My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012_0109_amended packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2012
>
2012_0109_amended packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2012 9:18:51 AM
Creation date
1/6/2012 8:21:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
3. Best Value Procurement utilizing Arizona State University (ASU) a third party method <br /> that was used for the Geothermal Project at the Skating Center. <br /> 3 Pros <br /> 34 • Accepted and tested method <br /> 35 • 98%performance record of on time and on budget <br /> 36 • Transfers risk to contractor <br /> 37 • Lower management inputs <br /> 38 • New approach for industry <br /> 39 • Becoming preferred method of high performing contractors <br /> 0 • Greater ability to minimize impact on users and operations <br /> 1 • Third party—increases transparency <br /> Cons <br /> 3 • Upfront costs for owner and contractor <br /> """'Yr^"""'Yr^ • Upfront time investment for owner and contractor <br /> 45 • May not obtain the lowest cost in the beginning <br /> 46 As the projects have been outlined and timing identified, the desired approach is to utilize <br /> 47 Arizona State University Best Value Process as used with the Skating Center geothermal project. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 The official Best Value Procurement method requires ASU as an outside agency. This <br /> 50 service/method is anticipated to improve results, save dollars along the way and in the end. This <br /> 51 method did prove to work well with the geothermal project; saving staff and project time, <br /> 5d"'? limiting cost overruns and change orders and produced an excellent project. <br /> 54 Included in your packet is a proposal from Arizona State University that staff will be prepared to <br /> 55 review with you at your meeting. <br /> 57 POLICY OBJECTIVE <br /> 58 It is the policy of the City to use procurement methods that deliver the best value for the <br /> 59 community. <br /> 60 <br /> 6,1 BUDGET IMPLICATIONS <br /> 6d'? The total cost of utilizing Arizona State University for the four year program as outlined is <br /> 63 $200,000 plus a $15,000 license fee. The cost would be paid for out of the budgeted bond <br /> 64 proceeds for the identified planning and construction management costs. <br /> 66 STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br /> 67 Based upon the multitude and variety of projects and aggressive timeframe, staff recommends <br /> 68 that the City enter into an agreement with Arizona State University in the not to exceed amount <br /> 69 of$215,000, including the license fee to implement the official Best Value Procurement Method <br /> 70 for the Park Renewal Program. <br /> 71 <br /> 7,, REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION <br /> "73 Motion to authorize the City Manager and Mayor to sign an agreement with Arizona State <br /> "74 University in the not to exceed amount of$215,000 to implement the official Best Value <br /> "75 Procurement Method for the Park Renewal Program as outlined with final City Attorney <br /> "76 approval. <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.