COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

Department of Public Works

DATE:

April 4, 2008

BOARD MEETING DATE:

April 22, 2008

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

None

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

James C. Porter, Director of Public Works

SUBJECT:

MidCoast Drainage Improvement Project
(Project No. M0210, M0211, F-149 [21])

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution rejecting the bids for the MidCoast Drainage Improvement Project and authorizing the Director of Public Works to re-engineer the project and
re-advertise for bid.

VISION ALIGNMENT:

Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government.

Goal 20: Government decisions are based on careful consideration of the future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.

Rejecting the bids received for the project and authorizing the re-engineering and
re-advertising of the project for bid will allow us to propose materials that are readily available locally thus reducing overall construction expenses.

BACKGROUND:

PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION

Adopted Resolution No. 069295 on February 26, 2008, which adopted plans and specifications, determined prevailing wage scales and called for sealed proposals for the above-mentioned project.

HISTORY

The Department, over the past few years, has evaluated and discussed with the MidCoast Community Council (MCC), various options to construct storm drainage in the sub areas of the MidCoast as provided for in the MidCoast Community Plan.

The MCC approved of constructing storm drain conveyance facilities in the
two areas as described in this report, without requiring the associated road improvements as described in the Community Plan; and also supported drainage improvements being financed with Mitigation Fees that have been collected in the MidCoast area.

On Tuesday, March 18, 2008, bids were accepted for this project and subsequently referred to this office for checking and recommendation. Bay Pacific Pipelines, Inc., at $322,845.90, was the lowest bid received. A summary of the bids received is illustrated on Exhibit “A”.

DISCUSSION:

The Engineer’s estimate for the project was $227,000.

The lowest bid received was approximately 42% higher than anticipated. The absence of locally produced reinforced concrete arch pipe caused an increase in bid prices as contractors determined that the arch pipe will have to be delivered from out-of-state. Discussion with prospective bidders indicated that the arch pipe was being supplied by a manufacturer in the state of Texas. Furthermore, the risk of damage to concrete pipe during delivery is increased as a result of the longer distance, causing a further increase in material costs.

We are recommending that bids received for this project be rejected as provided for in Section 22038 of the Public Contract Code and that the project be re-engineered to substitute the arch pipe with more cost-effective box culvert material and
re-advertise in June 2008, when the revised plans have been prepared.

A resolution has been approved as to form by County Counsel.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The estimated cost of construction for the re-engineered design is $315,000 and is proposed to be financed with Mitigation Fees. The higher estimated cost is due primarily to higher material costs for the project.

Funds have been appropriated to the Road Fund to finance this work.

There is no impact to the General Fund.

Attachment:

Exhibit “A”