|
604
<br /> • December 26,1979
<br /> CITIZEN COMMENT
<br /> • so dirt,
<br /> lj
<br /> '). BIDS RECEIVED-(CB 7912-539)
<br /> Hugh Warren reported that on November 14,1979 there was a bid call for
<br /> the 19th Ave.S.W.improvement project but all bids Submitted were
<br /> .•
<br /> rejected as they were higher than the budgeted amount for this project.
<br /> Council authorized the Public Works Department to redesign the Projekt
<br /> in order to meet the available funding and then readvertise. They did
<br /> readvertise after redesigning certain components of the pffect to reduce
<br /> the construction contract amount without seriously reducing'the gualitY
<br /> Ior general nature of the project and 6 bids were received as follows:
<br /> Cor_ltraSi_tor Alt.#2 Total
<br /> Tri-State Const. 1,290,054.16 51,980 28,000 1,370,034.16
<br /> West Coast Const. 1,313,337.01 44,678 25,500 1,383,515.01
<br /> R.L.Alia Co. 1,346,022.90 47,440 30,500 1,423,962.90
<br /> Klokstad Const. 1,440,509.74 44,554 31,000 1,516,063.74
<br /> ad
<br /> Buno Const. 1,449,205.48 66,940 40,000 1,556,145.48
<br /> DyConst. 1,621,432.01 67,260 27,354 1,716,046.01
<br /> Engineer's Est. 1,394,988.33 45,650 30,000 1,470,638.33
<br /> Mr.Warren reported on a list of revisions which were made to the con-
<br /> struction plans and specifications.
<br /> Councilman Baker questioned the revision about sidewalk removal and the
<br /> removal of traffic signals and street lighting from the contract,and
<br /> Mr.Warren replied that the sidewalk will be bid as an additive alter-
<br /> nate and that underground conduit will be put in and•used traffic
<br /> signals installed that have been in service at other locations in the
<br /> City.
<br /> Councilman Michelson asked if the UAR had approved the changes and Hugh
<br /> Warren said yes.
<br /> Bruce Jones,Assistant City Attorney,spoke on the problem that when
<br /> .• State submitted their bid the EEO certificate which was included in the
<br /> bid package was not filled out and sigaed and they had informed the City
<br /> a few days later that this omission was inadvertent. Several days aftkr
<br /> 4 the bid opening,.a Tri-State-representative signgd the certificate's°the
<br /> question was whether or not the failure to include the signed centificyte
<br /> •
<br /> • in the bid-befbre the-bid opening should disqualify them.,He said the
<br /> law was revigwed and under the state law Council may determine whether
<br /> this is a minok irregularity:which can be waived versus a substantial
<br /> irregularity which-canhot bh waived. Mr.'Jones felt Council could find
<br /> that this wag k minor irregularity. Since the contract is enforceable
<br /> , it is felt that.the failure tojinclude.the signed EEO certificate-did not
<br /> give an.advantage not shared by the other bidders. He se,the specifi-
<br /> , cations state that we reserve the right to waive any irregularities.
<br /> •
<br /> 1411111
<br />
|