and available $278,594.
However, there are overruns anticipated for current gas tax projects.
4. Residential Construction Tax:. Total unencumbered and available as of 1/31/79: $301,346.
CIP Committee recommends use of RCT funds.
Several funding alternatives using Block Grant funds are attached. The use of Block Grant
funds necessitates a special bid package to meet Block Grant regulations.
O
PROJECT
PROS
CONS
Let action of 2/20/79 stand -
I 1. Avoids rebidding portion of 1. No absolute certainty that loan will
.
no change orders
•
2. project.
Avoids phasing of project.
2. be repaid in near future.
Loan from RCT would nearly deplete
• 3. Avoids rewriting of Block RCT fund.
Grant.
Rebid light standards and street
II 1. Provides for financing por- 1. 4Ji11 actually increase project costs
.
furniture - contractor to purchase tion of project with Block
825)
Grant ($147
2. by $23,694.
Would require time and expense of
and install , rebidding, preparation of plans,
Estimated cost of rebid items
3 specs, etc.
two
hasing of project
uires
R
. ,
p
eq
lights $121,552 (current bid price) prime contractors, administration of
furniture 26,273 (current bid price) two contracts, longer construction
$147,825
4. period.
Block Grant application must be re-
compares to $124,131 that is saved by written.
eliminating these items from current 5. No certainty of bid prices.
contract.
III. City purchase street lights and 1. Provides for financing por-
ith Block
t 1. Would require time and expense of
preparation of plans and
rebidding
street furniture and contract for w
tion of projec
810)
Grant ($96 ,
specs, etc.
their installation 2 .
,
Savings of $27,321. 2. Requires phasing of project, two
Estimated cost of rebid items . prime contractors, administration of
er construction
l
n
t
g
o
s,
two contrac
Purchase light standards. $59,400 period.
Install light standards 11,137 3. Block Grant application must be re-
purchase furniture 26,273 written.
'. $96,810 4. No certainty of bid prices.
cor~pares to $124,131 savings i f these
itEm~ are removed from existing contract.
Savings is $27,321.
Page 1 of 2 p
•--
PROJECT PRns
CONS
jIV. City purchase street lights and
street furniture and install
.Estimated costs of rebid
Pu~~chase light standards $59,400
Purchase furniture 26,273
Install light standards City forces
$85,673
compares to $124,131 savings if re-
moved from existing bid. Savings is
$38,458.
1. Provides for financing por-
tion of project with Block
Grant ($85,673).
2. Savings of $38,458.
1. Would require time and expense of
rebidding, preparation of specs, etc.
Block Grant procedures require com-
petitive bid.
2. Block Grant application must be re-
written.
3. No certainty of bid prices.
4. Requires 4/5th's vote of City Council
for City forces to perform work.
5. City forces have never performed this
type of work on this scale.
6. Would remove City forces from other
projects and maintenance function
including traffic signal maintenance.
Page 2 of 2
• ~m No. CA 102
7 -~ 6 6'
CERTIFICATE OF CITY FINANCE OFFICER
Certification of Unappropriated Balance
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the money required for the
appropriation of funds for the purpose set forth in the
attached resolution is available in the Treasury, or is
anticipated to come into the Treasury, and is otherwise
unappropriated.
Amount $ 255,957.00 Fund Residential Construction Tax
Purpose Street Improvements Third Avenue, E to F Street
Bidder T.B. Penick & Sons
$222,675.00 621 6211 5569 ~ ~~ ~_.~
/ ~ ~~
28,282.00 621 6211 5201 _ ~ `'
Finance Officer
The City of Chula Vista
Bate 3/5/79 By
Certification of Unencumbered Balance
~C HEREBY CERTIFY that the indebtedness and oblici-
ation to be incurred. by the contract or agreement auth6r-
ized by t?~ie attached resolution can be incurred without
the violation. of any of the provisions of the Charter of
the City of_ Chula Vista, or the Constitution or the laws
of_ the State of California, that sufficient monies have
been appropriated for the purpose of said contract, that
sufficient. monies to meet the obligations of the contract
are actually in the. Treasury, or are anticipated to come
into the Treasury to the credit of the appropriation from
which the same are to be drawn, and that said monies now
actually in the Treasury, together with the monies antic-
ipated to came into the Treasury, to the credit of said
appropriation are otherwise unencumbered.
Amount Not to Exceed S
Finance Officer
The City of_ Chula Vista
Date By
Fund Dept./Activity
Purpose
Bidder
Certificate No.
r
• CHANGE IPJ CONTRACT
Y
' -~
~; ORDER N0.
Third Avenue Street Improvemerits~r DATE
"E" Street to "F" Street, V J ~' ~~
Phase One CONTRACT
T. B. Penick and Sons, Inc. CONTRACTOR
5-A
November 21, 1979
JOB AN003
The following .change shall be made to increase the
contract dated March 19. 1979 , between the City of Chula Vista and
T. B. Penick"& Sons, Inc. , Contractor.
REMARKS AND DETAILS:
Modify Change Order Pd o.5 to reflect actual c.rees placed in storage
at Rohr Park as directed by the City Landscape Architect.
Change Order No. 5 was based on the deletion of five (5) 24" box
trees and one (1) 30" box tree. The actual deletion was three (3)
24" box trees and two (2) 30" box trees.
The proper amount of credit is therefore $275.00, not $400.00 as
per Change Order No. 5. Difference to be added - $125.00.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE $ 690,714.01
Previous Change Order Nos. $ 867.30
Revised Total. Contract Price $ 691,,581.31
This Change Order No. 5-A $ 125.00
It is agreed by the undersigned that all extra work shall be performed
and materials furnished in accordance with the original contract and in
accordance with the statement, if any, attached hereto.
TOTAL CONTRACT $ 691,706.31
APPROVED BY:
.John P. Lippitt
d"
ACCEPTED BY: ~ ORDERED BY:
T. B. Penick & Sons, Inch Kenne~,~3~. Golf;kamp
THOMAS L . Y~;N
pR~SID~l`1T
" ~PW-E-4 4 ~ - ~S O S ~
50.5 .
r
ORDER NO. 7
CHANGE IP1 CONTRACT
Third Avenue Street Improvements,
Phase 1, "E" St. to "F" St•CONTRACT
T. B. Penick and Sons, Inc.CONTRACTOR
DATE December 11, 1979
JOB AIJ-003
The following change shall be made to increase the
contract dated March 19, 1979 , between the City of Chula Vista and
T. B. Penick and Sons, Inc. , Contractor.
REMARKS AND DETAILS:
TOTAL $849.23
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE $ 690,714.01
Previous Change Order Nos. $ 992.30
Revised Total. Contract Price $ 691,706.31
This Change Order No. _7 $ 849.23
It is agreed by the undersigned that all extra work shall be performed
and materials furnished in accordance with the original contract and in
accordance with the statement, if any, attached hereto.
TOTAL CONTRACT $ 692,555.54
APPROVED BY: ACCEPTED BY. ORDERED BY:
o n Lippitt
C'ty Engineer T. B enick & c
By: ~ Kenneth J Goldk p
S Civ' r
PW-E-44
Replacement of Plant Material destroyed by vandalism during.
Yuletime Parade. $371.00
Repair of Traffic Signal Telemetry System at the Intersection
of Third Avenue and "F" Street, Conduit not shown on plans
and only 6" below pavement surface. $478.23
SoS
~~/
CHANGE IP7 CONTRACT
Third Avenue Street Improvements
Phase One, "E" Street to
"F" Street CONTRACT
T. B. Penick and Sons, Inc. CONTRACTOR
ORDER NO. SIX
DATE October 10, 1979
JOB aN-003
The following .change shall be made to increase the
contract dated March 19, 1979 , between the City of Chula Vista and
T. B. Penick and Sons, Inc. , Contractor.
REMARKS AND DETAILS;
Construct .seven wood trellises with full 3" x 6" lath hangers
running continuously across the beams on 8" centers. Contractor
to furnish all labor and City is to pay for redwood material,
detailing and submersion of the redwood in woodlife for a period
of 4 minutes.
Lump Sum Payment $2,968.00
ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE
Previous Change Order Nos.
Revised Total. Contract Price
"~~"~
$ 690,714.01 /
$ - 2,100.70 ,,
$ 688,613.31 ~
This Change Order No. 6 $ 2,968.00
It is agreed by the undersigned that all extra work shall be performed
and materials furnished in accordance with the original contract and in
accordance with the statement, if any, attached hereto.
TOTAL CONTRACT $ 691,581.31
APPROVED BY: ACCEPTED BY: ORDERED BY:
City Council Resolutio
No. 799 d ted 10 9 79 T. B. enick and Son
B c. Kenn th J. Goldkamp
S eer
PW-E-44
%~ G' -~~
sus- ,