Loading...
SR-06101986-6GC~ - G JUM ~ 0 tgBB GS:SES:JAS Council Meeting: June 10, 1986 Santa Monica, California T0: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Recommendation to Award Contract for the Construction of Streetlights for La Mesa Drive Introduction This report requests that the City Council award a contract for the construction of streetlights for La Mesa Drive to C. T. & F., Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $215,450. Background The Capital Infrastructure Needs Assessment study completed and presented to City Council in 1984 recommended that deteriorated and energy-inefficient streetlight circuits be replaced at various locations throughout the City. Several streets needing circuit and pole replacement were identified in the study, and of those streets staff determined that La Mesa Drive's streetlight system was in the worst condition. Staff recommended that the special post top streetlights be replaced in kind to preserve the aesthetic quality of the street. Also, the dense overgrowth of ficus trees on La Mesa Drive prevents the installation of the taller, standard streetlight. Since the cost of installing special post lights is more expensive than standard streetlights, it was proposed that the City pay for half the cost of the standard streetlight and the residents would be assessed for the remaining cost. City Council approved the formation of the assessment district using the JllN 10 1986 - 1 - proposed assessment formula on April 23, 1986, and set a public hearing for May 28, 1985 At the public hearing, several residents of La Mesa expressed their concerns regarding changing the aesthetic value of the neighborhood by removing the original ornate poles and light s City Council directed staff to meet with the residents to discuss types of lights available A meeting was held on August 5, 1985, and it was decided that the City staff would request two estimates from contractors: 1} replace the streetlights with the type of ornate pole selected by the residents, and 2) rehabilitate the existing system City staff would meet with the residents after the estimates were received to choose which method (replacement or rehabilitation) would be selected based on cost and feasibility On January 6 and 7, 1986, the project was advertised for bidY No bids were received, The project engineer called the contractors who picked up plans to ask why they had not submitted a bids The majority responded that they were too busy and would bid at a later date if the project were readvertisedr A second Notice Inviting Bids was published on February 28 and March 1, 1986, in the Evening Outlook and in five construction journals. The notice was also sent to four minority business associations. Plans and specifications were issued to twelve contractorsr Bids were opened and read publicly on April 7, 1986, by the Deputy City Clerk _ 2 Three bids were received as follows: Replace C~ T~ & Fy, Incr $215,450 Smith Electric Supply '133,444 Paul Gardner Corporation 314,733 Engineer's Estimate: $192,000 Rehab $218,650 N/A N/A No minority or woman owned firm submitted a bid for this projec t C~ Ty & F., Inc., has successfully completed other projects for the City. On May 5, 1986, City staff and La Mesa residents met to decide which method would be used. After discussing the pros and cons of each method, the residents cYiose to replace the entire system with the new ornate poles selected at the previous meeting. Budget/Financial Impact Contract Incidental Expenses* Contingencies Total Funds Required Property Owners' City's Share 48~ Share 52~ $102,911.60 $112,538Y40 8, 274 00 10,341y60 8, 963 00 11,203.40 $121,152 72 $132,704y80 Total $215,450~OU 17, 236 00 21, 545 00 $254,231 00 *This streetlight district was formed in accordance with the Improvement Act of 1911 which provides for inclusion of incidental costs in the property owners' assessments and City's contribution Incidental expenses include cost of engineering, inspection, bond preparation, advertising and recordation fees - 3 - The City is paying 50~ of the cost of the project using standard light fixtures in the price base. The ornate, post-top fixtures add approximately $3.00 per linear foot to the cost of the project. The City is also paying 80~ of the side footage which is the current policy. Since there is considerable side footage (1568 lineal feet out of a total of 7934 lineal feet) the total City share is approximately 52~ of the project. The original estimate for this project was for the replacement of the streetlight circuit and funds were budgeted in accordance with the estimate. However, after inspecting the poles, it was evident that the entire streetlight system needed to be replaced which resulted in a higher project cost. It is proposed to use funds available in the account designated for new streetlight systems in addition to the funds originally appropriated for this project. Funds remaining in the new streetlight account and unused contingency funds from a streetlight project currently under construction totaling approximately $113,000 will be carried over to next fiscal year to form other streetlight districts when an adequate number of petitions are returned. The accounts are as follows: Streetlight Circuit Replacement 01-770-453-000-904 $ 85,449.26 New Streetlight Systems 01-770-453-000-903 81,508.18 Total funds available: $166,957.44 - 4 - Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council: 1~ Award a contract for the construction of streetlights for La Mesa Drive to C~ Ty & F „ Inca, the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $215,450; and 2~ Authorize the City Engineer to issue any change orders necessary to complete additional work to the extent of funds available in accordance with the Administrative Instruction on Change Orders Prepared by: Stan Scholl, Director of General Services Jean Stanley, Administrative Analyst - 5 Reference Contract No. 4693 (CCS).