HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2006 0802 CC REG ITEM 10J.EM O•S
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Yugal K. Lail, City Engineer /Public Works Director /
Prepared by Ken Gilbert, Public Works Consultant
DATE: July 26, 2006 (Council Meeting 08/02/06)
SUBJECT: Consider Bids Received for the Construction of the 2006
Pavement Rehabilitation Project
BACKGROUND
One of the elements of the City's pavement maintenance program is the periodic
application of a protective slurry seal and /or overlay to the pavement surface of all of
the streets in the City. The program objective is to maintain a bi- annual program
(construct a project every other year) in which each project addresses approximately
one -third of the residential streets in the City. In this way, every residential street in the
City should be slurry sealed or overlayed once every six years. Unfortunately, our bi-
annual schedule has slipped a year, since the last slurry application was in 2003.
On June 21, 2006, the City Council authorized the solicitation of construction bids for
this project, setting July 20, 2006, as the bid opening date.
DISCUSSION
A. Project Description and Scope
The project plans and specifications identify two types of pavement rehabilitation:
Type II Slurry Seal and ARAM (Asphalt- Rubber Aggregate Membrane). A brief
description of these pavement rehabilitation methods is as follows:
c:city share /public works/everyone /staff reports/2006 /Aug /2006_Rehab_Awd 00032:1
Honorable City Council
August 2, 2006
Page 2
1. Slurry Seal: The slurry seal operation requires pavement preparation (crack
filling, etc.), the application of Type II Slurry and the re- striping of the
resurfaced street.
2. ARAM: An ARAM pavement surface is a type of a cape seal requiring three
steps: A) the application of an asphalt (oil- based) rubber binder which is
sprayed onto the existing pavement, followed immediately by B) the spreading
of a pre- coated rubber /gravel aggregate which is then "rubber- tired" rolled and
embedded into the oil binder, followed one or two days later by C) a Type II
Slurry Seal. An ARAM pavement surface is typically used to address
pavement demonstrating more severe distress, and at a lower cost than an
asphalt overlay or reconstruction.
B. Bid Results
The bid documents were mailed to the plan rooms and the Notice Inviting Bids
mailed to over 20 contractors. The bid documents were requested from 13
contractors, of which 2 were returned. Bids were received and opened on July 20,
2006. At the time of the bid opening the apparent low bidder was American Asphalt
South. Upon reviewing the bids it was determined that there was an error in the
computations in their bid and that the actual apparent low bidder was Manhole
Adjusting. The Bid results are as follows:
Name Bid Amount
1. Manhole Adjusting, Inc., Pico Rivera, CA $3,079,907.06
2. American Asphalt South, Inc., Fontana, CA $3,113,508.50
** Engineers Estimate $1,642,037.00
C. Notice of Exemption
A Notice of Exemption for the project (Attachment 1) has been prepared and
submitted to the County Clerk for recordation.
D. Fiscal Impact
1. Construction Cost Estimate: If a contract were to be awarded to the
a ,Rparent low bidder, estimated construction costs would be as follows:
Descriotion Amount ($1
Bid Amount 3,079,907
Constr Contingency (approx. 10 %) 300.000
Total 3,379,907
c:city share /public works/everyone /staff reports/2006 /Aug/2006_Rehab_Awd 000322
Honorable City Council
August 2, 2006
Page 3
2. Total Project Cost Estimate: If a contract were to be awarded to the
apparent low bidder,_total project costs are estimated to be as follows:
i Element Prior Years This Fiscal Year Total ($)
I Design 13,910 0 13,910
Construction - 3,379,907 3,379,907
Constr Mngmnt/Inspection - 120,000 i
Total 13,910 3,379,907 3,513,817
3. Budget Adjustment: If a contract were to be awarded to the apparent low
bidder, it would be necessary to amend the FY 06/07 Budget to fully fund the
project. A summary of the budget change necessary for such an action, is as
fnl Inws.
....--- ............ _.....-- ................... __._
Project 8002
........... ....... _._ ...................... - ................... __ ...... _._._._
Current
............... _._ ....... _ ............ ................ .......
--- ..._.- _..........
Proposed
FY06 /07
Proposed
Revised
Element
Budget ($)
Change ($)
Budget ($)
Design
252
0
252
Construction
1,285,000
2,094,907
3,379,907
Inspection
70,000
50,000
120,000
Total
1,355,252
2,144,907
3,500,159
Prior Year Expenses
13,910
13,910
1,369,162
2,144,907
3,514,069
Note: The funding source for this project is Fund 2603: TDA Article 8
(LTF).
4. Funding Shortfall: There are insufficient unappropriated reserves in Fund
2603 to fund this project for amount stated above.
E. Bid Analysis
The amounts for certain bid items set forth in the bids received, were far greater
than the engineer's estimate (see Attachment 2 for details). A brief description of
the differences is as follows:
Staff have been advised that contractors are extremely busy at this time and are
very selective in the jobs they bid, as such, this could be a main reason for the
high bids that were received.
• Slurry Seal: The amounts bid for slurry seal were in excess of $200 per Extra
Long Ton. These amount far exceed the $90/ ton bid amounts approved in
prior contracts. Staff was aware of rising costs for petroleum based products,
but did not expect the bids to more than double.
• ARAM: The bid amount for this work far exceeded staff's cost estimate. It may
be possible to revise the Scope of Work to lower these costs.
c:city share /public works/everyone /staff reports /2006 /Aug /2006_Rehab_Awd 000323
Honorable City Council
August 2, 2006
Page 4
• Asphalt Overlay The plans and specifications included a requirement that all
cul -de -sacs and certain approaches to Stop intersections which were to receive
ARAM pavement rehabilitation, receive an asphalt overlay instead. This
provision was included in order to avoid delimitation problems known to occur
in those areas. It may be possible to reduce or eliminate this requirement.
• Surface Preparation: The bid amount for this work far exceeded staffs
expectations. It may be possible to revise the Scope of Work to lower these
costs.
F. Project Re- Design
It is recommended below for the Scope of Work in the project to be revised to
reduce project costs.
G. Schedule
It is recommended below that the bids be rejected, the project redesigned and re-
advertised. If this action is taken, the anticipated project schedule would be as
follows__:_
............... ..__ .. . ............. ._ ...... ..... - - -- ...._......_. .... _._ ............ --- .......... ......... .... .................. .... ................... ......... .... ........
............... - - -- ...._._............_._ .__...................._.... - -- - .......... _..._...._._..._._
Date Event / Action
09/20/06
Re- design completed and presented to City Council for
approval._._._ ............._._.__._... ..._.....___._._._._._._....._'
09/22/06 _ Plans on sale
-- ._... - --- ............ - - -- ._._...._....... -- .............. -- ............ ----- .................... _ ... _._ ...................... — ... ............... _ ... _._- .................... - ..... ..... __._ ..................... ._ ... _ --
10/31/06 ! Bids O en
__...... -- ...._ ....................... ........-- -- -- --------- _......- _..._.-------..................._..._----.........._._.__._..._.................._.----._.............----._._.-.........---..__......_......._...._..._. .---- ._...._._..........- - - - - -- ._....._
11/15/06 Award Contract
j ..................- ___._......- •- __......_._...._. •_ _-- .................... _...._._.... ......... --_._.._.................._ ... -__._....._....-•--___....-_ ..................... - ... ....._- ..... - ....... .........
;
01/02/07 r_..._.t_._Start construction _
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Reject all bids and direct staff to re- design the project to lower project costs.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Notice of Exemption
Attachment 2: Bid Results /Analysis
c:city share /public works /everyone /staff reports /2006 /Aug /2006_Rehab_Awd 000324
TO: X County Clerk
County of Ventura
800 S. Victoria Ave.Loc. #1210
Ventura, CA 93009 -1210
Attachment 1
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
CITY OF MOORPARK
799 MOORPARK AVENUE
MOORPARK, CA 93021
(805) 517 -6200
State Clearinghouse
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
Submission of this form is optional. Local agencies or private individuals may file this form with the County Clerk (Public
Resources Code Sec. 21152.b). Filling of this notice starts a 35 -day statue of limitations on court challenges to project
approval (Public Resources Code Sec. 21167.d.). Failure to file this notice results in the statue of limitations being
extended to 180 days.
Project Title: 2006 Pavement Rehabilitation Project
Project Type: Private Project X Public Project
Project Location: Various streets throughout the City of Moorpark
City: Moorpark Zip Code: 93021 County: Ventura
Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: Ongoing maintenance of paved streets including the
application of slurry seal and ARAM pavement surface.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Moorpark Date of Approval: June 21, 2006
Name of Person /Agency Carrying Out Yugal Lail, P. E., Director of Public Works and City Engineer
Project:
Exempt Status (check one): Ministerial (Sec. 15073)
_ Declared Emergency (Sec. 17071.a.)
_ Emergency Project (Sec. 15071.b. and c.)
X Categorical Exemption (state type and section)
General Rule Exemption
Section 15301 Class 1 Exemption
Reasons Why Project is Exempt: Involves ongoing maintenance of existing public facilities, without expansion or other
Alterations.
Contact Yugal Lail, P.E. Phone: (805) 517 -6255 Ext.:
Person:
If filed by Applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project?
Date July 6, Signature: j� Title:
Filed: 2006
arty K. Hogan
Yes No
Community Development
Director
000325
City of Moorpark
LS
Bid Results: 2006 Pavement Rehab. Project
1
Bidder » »>
Bid Opening:
1
Name:
Engineer's Estimate
July 20, 2006
SY
Address:
4,000
SY
10.00
Cit, State:
SY
4.00
2,300
Tel. No.:
105.00
38
EA
Contact Person:
73
Item Description
200.00
Est Qty Units
LS
Unit Cost
1 Traffic Control
2 Stormwater
3 Surface Preparation
4 AC Overlay - Cul -de -sacs
5 AC Overlay - STOP Areas
6 Cape Seal (ARAM)
7 Slurry (Type II)
8 Adjust Manhole
9 Adjust Valve Cans
10 Striping
11 Loops
12 Caltrans Permit
13 Release
Total
1
LS
30,000.00
1
LS
10,000.00
1
LS
50,000.00
19,300
SY
10.00
4,000
SY
10.00
242,734
SY
4.00
2,300
ELT
105.00
38
EA
500.00
73
EA
200.00
1
LS
70,000.00
20
EA
100.00
1
LS
1,000.00
1
LS
1.00
Attachment 2 I
Page 1 of 1
Vendor 1
Vendor 2
40,000.00
Manhole Adjusting, Inc.
American Asphalt South, Inc.
6.59
9500 Beverly Road
14436 Santa Ana Avenue
19,000.00
Pico Rivera, CA 90660
Fontana, CA 92337
395.00
(323) 558 -8000
(909) 427 -8276
2,000.00
Jennifer Tan
Roseann Long
Total Bid
Unit Cost Total Bid
Unit Cost Total Bid
30,000.00 I 15,000.00
10,000.00 10,000.00
50,000.00 189,000.00
193,000.00
24.90
40,000.00
34.00
970,936.00
6.59
241,500.00
221.38
19,000.00
350.00
14,600.00
395.00
70,000.00
90,000.00
2,000.00
400.00
1,000.00
410.00
1.00
1.00
1,642,037.00
15,000.00 15,000.00
10,000.00 5,000.00
189,000.00 220,975.00
480,570.00
21.38
136,000.00
29.47
1,599,617.06
7.25
509,174.00
201.25
13,300.00
385.00
28,835.00
434.00
90,000.00
66,000.00
8,000.00
330.00
410.00
410.00
1.00
1.00
3,079,907.06
15,000.00
5,000.00
220,975.00
412,634.00
117,880.00
1,759,821.50
462,875.00
14,630.00
31,682.00
66,000.00
6,600.00
410.00
1.00
3,113,508.50 I
000,3 Gb