Laserfiche WebLink
P ofBRIGHTON Report Number 12-090 <br /> Agenda Section VI-5 <br /> Council Meeting Date April 24,2012 <br /> the city that works for you <br /> REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION <br /> ITEM DESCRIPTION: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR <br /> PROJECT 12-5,HIGH SERVICE AND FORESTDALE WATER TOWER PAINTING. <br /> DEPARTMENT HEAD'S APPROVAL: <br /> CITY MANAGER'S APPROVAL: <br /> No comments to supplement this report Comments attached <br /> Recommendation: Adopt the attached olution rejecting all bids for City Project 12-5, High Service and <br /> Forestdale Water Tower Painting. <br /> Legislative History: <br /> February 28, 2012 Work Session with Council <br /> March 13, 2012 Council Authorizes Advertisement for Bids <br /> April 17,2012 Bids Opened by Staff <br /> Financial Impact: Five bids were received and opened by staff at 11:00 a.m. on April 17, 2012 and a bid <br /> tabulation has been completed by the Engineering Department and bid totals verified. The low bid of$317,600 <br /> submitted by TMI Coatings,Inc. is 42 percent above the engineer's estimate of$223,000. <br /> Explanation: The engineer's estimate was created late in 2010. It is possible the 2012 cost of raw materials (i.e. <br /> paint, fuel, steel) are higher due to inflation pressure and have yielded higher than anticipated project pricing. <br /> Also, many of the contractors drive long distances to reach the site, and this variable creates higher mobilization <br /> costs. <br /> For the Forestdale Tower, plans and specifications included pictures of damaged interior/exterior areas, but the <br /> extent of the existing damage was unclear to the bidders which may have resulted in higher prices. <br /> For the High Service Tower, there is a fair amount of steel work specified (i.e. seal welding, tank repairs, <br /> additional access hatches, and updated safety ladders). Staff is going to reevaluate the scope of structural <br /> improvements to see if we can reduce project costs where possible. <br /> Costs and Funding: The Water Improvement Fund has $300,000 budgeted for both projects. Included in the <br /> budget was $77,000 for in-house and consultant engineering services. Approximately $66,000 of this was for <br /> construction observation and testing. In total the low bid of$317,600 plus $77,000 of engineering services would <br /> be $394,600, nearly $100,000 over budget. At this amount, Fund 400, Water Improvement Fund does not have <br /> enough cash available to finance the project. <br /> /1) <br /> Grant W. tTels,P. . <br /> Director of ublic Wor s <br /> Attachment: Bid Rejection Resolution <br />