Agenda - Council - 04/22/2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Background: The 2008 - 2012 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was approved by City Council at the January 8, 2008 meeting. Staff prepared a summary of the 2008 projects referenced in that document and brought them to the. Public Works Committee on January 15, 2008 as a way to outline the proposed schedule for implementing the projects. One of the utility projects outlined was for the construction of water tower #3 in Elmcrest Park. Constructing this elevated tower will expand the existing water supply system and support future growth. On February 19, 2008 the Public Works Committee recommended authorization of an RFP for engineering services, which was subsequently ratified by the City Council on March 11, 2008? Observations: AWARD CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES AND AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR WATER TOWER #3 IN ELMCREST PARK By Tim Himmer, Assistant City Engineer The RFP was sent out to four consulting firms, HDR, Bolton & Menk, Hakansan Anderson, and Progressive Consulting Engineers. The following summary outlines the proposals received, which have been evaluated and ranked on the criteria referenced in the RFP: HDR Bolton & Menk Hakanson Anderson Progressive Design/Admin. Experience 22 26 21 22 Inspection/Operation Experience 33 30 35 34 Work Plan/Project Understanding 16 19 14 17 References 10 10 9 10 TOTAL SCORE 81 85 79 83 Many factors went into this evaluation and two consultants have been eliminated; HDR and Hakanson Anderson due to cost considerations and experience on similar projects. Therefore, staff is comfortable with awarding the engineering services to either Bolton & Menk or Progressive Consulting Engineers. Following are the pros and cons associated with each consultant: Bolton & Menk is a local company with a strong work history in the City. They have been involved in various projects in the City relevant to this project (Elmcrest Park preliminary design, NW sewer project, and the most recent Comprehensive Water System Study in 2004), and have the advantage of having compiled most of the information necessary to hit the ground running. They submitted a proposal beyond the scope outlined in the RFP to include surveying and geotechnical evaluations; this means that the City will not need to enter into additional contracts for this project. Their proposal was the least expensive, which included an option for the City to take on some of the routine inspections. The only concern staff has with their proposal is the qualifications of anew staff member that will be responsible for the specialty inspections. He appears to meet the required specialty certifications referenced in the RFP, but we are continuing to examine his qualification