HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-26-07 Item 7D1&2, Engineering Services
~
~HlLLS
Request for Council Action
Prepared By:
Dept.:
Council Mtg. Date:
Final Action Needed By:
____~_~~S:t_ine Giga ~_
Engineering
3/26/07
3/26/07
Agenda Item:
701-2
Budgeted Amount:
Actual Amount:
Funding Source:
to Approve the Request for Qualification Process for Engineering Services
to Approve the Termination of the Agreement between the City and URS, Inc. for Professional Engineering Services
the Request for Qualification Process for Engineering Services
the Termination of the Agreement between the City and URS, Inc. for Professional Engineering Services
~:iiPPOrti"ii9"!"QOCum'eiilS: ';@ltached). .
x Memo/Letter;
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No.:
[Engineering Recommendation:
Attorney Recommendation:
Other:
~
~
EN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 21, 2007
AGENDA ITEM 7D1-D2
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Michelle Wolfe, City Administrator
Kristine Giga, Civil Engineer~
Greg Hoag, Public Works Director~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Request for Qualification Process for Engineering Services
BACKGROUND
The City of Arden Hills has contracted with URS, Inc. (formerly BRW, Inc.) for engineering services
since 1998. Until 2006, URS served as the City Engineer. In 2006, the City entered into a Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA) with the City of Roseville for engineering services, designating the City of
Roseville as the City Engineer.
It has been almost 10 years since Arden Hills has conducted a process regarding engineering
consultants. Staff feels that in order to provide Arden Hills with the best service at competitive rates,
it is appropriate to conduct a request for qualification (RFQ) process for engineering services at this
time.
The City Council has approved construction agreements with the City of Rose vi lie to complete the
feasibility report, design, and construction engineering for the 2007 and 2008 Pavement Management
Program projects. These larger projects were typically completed by the outside consultant. With
Roseville completing this work, there is not an immediate need for a consultant to be heavily
involved with Arden Hills projects. As a result, the timing of this RFQ process will not impact the
current workload.
DISCUSSION
There are two ways we can approach this process, namely, to solicit a single engineering consulting
firm or select several firms to create a consultant pool.
\\RVNAS I \AHdata$\PR&PW\Engineering\2007\Council_ Actions\3-26-07Memo _ RFQ_ l.doe
3/22/2007
Page 2
A single consultant is often used for engineering services in cities where there is no staff engineer.
This single consultant would develop a history with the City, as URS has over the years with Arden
Hills. Since the same people work on projects from year to year, this option provides consistency and
continuity, allowing them to gain an understanding of specifics the City desires to see in projects.
If we designate a pool of qualified consulting engineers, we would not be limiting ourselves to one
consulting firm. Instead we would have the ability to select a consultant to perform work based on
their special expertise. While most firms are well-rounded in civil engineering disciplines, different
firms excel in one or more of the various disciplines. Also, a pool can be more competitive. As
projects are identified for outside consulting work, we can request that the firms provide us proposals
for engineering services. Depending on workloads, the costs for project engineering can be more
competitive with a pool.
With Roseville serving as the City Engineer for Arden Hills and providing a staff engineer, the need
for a single consultant to provide continuity is not as critical; the Civil Engineer is able to provide
that consistency. As a result we are recommending that we put together the RFQ with the intent to
develop a consultant pool. The pool would consist of three to five engineering firms that we could
draw on to assist us with projects as they are identified.
If this process is approved by Council, staff will post the RFQ for approximately 30 days. Upon
review of the submittals, staff may choose to hear presentations by a selected group of candidates.
With an early April posting, staff would anticipate that a selected consultant pool could be presented
to Council for approval in June.
To move fOlWard with this solicitation process, staff recommends that the City terminate its current
contract with URS. The contract was revised last year; however, most of the conditions are not
consistent with the proposed terms of the RFQ. We feel that terminating the existing contract will
provide a level playing field for URS and other consultants responding to the RFQ. The contract
states that it can be terminated by either party with a 30-day written notice.
We still anticipate working with URS on the closure of past Pavement Management Program
projects, the CSAH 96 Landscaping Improvements, and moving fOlWard with the CP Rail Bridge
improvements, as identified in the 2007 CIP. We also foresee relying on URS for historical
information as new staff continues to gain knowledge about Arden Hills. We are considering using
URS' services for environmental review for TCAAP on behalf of the City. These services would be
contracted with URS in a similar manner to how our "Miscellaneous Engineering Services" were
administered, on a time and materials basis, as opposed to a lump sum contract amount.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
At this time, staff is recommending the following actions:
. Motion to Approve the Request for Qualification Process for Engineering Services
. Motion to Approve the Termination of the Agreement between the City and URS, Inc. for
Professional Engineering Services