Report to: General Committee Report
Date:
SUBJECT: Award of Tender 340-T-09
Construction of
PREPARED BY: Linda Irvine, Manager, Parks and Open Space Development, Ext. 2120.
Tony Casale, Senior Buyer, Ext. 3190.
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
That the report entitled “Award
of Tender 340-T-09 Construction of
Greensborough Neighbourhood Park on
2)
That the Contract for 340-T-09 Construction
of Greensborough Neighbourhood Park on
3)
That a
separate purchase order in the amount of $52,945.10 exclusive of GST be issued to the contractor for
contingency to cover any additional fees, that a separate purchase order in the
amount of $5,000.00 exclusive of GST be issued to MEP
4)
That Internal
Capital Administration fees be charged against the 2007 Urban
5)
That the award in the amount of $679,561.19 be funded from the 2007 Urban
6) And That the shortfall in the amount of $137,111.19 be funded from the Urban Design development charges reserve account in the amount of $123,400.07 and the balance in the amount of $13,711.12 be funded from the capital contingency account # 044 6900 6395 005 and transferred to the Urban design account # 081 5350 7625 005;
7) And Further That staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
The purpose of
this report is to obtain Council approval to award the Contract for the Construction
of Greensborough Neighbourhood Park on
The
The scope of work includes but is
not limited to site servicing, rough grading, fill removal, sub-grade preparation,
asphalt and concrete paving, playground with concrete curb and play sand, steel
shade trellis, fencing, irrigation, planting, sodding and park furniture
installation. The project is to begin
construction in the spring of 2010 and the soccer field is to be sodded and
complete by
OPTIONS
/ DISCUSSION:
Tender # 340-T-09 was issued in accordance
with
Advertised |
ETN |
Bids closed on |
|
Number of Bidders |
30 |
Number responding to bid |
20 |
Company |
Prices
(exclusive of GST) |
|
$536,858.00 * |
Pacific Paving Limited |
$570,984.88 ** |
Colpac Construction Inc. |
$579,451.00 |
Forest Contractors Ltd. |
$675,483.00 |
Iron Trio Inc. |
$679,790.76 |
Wyndale Paving Co. Ltd. |
$693,631.68 |
Pine Valley Enterprises Inc. |
$714,330.00 |
Gateman-Milloy Inc. |
$746,191.04 |
|
$756,180.00 |
Evansgolf Corporation |
$756,571.31 |
Todd Brothers Contracting Ltd. |
$763,216.15 |
Dig-Con International Limited |
$769,244.33 |
Cambium Site Contracting Inc. |
$804,393.85 |
Mopal Construction Ltd. |
$816,353.40 |
|
$832,490.68 |
Melfer Construction Inc. |
$850,561.50 |
Royalcrest Paving & Contracting Ltd. |
$898,507.05 |
Elirpa Construction & Materials Ltd. |
$927,530.79 |
Gobro Con Inc. |
$985,926.49 |
Serve Construction Ltd. |
$1,039,741.50 |
* Wilson Contracting Limited (Not recommended)
The low bidder miscalculated their quantities on items 2.2 (Remove and dispose, as needed, excess clean native fill materials) and 2.4 (Place Sports Field Mix) as identified in the bid document. Item 2.2 was substantially lower than all other proponents; including the second lowest bidder (low bidder priced this item at $30,000.00 versus other bidders’ pricing which ranged from $70,000.00 - $160,000.00). Furthermore, pricing for item 2.4 was slightly lower than other proponents (low bidder priced this item at $23,184.00 versus other bidders’ pricing which ranged from $33,075.00 - $63,000.00).
Town staff are concerned about the inherent risks associated with awarding a contract based on pricing that does not adequately reflect the contractor’s costs. Furthermore, the low bidder confirmed in writing that the pricing for items (2.2. and 2.4) did not reflect the job required and requested to withdraw their bid. The Towns General Terms and Conditions do not permit withdrawal of a bid after tender closing date, but the Town has the direction not to award to the lowest bidder, if such action is deemed to be in the best interest of the Town.
**Pacific Paving Limited (Not recommended)
Colpac Construction Inc (Recommended)
9% Internal Capital
Administration fees for this project are to be charged on the consulting cost of
$39,050.00 and construction award of $579,451.00 for a total fee of $55,665.09
of which $13,500.00 has already been drawn.
The remaining fees are to be charged against the 2007 Urban
The Greensborough NP Stalmaster project (081-5350-7625-005) has a remaining balance of $542,450.00 which, less this award, creates a shortfall of $137,111.19 to be funded from development charges in the amount of $123,400.07 and the capital contingency account (044-6900-6395-005) in the amount of $13,711.12 based on the original 90/10 split in the project budget. The Development Charges Background Study identifies adequate funding for this project.
The financial considerations include PST (8%), any monies expended after July 2010 will be subject to the implementation of the HST.
As part to the overall storm water management plan for this subdivision, this park site includes a “dry pond” function. So as not to delay park construction, the park tender was released based on existing site grading plans which do not accurately reflect what the final grading of the site will be once the developer completes his work to meet the subdivision storm water requirements. The developer will be removing excess fill from the site this spring to meet his storm water management obligations in advance of the start of park construction. This work is estimated at approximately $50,000 in value. Once this work is completed, a change order will be issued and the park contractor will be asked to re-price his fill export quote (item 2.2 in the tender). Under the General Terms and Conditions of the tender, the Town is entitled to issue change orders to reduce the value of work in the contract. The tender includes a unit price for fill removal which will be used as a basis for a change in the price once actual quantities are known. This will result in cost savings to the project and the “actual” budget shortfall will be less than what is identified in this report. After anticipated savings are realized, the remaining funding shortfall is attributed to the challenges and costs of constructing a full sized soccer field within a site constrained by storm water storage requirements. Any recovered cost savings realized at the completion of this project will be returned to the original funding source.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
The