CCP 05-22-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2006 I'MI' 5/J 8/2006 Page 2 . Lmprovements Roadway Stom1 Sewer Sanitary Sewcr Watennain Hoadway Easement Acquisition Allowance Feasibility EstifTlat" $ 1,100,000,00 $ 410,000.00 $ 82,000.00 S 160,000.00 S 12,000.00 Engineer~s EstimClJ~ $ 1,142,739.14 $ 458,524,94 $ 90,948.50 $ 220,055.84 $ 0,00 Construction Bid $ 1,215,425.91 $ 605,988.41 $ 89,364.00 $ 29Ll16.00 $ 000 TOTAL $ 1,764,000,00 $ 1,91~,168.42 $ 2,201.894,32 URS has been paid $156,435,65 to date in engineering fees. DISCUSSION Staff has outlined some options on how to proceed with this project and the factors to consider with each oplion. Option I: Award the project to low bidder, Amt Construction, in the amount of S 1,808,584.32. The Storm Sewer Fund balance is currently negative by approximately $52,000. At the end of this project, the balance would be negativc by approximately $200,000. With current ell' projections, the fund balance would not become positive until 2009. Funds could be reallocated through an intemalloan from another account to ensure these needs remain fully funded. Capital and Water fund balances will also decrease significantly. . Over the last month, several conmmnities have observcd increasingly higher bids. This is likely due to the uncertainty in energy costs. O]Jtion 2: Reject all bids and re-advertise the project early in 2007 (Advertise in January and open bids in February). While the total project cost may not decrease, this would allow time for the fund balances to grow, The money that would have been spent on the project this year would remain in the City's account and earn interest, which would finance possible increases in project costs due to inflation and energy costs. Interest would accrue only in funds with a positive balance; since- the SI01l11 Sewer Fund is in the negative, interest \-vauld not accrue in this fund. This option would also allow staff time to further review the plans to find value engineering opportunities to reduce overall project costs. In order to remain proactive with the City.s Pavement Ivlanagcment Program, slaff would recommend incorporating ncxt year's mill and overlay project with the Ridgewood Neighborhood Improvements construction contract. This may also be more cost-effective for both parts of the project. ()l'tion 3: Reject all bids and postpone thc project indefinitely. This option would allnw the City to review the recent pavement management analysis by GoodPointe and proceed \vith projects suggested by the analysis. Staff docs not recommend this option, as the plrtl1s for the project have heen completed. \Vhile there would be some additional engineering costs to re-advertise the pro.icet, the longer the project is postponed, the more likely more significant changes would need to be made to the plans. .