Laserfiche WebLink
CITy OF RIVERSIDE <br /> <br />CITY COuNcIL MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />People Serving <br />People <br /> <br />Riverside <br /> <br />AIl~Amm'k~ City <br /> <br />1998 <br /> <br />HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br /> <br />DATE: April 6, 2004 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: <br /> <br />BACKGROUND: <br /> <br /> ITEM NO: 20 <br /> <br />CONSTRUCTION OF HUNTS LANE 48-INCH WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN - <br />REJECTION CE BID NO. 6131 <br /> / <br /> <br />Riverside Public Utilities recommends ti <br />inch Water Transmission Main. The pr( <br />transmission pipeline and appurtenan~ <br />Bernardino and the City of Colton. <br /> <br />The existing transmission pipeline con,, <br />installed in the 1940's. Due to housing ( <br />replaced with a new steel welded cem( <br />price of steel rose dramatically raising I <br /> <br />Six bids were received and opened on I <br />Company, did not meet the minimum bi <br />bid was incomplete and determined tc <br />Buntich Construction Company of Uplal <br />determined that Mladen Buntich has n' <br />exceeded the engineer's cost estimab <br />construction costs associated with the f <br />may result if the project is rebid at a futu <br /> <br />The Board of Public Utilities approved a <br />meeting on March 19, 2004. (See atta <br /> <br />FISCAL IMPACT: <br /> <br />~e rejection of all received bids for the construction of Hunts Lane 48- <br />,ject consists of installing 1,994 linear feet of 48-inch diameter water <br />:es on Hunts Lane and Commercial Road, within the City of San <br /> <br />ists of a 42-inch diameter concrete pipe with mortar joints and was <br />[evelopment and seismic activity, the transmission pipeline was to be <br />nt lined and coated pipe. However, during the bidding process the <br />~roject costs above budgeted amounts. <br /> <br />/larch 3, 2004. The lowest bid, which was received from E.J. Meyer <br />:lding document requirements. Therefore, the E.J. Meyer Company <br />be non-responsive. The lowest responsive bid was from Mladen <br />~d, California. Staff has reviewed all provided documentation and has <br />et all of the requirements of the specifications. However, the bids <br />, by $493,490 or approximately 68.7 percent. After review of unit <br />Jrnishing of the steel water transmission main, a substantial savings <br />re date when steel prices stabilize and return to an acceptable level. <br /> <br />~d recommended to the City Council rejection of all bids at its regular <br />:hed Bid Award Recommendation for bid summary.) <br /> <br />The Budget amount for the entire ploject was estimated at $950,000.00, which includes all design, <br />construction, change order contingencles, contract administration, and inspection. If award is made to the <br />lowest responsive bidder, the project c~)st would exceed $1,500,000. <br /> <br />The Utility has budgeted several other I: <br />likely affect our ability to complete tho.~ <br />delaying this project at this time and utili <br />project when steel prices are lower in ti <br /> <br />ALTERNATIVES: <br /> <br />rojects that are more cdticel at this time, and the dsing steel costs will <br />e projects within budgeted amounts. Staff, therefore, recommends <br />zing the funds on other more cdtical projects, or, if feasible, rebid the <br />~e future. <br /> <br />Award the contract at this time to the Io~/est responsive bidder. This alternative could result in an excessive <br />cost to the City and would require a trar~sfer of funds from reserves. This alternative is not recommended. <br /> <br />20-1 <br /> <br /> <br />