Item No. 7.
| MEETING DATE: 02/16/2021 |
|
| TO: | HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS |
| FROM: | JIM SADRO, CITY MANAGER By: Elias Saykali, Public Works Director |
| SUBJECT: | REJECT ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING LOT DEMOLITION AT 115 AND 121 NORTH EUCLID STREET, CITY PROJECT NO. 1-D-20 |
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council reject bids received from UBD INC., Gentry General Engineering Inc., CHI Construction, Cinbad Industry Inc., and Grandville Contracting and Management Inc. for the Community Center Parking Lot Demolition project at 115 and 121 North Euclid Street, City Project No. 1-D-20.
DISCUSSION:
On January 14, 2021, the City of La Habra received bid proposals from five firms, including UBD INC., Gentry General Engineering Inc., CHI Construction, Cinbad Industry Inc., and Grandville Contracting and Management Inc. for the Community Center Parking Lot Demolition project at 115 and 121 North Euclid Street.
After reviewing all bid proposals, staff determined that four of the five bidders, including the apparent low bidder (UBD Inc.), did not meet the City's bid requirements. It appears that the firms failed to thoroughly review the bid specifications and did not submit the required documents listed in Appendix "C" of the bid specification. In addition, Cinebad Industry Inc.'s bid proposal also contained typographical errors that resulted in their bid amount to be significantly higher than the rest of the submitted bids. Therefore, these four bids are deemed "non-responsive." Gentry General Engineering Inc.’s proposal was the only bid that met the City's bid requirements; however, it was not the lowest submitted bid and was 2.2 times higher than the apparent low bidder.
This project is funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). In order to utilize CDBG funds, the bidders must submit all the required documents in Appendix "C" of the specification. The Non-Responsive bidders did not submit the required documents which prevent the City from being able to utilize the CDBG funds allocated for this project. Although Gentry General Engineering Inc.'s proposal met the requirement, the submitted bid was well above what is reasonable and fair for the size and scale of this project and is deemed not in the best interest of the City to award a contract and therefore all bids are rejected.
In an effort to avoid the same mistakes from being made again when this project is put out to bid a second time, staff will make changes to the bid documents so that the requirements are more clearly identified.
| Ranking | Company Name | Bid Amount |
| 1 | UBD Inc. | $84,444.00 |
| 2 | Grandville Contracting & Management Inc. |
$99,299.20 |
| 3 | CHI Construction Inc. | $114,927.38 |
| 4 | Gentry General Engineering Inc. | $191,359.88 |
| 5 | Cinebad Industry Inc. | $1,239,050.00 |
After reviewing all bid proposals, staff determined that four of the five bidders, including the apparent low bidder (UBD Inc.), did not meet the City's bid requirements. It appears that the firms failed to thoroughly review the bid specifications and did not submit the required documents listed in Appendix "C" of the bid specification. In addition, Cinebad Industry Inc.'s bid proposal also contained typographical errors that resulted in their bid amount to be significantly higher than the rest of the submitted bids. Therefore, these four bids are deemed "non-responsive." Gentry General Engineering Inc.’s proposal was the only bid that met the City's bid requirements; however, it was not the lowest submitted bid and was 2.2 times higher than the apparent low bidder.
This project is funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). In order to utilize CDBG funds, the bidders must submit all the required documents in Appendix "C" of the specification. The Non-Responsive bidders did not submit the required documents which prevent the City from being able to utilize the CDBG funds allocated for this project. Although Gentry General Engineering Inc.'s proposal met the requirement, the submitted bid was well above what is reasonable and fair for the size and scale of this project and is deemed not in the best interest of the City to award a contract and therefore all bids are rejected.
In an effort to avoid the same mistakes from being made again when this project is put out to bid a second time, staff will make changes to the bid documents so that the requirements are more clearly identified.
FISCAL IMPACT/SOURCE OF FUNDING:
This project is included in the City's adopted Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Community Development Block Grand budget in the amount of $200,000, which should provide sufficient funds needed to complete this project.
GENERAL PLAN RELEVANCE:
LU 4.3 Public Safety and Community Design
LU 4.5 Community Maintenance
LU 5.5 Revitalization of Obsolete and Underused Properties
LU 6.2 Public Facilities and Services
LU 17.1 Adequate Community- Supporting Uses
LU 4.5 Community Maintenance
LU 5.5 Revitalization of Obsolete and Underused Properties
LU 6.2 Public Facilities and Services
LU 17.1 Adequate Community- Supporting Uses