|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
|
|
|
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY
|
|
|
|
|
DATE:
|
May 11, 2006
|
BOARD MEETING DATE:
|
May 23, 2006
|
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:
|
None
|
VOTE REQUIRED:
|
Majority
|
|
|
|
|
TO:
|
Honorable Board of Supervisors
|
|
|
|
FROM:
|
Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services
|
|
|
|
SUBJECT:
|
Agreement with BJYWest for the Provision of Plan Checking Services
|
|
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Adopt a resolution authorizing an Agreement with BJYWest to provide plan checking services
|
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government.
|
Goal 21: County employees support and integrate the County vision and goals into their delivery of services.
|
|
|
This Agreement contributes to this goal by providing the public with expeditious plan checking services.
|
|
|
Performance Measure(s):
|
Measure
|
FY 2005-06
Actual
|
FY 2006-07
Projected
|
Percent of plan checks completed in two weeks
|
0%
|
25%
|
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
The Planning and Building Division has the responsibility for plan checking services within the unincorporated areas of the County. The County has generally provided plan checking services with an in-house plan checking engineer. However, at the present time, in-house plan checking staff consists of only one person. The number of permit applications and plans that are being submitted exceed the capability of one individual to complete a plan check accurately in a timely manner.
|
|
|
On June 21, 2005, the Planning and Building Task Force issued a report addressing concerns about the Planning and Building Division. The Task Force divided its recommendations into three phases. On September 20, 2005 and December 13, 2005, the Board accepted the Division’s response to Phases One and Two respectively and approved the implementation of its recommendations including an appropriation of $125,000 for hiring a contract structural civil engineering firm and the addition of a second permanent plan checker position to be funded from the General Fund. The Division is in the process of recruiting for the full-time position.
|
|
|
It is still necessary to use the services of an outside plan checking service to assist with the existing backlog of plan checks as well as to provide coverage on an as-needed basis during periods of staff absences.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
A Request for Proposals (RFP) was prepared and sent to four firms. Three firms responded with proposals, and a fourth declined to submit due to current workloads.
|
An evaluation was conducted based on a comparison of experience, staffing, turnaround times, and cost. BJYWest was determined to have successfully met all of the criteria set out in the RFP and was the most competitively priced. This firm not only has extensive experience providing these services to other jurisdictions, but also had previously contracted with the County in 2000 when the Division required an outside firm to handle plan checking in the prolonged absence of any permanent staff. During that period, BJYWest performed these services to the complete satisfaction of the Division.
|
|
|
Once BJYWest is hired, the Division will be able to complete 25% of plan checks within a two-week period. The estimate of 25% is related to the total number of plans waiting to be plan checked and the number the consultants can complete within two weeks given their other workload.
|
|
|
The proposed Agreement is for a term of two years from June 1, 2006 until May 31, 2008 for a not-to-exceed amount of $250,000.
|
|
|
County Counsel has reviewed the Resolution and Agreement as to form.
|
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
The total amount of the proposed Agreement is $250,000, half of which will be funded from existing appropriation in the Planning budget. The remaining $125,000 will be provided from General Fund Non-Departmental Reserves as approved by the Board to implement Phase I responses to the Planning and Building Task Force recommendations. There is no further Net County Cost impact.
|
|
|
|
Request for Proposal Matrix
|
1.
|
General Description of RFP
|
Provision of Plan Checking Services
|
2.
|
List key evaluation criteria
|
Experience, staffing, turnaround times, cost
|
3.
|
Where advertised
|
Not advertised
|
4.
|
In addition to any advertisement, list others to whom RFP was sent
|
Sent to four well-known, qualified firms
|
5.
|
Total number sent to prospective proposers
|
Four
|
6.
|
Number of proposals received
|
Three
|
7.
|
Who evaluated the proposals
|
Director, Community Development
Deputy Director, Community Development
Building Inspection Manager
|
8.
|
In alphabetical order, names of proposers (or finalists, if applicable) and location
|
Berryman Henigar, Pleasanton
BJYWest, West Sacramento
CSG Consultants, San Mateo
Kutzmann & Associates, Fremont
|