HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 1a SIDEWALK REPAIR 01-04-82DATE:
DECf~IBER 29, 1981
NEW BUSINESS
NO. 1
1-4-82
Inter-Com
TO:
WILLIAM HUST~N, CITY MANAGER
FROM:
DALE WICK, ASSISTANT CITY E~gGINEER
S UBJ ECT:
Akm~RD CF BID F.Y. '81-'82 SIDEWALK AND CURB REPAIR PROSRAM
RECG~ENDATIGg:
It is recommended that the City Council, at their meeting of Jan. 4, 1982, award
the Contract for subject ~rk to Porter Construction Co., of Santa Ana,
California, in the amount of $39,232.93 and authorize staff to add additional work
to the contract to utilize all of the funds budgeted for this project. It is
further recu,.,ended that the bid bond in the amount of $3,856.80 be returned to
Scott and Sons Const.
BACKGR~:
Subject project enu~-,;passes removal and replacement of sidewalks and curbs, which
have been uplifted by tree roots at approximately 100 locations throughout the
City.
Bids for this work were opened on Dec. 29, 1981, at 9:00 AM and were received as
follows:
CCNTRACTfR
Scott & Sons
Porter Const. Co.
American Construction
Industrial Fence & Supply
Arm & Ha~mer Conc. Removal
Dyno Construction
BUSINESS LGCATIflg
Whittier, CA
Santa Ana, CA
Buena Park, CA
Long Beach, CA
Irvine, CA
San Dimas, CA
BID
$38,567.98
39,232.93
39,451.96
41,002.47
41,013.80
52,785.14
On December 30, 1981, staff received a letter frc~ the low bidder Scott and Sons
to withdraw their bid due to an error in the unit price of Bid Item No. 1. The
contractor bid $0.41 in lieu of $1.41 per lineal foot for a differential amount of
$1,385.90. In addition, the low bidder stated that he did not account for the
cost of root pruning which was to be included within Bid Items No. 3,4,5. The low
bidder has also has requested that their bid bond in the amount of $3,856.80 be
returned.
A review of the bid tabulation for Bid Item No. 1 indicates that an error could
have been made. The unit cost for the other five bidders for that item ranged
frem $0.85 to $4.00 per lineal foot with an average cost of $1.86 per lineal
foot. The second item of root pruning is not as clear to evaluate due to that
cost being included within three other bid items of sidewalk and two types of curb
and gutter.
It is staff's feeling that an honest error was made by Scott and Sons Const. on
Bid Item No. 1 which would revise their bid to a new total of $39,953.88 and place
them as the third low bidder.
AWAt~ CF BID F.Y.
DECEMBER 29, 1981
PAGE 5%;0
'81-'82 SIDEWALK AND CURB REPAIR PROGRAM
The difference between Scott and Sons Const. original low bid and Porter Const.
C~f~any's bid is $644.95.
The first Iow bid is 5.9% below the Engineer's estimate while that of Porter
Const. is 4.3% below the Engineer's estimate. There is presently $45,000.00
budgeted for this project.
Attached for the City Council's information is a tabulation of all bids received.
BC8 L~DENDECKER
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WC~KS/
CITY ~gGINEER
db
cc:
City Council
Finance Director
Street Maint. Supt.
I~eember 30, 1981
Scott & Sons Constructioh
P.O. Box 1891
Whittier, CA 90609
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Attn.: Engineering Department
Dear City Engineer:
At this time, I would like to request to withdraw my firm's bid from your 1981-82
Sidewalk & Curb Proqram. Our bid of $38,567.33 was the apparent low bid, but we
~ish to withdraw for the following reasons:
(1) Bid Item 91 of Sawcut AC or concrete should have been $1.41 per Lin.
Ft. in lieu of .41 Per Ft.
(2) Bid items ~3,4,5, the Root Prunings, >~re omitted from our bid and there
was no separate bid item for these.
I hope you feel the above two reasons are sufficient enough to honor a withdrawal
of this bid and that our bid bond will be returned.
Thanking you kindly,
PA33L L. SCCri~
SCOIT & SCNS CfNST~3CTION