HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 - Streetlight Improvements_
NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 5
March 13, 2012
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Public Works Department
Stephen G. Badum, Public Works Director
949 - 644 -3311, sbadum(a)newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Peter Tauscher, Junior Civil Engineer
APPROVED:
v
TITLE: Award of Contract No. 4822 for 2011 -2012
Streetlight Improvement Project
ABSTRACT:
In an on -going effort to rehabilitate the City's aging streetlight system by increasing reliability
and decreasing energy and maintenance cost, staff requests City Council approval to award the
FY 2011 -2012 Streetlight Improvement Project to Unique Performance Construction, Inc.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Approve the project plans and specifications;
2. Reject the low bid received from Pro Tech Engineering Corporation as non - responsible.
3. Award Contract No. 4822 to Unique Performance Construction, Inc., for the total bid price
of $273,840.00 and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract.
4. Establish a contingency of $28,000.00, approximately 10 percent, to cover the cost of
unforeseen work.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
The current adopted budget includes sufficient funds for this contract.
Account Description Account Number Amount
General Fund 7013- C2202002 $ 301,840.00
$ 301,840.00
Proposed uses are as follows:
Vendor Purpose Amount
Unique Performance Construction, Inc. Construction Contract $ 273,840.00
Unique Performance Construction, Inc. Construction Contingency 28,000.00
Total: $ 301,840.00
Award of Contract No. 4822 for 2011 -2012 Streetlight Improvement Project
March 13, 2012
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
At 10:00 a.m. on January 31, 2012, the City Clerk opened and read the following bids for the FY
2011 -2012 Streetlight Improvement Project:
BIDDER
Low Pro Tech Engineering Corporation
2 Unique Performance Construction, Inc.
3 Traffic Development Services
4 Steiny and Company, Inc.
5 California Professional Engineering
6 Sully - Miller Contracting Co.
7 J.F.L. Electric, Inc.
8 PTM General Engineering Service, Inc.
9 International Line Builders, Inc.
TOTAL BID AMOUNT
$265,265.00*
$273,840.00
$309,510.00 **
$311,000.00
$322,906.00
$330,987.00 * **
$364,565.55
$367,167.00
$564,478.00 * * **
* Bid Rejected
** As -bid amount is $304,560.00
' ** As -bid amount is $333,837.00
* * ** As -bid amount is $565,521.00
Upon completing reference checks of the apparent low bidder, Pro Tech Engineering
Corporation (Pro Tech), and given the documented historical unsatisfactory contract
performance by this contractor on past City projects, staff recommends rejecting Pro Tech's bid,
the apparent low bidder for the following reasons:
G Pro Tech was previously awarded the Balboa Peninsula Streetlight Modifications project
(C -3416) in June 2001, where numerous problems concerning inferior work quality,
uncompleted work, and incorrectly installed facilities were encountered. Examples of
work performance safety problems in the City included missing ground wires, improper
splices, and exposed fuses and wires. Extensive corrective work was required extending
the final project completion date and resulting in costly change orders. Furthermore, past
failures of that streetlight system have been traced back and attributed to Pro Tech
Engineering Corporation's inferior installation including direct violations of the Electrical
Code.
C May 28, 2008, Pro Tech's low bid was rejected by City Council for Contract No. 3975,
Traffic Signal Modernization — Phase 1 Construction, due to the lack of cooperation to
provide the required contractual documents and information. For example, the City
requested certification for employees to perform work as electricians pursuant to California
Labor Code 3099. Pro Tech made no attempt to contact the City to resolve the contractual
documents and missing information issues, nor ever produced the required documents on
the Phase 1 Traffic Signal Modernization project.
o A check of Pro Tech's recent references as part of this project bid indicated that Pro Tech
Engineering Corporation continues to have similar issues completing projects in other
municipalities such as the cities of Downey, Orange, and Diamond Bar. Those agencies
cited Pro Tech's inadequate supervision and oversight of the projects, on -going problems
with traffic control, not following directions, and not completing work in a timely manner.
■
Award of Contract No. 4822 for 2011 -2012 Streetlight Improvement Project
March 13, 2012
Page 3
O In accordance with Due Process procedures, and at the request of Pro Tech, an informal
hearing was held on February 23, 2012 with Mike Niknafs, President of Pro Tech, Public
Works staff, and Rob Houston with the City Manager's Office who served as a third party
review body and facilitator of the hearing. Information regarding staff concerns, reference
checks, history of past performance by the contractor, and other related problems were
provided by the Public Works Department. Mr. Niknafs had an opportunity to discuss the
presented information and concerns and refuted the claims presented. As an outcome of
the meeting, and in an effort to afford Mr. Niknafs the opportunity to provide additional
references or information that we could evaluate to reconsider our decision, Mr. Niknafs
was given a deadline of February 2gth to provide any additional information, work
references, and employee references to support Pro Tech's position. As requested, Pro
Tech provided two additional references, City of Downey and Garden Grove, who called
on behalf of Mr. Niknafs appeal and stated that they are at best satisfied with the quality
of Pro Tech's work. However, the City of Downey stated that there were continuous
traffic control issues on the project which needed to be continually addressed. The
reference check from the City of Garden Grove stated that the work was adequate, but
the Project Manager was not good and working with Pro Tech was not a favorable
experience. No employee references were provided as requested.
For these reasons staff recommends not awarding this contract to the apparent low bidder, Pro
Tech, and instead awarding the contract to the second apparent low bidder.
The second low bidder, Unique Performance Construction, Inc., (Unique Performance), possesses
a California State Contractors License Classification "A" as required by the project specifications.
A check of Unique Performance's references indicates satisfactory completion of capital
improvement projects in other municipalities including cities of Seal Beach, Bellflower, and
Laguna Beach. Unique Performance Construction's total bid amount is approximately 12 percent
below the Engineer's Estimate of $310,000.00.
The work for this contract includes removing 41 streetlight fixtures, installing new energy
efficient LED streetlight fixtures, and upgrading the existing streetlight circuit per the City's
Streetlight Replacement Master Plan. The work area includes the Anniversary Tract and
portions of Irvine Avenue and University Drive.
Pursuant to the contract specifications, the contractor will have 45 consecutive working days to
complete the work.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this project exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to Section 15302 (replacement of existing facilities involving
negligible expansion of capacity) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
Award of Contract No. 4822 for 2011 -2012 Streetlight Improvement Project
March 13, 2012
Page 4
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the
meeting at which the City Council considers the item). The Notice Inviting Bids was advertised
in the City's official publication and in construction industry publications.
Submitted by:
irector
A. Location Map
I/
FY 2011 -2012 STREETLIGHT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Contract No. 4822
LATIN /
AV aVf' FWMER Ay 0
AV pp� y�h�
OF
\ V h
rte"
CITY 1 Or �ERRI qA� P4LWCQ'i pR. - O,R
O
COSTA ; �p vizp CITY
< OR p. p O a Of
MESA `� IRVINE
`_ vnLSpN Si � 91£
%IMDMA ST / a
p
4 2+, q FMER91iY
R p
19TH ST
a
�9
AP oF' ijh `�i
CITY uRTpr
h
NEIbP
tip p SJ 64' �� la CH n
DR 4
V`k OR
tl C
Sol P
LS RD < RP
&yp
c G/lN
PAGF /CP
PROJECT LOCATION opt,
'��/
C— @iDk O AREA
s►rom �a ae
SHM tic ww
VICINITY MAP
T.S.
S
Agenda Item No. 5
March 13, 2012
RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH REJECTING THE LOW BIDDER, PRO TECH ENGINEERING
CORPORATION, FOR THE FY 2011 -2012 STREET LIGHT IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT AS NON - RESPONSIBLE
WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach ( "City ") solicited bids for a FY 2011 -2012
Street Light Improvement Project as part of its on -going effort to rehabilitate the City's
aging streetlight system by increasing reliability and decreasing energy and
maintenance costs ( "Project "); and
WHEREAS, Pro Tech Engineering Corporation ( "Contractor ") submitted the low
bid for the Project; and
WHEREAS, a project is generally awarded to the low bidder unless the City finds
the bidder is non - responsible; and
WHEREAS, California Public Contracts Code Section 1103 defines a
"responsible bidder" as "a bidder who has demonstrated the attribute of trustworthiness,
as well as quality, fitness, capacity, and experience to satisfactorily perform the public
works contract;" and
WHEREAS, California courts have held that a bidder may be rejected as non -
responsible when the bidder is "not qualified to do the particular work under
consideration" (City of Inglewood -Los Angeles County Civic Center Authority et al, v.
The Superior Court of Los Angeles (1972) 7 Cal.3d 861, 867); and
WHEREAS, based upon the City's previous experience with Contractor and the
findings provided below, staff recommends the City Council reject Contractor's bid and
find that Contractor is non - responsible.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby
resolves as follows:
Section 1: The City Council rejects Pro Tech Engineering Corporation's bid as
non - responsible and finds that it is not qualified to perform the Project based upon the
following:
A) The Contractor was previously awarded the Balboa Peninsula Streetlight
Modifications project (C -3416) in June 2001. The City experienced
numerous problems with the Contractor including but not limited to inferior
work quality, uncompleted work, incorrectly installed facilities, and
performance safety problems including missing ground wires, improper
splices, and exposed fuses and wires. Extensive corrective work was
required extending the final project completion date and resulting in costly
change orders. Furthermore, past failures of that streetlight system have
been traced back and attributed to the Contractor's inferior installation and
direct violations of the Electrical Code.
B) On May 28, 2008, the Contractor's low bid was rejected by the City
Council for Contract No. 3975, Traffic Signal Modernization - Phase 1
Construction, due to the lack of cooperation to provide the required
contractual documents and information. For example, the City requested
certification for employees to perform work as electricians pursuant to
California Labor Code Section 3099, however, the Contractor made no
attempt to contact the City to resolve the contractual documents and
missing information issues, nor did it ever produce the required
documents on the Phase 1 Traffic Signal Modernization project.
C) A recent check of the Contractor's references indicated that it continues to
have similar issues completing projects in other municipalities such as the
cities of Downey, Orange, and Diamond Bar. Those cities cited the
Contractor's inadequate supervision and oversight of projects, on -going
problems with traffic control, an inability to follow directions, and not
completing work in a timely manner.
D) In accordance with due process requirements, and at the request of the
Contractor, an informal hearing was held on February 23, 2012 with Mike
Niknafs, President of Pro Tech Engineering Corporation, Public Works
staff, and Rob Houston with the City Manager's Office who served as a
third -party review body and facilitator of the hearing. Information
regarding staff concerns, reference checks, history of past performance by
the Contractor, and other related problems were provided by the Public
Works Department. Mr. Niknafs had an opportunity to present both oral
and written information to address the City's concerns and respond to
staff's finding of non - responsibility. To afford Mr. Niknafs the opportunity
to provide additional references or information Mr. Niknafs was given a
deadline of February 29, 2012 to provide any additional information, work
references, and employee references to show that the Contractor was
responsible. In response, the Contractor provided two additional
references, cities of Downey and Garden Grove, who called on behalf of
Mr. Niknafs and stated that they are at best satisfied with the quality of the
Contractor's work. However, the City of Downey stated that there were
continuous traffic control issues on the project which needed to be
continually addressed. The reference check from the City of Garden
Grove stated that the work was adequate, but the Project Manager was
not good and working with the Contractor was not a favorable experience.
No employee references were provided by Contractor. Following the
informal hearing and the additional information supplied by the Contractor,
City staff finds that the Contractor is not qualified to perform the work
required by the Project and recommends it be found non - responsible.
Section 2: The City Council finds this Project and the finding of non - responsible
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") pursuant to
Section 15302(c) (replacement of existing facilities involving negligible expansion of
capacity) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3,
because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 3: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 2012.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk