Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1994 1102 CC REG ITEM 11B'>R?ARK, CALTC" '' ;. v Coundl NIE3 l�j ACTION: Ry TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Background 01i ITEM • S. 1­1 CC �',-_iION: AGENDA REPORT CITY OF MOORPARK Honorable City Council Mary R. Lindley, Assistant to the City Manager October 13, 1994 (CC Meeting of October 19) Consider the Rejection of All the Dorothy Wall Bid Proposals and Authorize Staff to Re -bid a Scaled Back Version of the Project On September 21, City Council directed staff to provide additional information on the Dorothy Wall project related to owner occupancy vs. rental, possible funding alternatives, and the project cost split between the properties east and west of Bard Street. The project originated as a result of damage sustained by the existing wall east of Bard Street. Council approved the demolition and construction of the wall and directed staff to file for FEMA funds for the demolition portion of the project. Council later asked staff to provide cost information for extending the wall's construction to include the residences west of Bard Street to replace existing chain -link and wooden fences. The Project includes 18 properties, 10 of which are owner occupied (56 %). A map has been provided with this staff report to identify the properties. All of the properties are within the Redevelopment Agency's project area. Based on the low bidder's proposal, staff estimates the total cost of the project (including east and west of Bard Street) to be $70,100. East of Bard Street Number of Owner Properties Occupied Renter Cost 6 5 1 $29,224 The length of the project east of Bard Street is approximately 484 feet. The costs for this half is based on $54 per foot ($26,136). The per foot cost of the east side of the project is slightly higher than the west side because some grading and an additional course is needed in a portion of the area. Additional costs include inspection ($1,000) and a 10% contingency ($2,088). The total cost of the project east of Bard Street is $29,224. 00200 Dorothy Wall Project October 13, 1994 Page 2 West of Bard Number of Properties 12 Owner Occupied Renter Cost 5 7 $40,876 The percentage of owner occupied residences west of Bard Street is 29 %. The length of the project is approximately 650 feet. Based on $51.78 per foot ($33,660) plus the removal of two large trees ($2,500) and inspection costs ($1,000), and a 10% contingency ($3,716) the total estimated cost is $40,876. Please note that the cost split between the project east and west of Bard Street is an estimate, calculated by staff, based on the low bidder's proposal for the total project. The Dorothy Wall was bid as one entire project, therefore the costs provided by the contractor were not broken down. The Council has already approved a funding source for the east portion of the project (50% TDA and 50% MRA bond proceeds) and allocated $26,100. On September 21, Council requested that staff further develop funding options for the west half of the project. Specifically, Council requested staff to explore the possibility of providing the property owners with low interest loans through the Redevelopment Agency's Housing Rehab Program for a portion of the costs. This option looks less attractive with the discovery that more than half of the residents living in the effected properties are renters. The absent owners (landlords) would not qualify for the low interest loan program. While the Council can still pursue a cost sharing arrangement, providing owner occupied residences with low interest loans and requiring absent owners to acquire their own financing, it will be difficult to get the participation of all the owners. If the City cannot get 100 percent participation in a cost sharing arrangement, the project should not move forward. Other funding options previously provided to Council included the use of TDA funds, MRA bond proceeds, a combination of TDA funds and MRA bond proceeds, and cost sharing arrangements between the City and the property owners. Again, cost sharing arrangements are difficult to put together because they should require 100 percent participation on the part of the property owners. Clearly, it is much easier to secure the permission and participation of the property owners if the City is willing to fund the entire project. 00201 Dorothy Wall Project October 13, 1994 Page 3 Had the low bidder been willing, the City Council could have chosen to scale the project down to include the properties east of Bard Street only and awarded the contract to the low bidder at their original unit price ($52.73). Staff spoke with the low bidder who indicated that because the east half of the project was more labor and material intensive, they could not agree to do a scaled down project for $52.73 unit price. Other options available to Council are as follows: 1) scale the existing project down to include the properties east of Bard Street only. This will require rejecting all bids and directing staff to re -bid the project for the demolition and construction of the Dorothy Street wall east of Bard Street only; 2) approve the project as it exits in the bid document (east and west of Bard Street) with the City Council agreeing to fund 100 percent of the costs, award the contract to the low bidder (Phil Carter Company Inc.) , and direct staff as to the funding source for the additional $44,000; 3 ) defer approval if the low bidder agrees to extend the bid for 60 days, and direct staff to determine if 100 percent of the property owners, west of Bard Street, will participate in a 50/50 cost sharing arrangement with the City (owner occupied residences who qualify would be offered low interest loans through the Redevelopment Agency, and absent property owners would be require to provide their own financing), or 4) reject all bids and re -bid the project with two options: 1) demolition and construction of the a wall east of Bard Street, and 2) demolition and construction of a wall east and west of Bard Street. In addition, staff would be directed to determine the level of participation that could be expected by the property owners in a 50/50 cost sharing arrangement as identified in option 3. Option 1 calls for staff to report back to Council for award of a the contract for a scaled down project. Options 3 and 4 call for staff to report back with information on participation levels in a cost sharing arrangement and award of a contract (for the full or a scaled back project) , providing Council with another opportunity to consider the scope of the project. 00202 Dorothy Wall Project October 13, 1994 Page 4 Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve option 4 which includes: 1) reject all bids and re -bid the project with two options: 1) demolition and construction of the a wall east of Bard Street, and 2) demolition and construction of a wall east and west of Bard Street. 2) directed staff to contact the property owners west of Bard Street to determine the level of participation that could be expected in a 50/50 cost sharing arrangement with the City, and 3) direct staff to report back to the City Council with the results of it contacts with the property owners and the bid proposals. 00203 r'L � s E 0 it to w %n • f)OR. TRAI S R R.R . L ne A' S. P RR. R. oo 0 0 C> (D a o 00 M041DAMEA.&OO --r64--- " I uAlAk �53 A7 ss, 481 4 r--7! 2 ol to, L a 1 13 54 -56 g 143 C (D 1 70 75 y( M So T9 TO TT o 51 A, r- .1p. 3. 310 &CIP Val,, SECOND It" q W, s so - s so- b bo• 5 50, 5 50* 5 50, 5 50 O E E) o o0a 0 0 @ @14 @ @ @ @ !630 2 29 2 26 2 27 - -26 2 25 2 24 ' '123 2 22° I uAlAk �53 A7 ss, 481 4 r--7! 2 ol to, L a 1 13 54 -56 g 143 C (D 1 70 75 y( M So T9 TO TT o 51 A, r- .1p. 3. 310 &CIP Val,, SECOND It" q