HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 3.I 08/16/2004' CITY M CALIFORNIA -
PETALUMA,
AGEND L A-u gust 16,20(
Agenda'.'I'itle Meeting Date: August 1`6, 2004
Resolution awarding' the -Petaluma Senior Center Expansion. project
to, Carr's Construction of - Windsor; authorizing the use of
Proposition 40 (Park Bonds) monies to augment the project budget, Meeting Tune 3:00 PM -
and authorizing staff to work with - the contractor through values El 7:00 PM
engineering to bring the contract price within allowable budgetary
'limits.
Category (check one) 1® Cons'* Calendar ❑'Public ;I ;Hearing New Business
Unfinished Business 0 Pres e ntation
Department
Dire
;Co 'ct Person: ;
f Phone`N' tuber
Jim
-rim Carr
(707) 778 -4380
Parks and Recreation.
f
Cost.of:Proposal Low bid o $7!4,305,. Proposal to value engineer
Account Number
the project and bring the projec cost to $675;000;0.0
Name of Fund: Proposition 12 and
40 "Park Bonds
Amount. Budgeted $ 481;0.00 of'Proposition. 12 Park,,Bond funds,
$40,000 of encumbered park development fees, and proposing the
use of $154,000 of Proposition 40' ark- Bond funds.
ch
Attaments to Agenda.Packet=gtem
1. Itemized list of projects approved by :the Recreation, Music and Parks July 17, 2002
Z. Resolution ; awarding the contract, to expand the Petaluma Senior Center to Carr's Construction of
Windsor,, and - authorizing.the use of Proposition 40 Park Bonds to augment the project budget.
.
Sum'mary Statement
The project to expand the Petaluma Senior Center was put out to bid u with three contractor's responding.
Carr's Construction. of Windsor , was low bidder at $714,305. , Currently there is $521,000 budgeted.
Additional re uired.funds are recommended"to' come from Proposition 4,6- per�capita funds in the amount of
q
$154 000. Staff recommends awarding' the contract, ;then through va ,, engineering deduct items in
con e ect,arclutect to =reduce the 1ow bid to an amount of'$614 '
' con ce rt with the p ro'' 845;.:
j , .�,
Recommended Citv'Coun'il 'Acti
'c ' on /Suggested Motion
Recommend approval of the °proposed', resolution
Reviewed by Finance Director:
-
Review e e
A roved _. `' . Manag
Date
DW e:
T'oda 's. I)'
Revision A' and Date Revised:
, File Code:
:
a
`4
2
a
�4A 2 'CITY Old' PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA.
3 _
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE CONTRACT TO: EXPAND THE PETALUIVIA• SENIOR
CENTER TO CARR'S CONSTRUCTION OF WINDSOR A�T'� ORIZING THE,IJSE OF
6 PROPOSITION 44 FUN
DS'-TO AZTGMENT' THE :PROJECT',,9U GET ANTI AUTHORIZING
h
STAFF TO VALUES ENGINEER THE PROJECT To BRING THE PRIC IN LINE WITH
8
AVAILABLE .FITNDING.
p �
9 AGE NDA REPORT
10� FOR
,.
11 AUGUST .16 9 ZQ ®4
13 Y-. ExEcuTwE Summmk :
14 The project to expand the. Yetaluma Senior Center :had 3' firms .submit bids, with Carr's Construction
15` of Windsor the low bidder at $71.4;395. Curre'ntly,$514 ;000 is budgeted. Staff recommends awarding
16 the contract and authorizing. sta_ ff to values engineer the ;project in', concert with the project architect
17 to reduce the project scope and _amount. Up to an amount of $99;550 can be deducted through a
19 Prop osition 40 fun h will. not affect the u recommends using $154, 000 of
nlit of the project. Staff
18 change order whi p q y g
p ds to augment the ro ect bud et and ;award the contract to Carr's Construction.
20,
21, 2. B ACKGROUND :
22 The ro ect to ex and, the Peta
23 the Petaluma Ad v so °'.Committee heal Se ni o r ' mvolvedaW m p , been � � rocess for over the 'last 2 years with
ry y h the expansion desig n: The project was put
24 out to bid with three firms responding:
25 1..CafeS Construction (Windsor) $714,395
2. Murray Building (Sonoma) 837,41 -5
3. GCCI Inc. 989,873
28 Engineers estimate forthe project was $450,000. From what; staff and the architects have been able
29' to ascertain and confirmed by .contractors in the- field, the. cost of building supplies, especially
30 lumber has increased,at a rapid:rate° over .tiJ t year.,
31 City staff and the project, architect have met- io identify areas which can be deleted from the project
32 and while reducin g the scope"' the project, will ,not,affect the.overall 'quality.
33 Most changes involve painting ;instead of the use of wall, coverings; deletion of a number of
34 skylights; substrtutngi exterior windows; extenorwall' siding and carpet with another commercial
g boutique Rom•the p ect.
. p 1 `p i , g is from,the project; remove a lobby
36 bouti ro
35. ade ut less ex ensive roduct rernovin built• in ca f
37 Staff met with representatives' of the :.Senior Advisory" ;Committee and interested; seniors who support
38 the recommended:, changes: The seniors have a building fund which they will use to purchase interior
3:9 furniture once the pro)ect,.is finished. At thattune they `will purchase ready made cabinets and any
40 other amenit'
41 Staff recommends movie forward with the project been reduced from the; project.
ies they feel are imp ortant "and may ha
g p J t by awarding to the low bidder, and authorizing
42' staff to values engineer the project to reduce the scope sand price of'the project, .Staff, the project
43 architect.and'the Senior Advisory Committeebelieve that through values engineering, the scope can
44 be reduced without affecting the integrity' ofthe project�,.and thus bringing the cost of the project to
45 $614,845. Also recommended is to utilize $154 000 froni.Proposition 40 Park Bond, monies in order
46' to increase the project,,budget The Council hadfecentl`y authorized' staff,to approach the State to
47 submit an application to appl'' for.thelper, capita funds ($399;000) to be used'for a list of deferred
mag maintenan c e
ation • tenan a pavh the proposed' of $.154,0OG fof the�senior center project, some
proje projec ing will be deferred. Staffwill ' ' roach Water Conservation regarding the
3
I irrigation projects for assistance. Impacts to the list of;maintenance projects staff believes is minimal
2 and alter , native source ' s of funding will be'identified.
3 The project architect hecked the low bidder's references, and.each contact was satisfied with the
4 quality of the contractor',s work, and his ability and willingness to work through any problems, thus
5 keeping change orders'to a�minkhum.
6
7 3. ALTERN
8 a. Approve theresolu'tion as recommended.
9 b. Direct staff to re- negotiate with the low bidder resulting in substant ve to the project.
10 c. Not award the project.
1 1 4. FINANCIAL IwAct&
12 Funds currentl are budgeted in the amount of $521,000. Staffis recommending using $154,000
Y' g _
13 from Prop_ osition =40 Park Bonds to augment the. project budget which;is as follows;
14 Proposed. Budget
15 Construction $615;000
16 Contingency ,(5%o) 30;000
17 Inspection./ Admin (5 %) 30.000
18 Total Project $675,000
19
20 Proposed; Funding
21 Proposition 12;(04 -05; Budgei).$481,000
22 Encumbered (03=0.4 Budget) 40,000
23 , Proposition 40° 154.000
24 Total funding $675,000
25
26 5. CONCLUSION.
27 With the bidding of the Senior Center Expansion Project, three-ribs - b were receiv
28 to the high cos ed. Due
tof building materials the costs foi construction have:escalated over•the' last year, as.
29 reflected in high .b d's. Following values engineering ,w th the low bidder, , staff be -lieves that the
30 proposed project can proceed, providing thei seniors with an expanded' facility that:wili meets their
31 needs. To wait until some future dateIo bi'd the . project could easily result in Fhigher construction
32 costs.
33 .
34 6. O UTCOMES OR.PERFORMANCE'MEASUREMENTS "THAT: WILL IDENTYFY SUC
35 COMPLETION
3`6 Foll'owing;awardng of the'project, ;staff will meet with the contractor,. values engineer the;project to
37 arrive at the contracted amount, obtain th'e appropriate bonds and insurance; and arrange:for'the
38 agreement to be s gned.'The contractor would start in September with ,the to conclude at the .
39 start of the new :calendar' yeas..
40' 7. RECOMMENDATION
41 'Reco1111T1end'''approval of the resolution a contract.
42
gAbnns /2003 agenda bill,
52
0
x
.i
.f
•
• •
��
-
�
� ,
._
_
{
2
3
4`
7
10,
11
12
13
14 RESOLUTION AWARDING THE, ,CONTRACT FOR TIDE PETALUMA SENIOR
15 CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT TO CARR'S CONSTRUCTION OF WINDSOR,
'l..T AUTHORIZING THE PROPOSITION 40 PER CAPITA FUNDS TO'
17
NT TII'E PROJE., OF
„ JD UgJGET, A UTYHOH®1/1E STAFF TO VALUES
IJ E
18- ENGINEER THE PROJECT TO BRING THE PROJECT SCOPE WITHIN
19 BUDGETED AMOUNTS, AND. AUTHORIZE TH
ECIT3' MANAGER TO
20 EXbCUTE ' HE CONSTAUCTIOIV AGREEMENT
21 '
22
23 WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma has bid the project to expand the Petaluma Senior
24 Center; -and
WHEREAS, three: responsive bids were received, with Carr''s'Construction of Windsor
27 California the''low'bidder; and.
28
, .project budget, and
29 WHEREAS, the low bid was at' an mount that exc eeded the
30 By values engineering the project with the;low bidder, a project price can
31 be established .thatineets with identified budget'funds , and
33 WHEREAS, in order to have sufficient funds far the pr=oject, staff recommends that
34 $154,000 from Proposition 40 Park Ponds be used to augment the project
35- budget.
38 NOW, THEREFORE BE .IT „`RESOLVED, that the Petaluma City Council does hereby
39 award the construction contract for the Petaluma Senior Center Expansion' Project to Carr's
40 Construction of ViWmdsor for an amount of $714,3,95, authorizes staff to values engineer the
41 project and through the change order process toxeduce the scope and price of the project to
42 $614,845, authorizes, the use of $1.5'4,0.00 from Proposition 40 Park Bonds to.,be used for the
43 project, and authorizes the City Manager execute the. construction contract; subject to
review and approval of all contracts, insurance and bonds by the City Attorney.
5