Consent-Community Services # 11.
Board of Supervisors
Public Works
- Meeting Date:
- 11/05/2024
- Brief Title
- 2024 Road Resurfacing Project Change Order
From:
Leslie Lindbo, Director, Department of Community Services
Staff Contact:
Todd N. Riddiough, Director of Public Works, Department of Community Services, x8039
Supervisorial District Impact:
Districts 1,2,3, 5
Subject
Approve Change Order No. 1 to Agreement No. 120-2024-3011-PCC for the 2024 Road Resurfacing Project with Pavement Coatings, Inc., to increase the maximum compensation by $1,159,867.50 to a new maximum amount of $7,810,163.55 due to necessary quantity adjustments for four Project bid items with finding that further competitive bidding for the work described in the Change Order would have been unavailing and would not have produced any public advantage. (No general fund impact) (4/5 vote required) (Lindbo/Riddiough)
Recommended Action
- Review proposed Change Order No. 1 to Agreement No. 120-2024-3011-PCC for the 2024 Road Resurfacing Project with Pavement Coatings, Inc. to increase the maximum compensation by $1,159,867.50 to a new maximum amount of $7,810,163.55 due to necessary quantity adjustments for four Project bid items;
- Find that competitive bidding for the work described in Contract Change Order No. 1 would have been unavailing, impractical and would not have produced any public advantage; and
- Approve Change Order No. 1 (Attachment B).
Strategic Plan Goal(s)
![]() |
Thriving Residents |
Reason for Recommended Action/Background
This action will allow the Department to proceed with completing the ongoing construction of the 2024 Road Resurfacing Project (Project) before the winter season.
Background
The proposed County Roads (CR) where pavements are being improved in the 2024 Road Resurfacing Project are located throughout the County as shown on the location map (see Attachment A) and listed below:
Background
The proposed County Roads (CR) where pavements are being improved in the 2024 Road Resurfacing Project are located throughout the County as shown on the location map (see Attachment A) and listed below:
- 4.75 miles on County Road (CR) 31 from CR 93A to CR 98
- 1.15 miles on CR 93A from CR 32 to CR 31
- 2.62 miles on CR 32 from Interstate 505 to CR 93A
- 4 miles on CR 25A from CR 97 to CR 101
- 0.42 mile on CR 21 (Beamer St) from the Woodland city limit to CR 102
- 1.2 miles on CR 21A from CR 85B to State Route (SR) 16
- 0.33 mile on CR 20A from CR 85B to Gable Dr
- 2 miles on CR 85B from CR 23 to SR 16
- 2 miles on CR 22 from CR 85B to CR 23
- 1.3 miles on CR 23 from CR 85B to CR 22
- 1.25 miles on CR 87 from CR 16 to CR 19
- 2.45 miles on CR 94B from SR 16 to CR 19
- 0.72 mile on Netherlands Ave from S River Rd to CR 146B
- 3.65 miles of roadway in the town of Esparto west of SR 16 (Yolo Ave)
- 3 miles of roadway in the town of Clarksburg
- 0.2 mile of roadway in the town of Capay
The Project involves pavement preservation of approximately 31 miles of Yolo County roadway, including streets on the west side in the town of Esparto and in the towns of Clarksburg and Capay. The roadways and streets will be treated by applying a double seal or triple seal treatment on the existing road surfaces. Double seal treatment begins with surface preparation, followed by a microsurface treatment on the existing pavement surface and finished with an asphalt rubber chip seal. Triple seal treatment also begins with surface preparation and a microsurface treatment on the existing pavement surface, followed by an asphalt rubber chip seal and slurry or microsurface to complete the treatment. On road segments where the pavement has far exceeded its design life, the treatment will include completely pulverizing pavement in-place, placing a hot mix asphalt leveling course, then applying an asphalt rubber chip seal followed by a slurry seal. The resurfacing of the roadways will be less than one inch.
On September 26, 2023, the Board approved the Project construction budget of $7,000,000 and allowed the Director of Public Works to execute a construction contract with the lowest responsive bidder, and the authority to approve all construction change orders, provided the contract amount does not exceed available funds for the project.
During Project construction, our contractor, Pavement Coatings Co., notified County construction inspection staff that there appeared to be an error in the County’s calculation for the amount of the microsurface treatment layers. Staff reviewed the situation and concurred that there was an error in the cost estimate calculation for the amount of microsurface treatment material needed for the variable, weathered pavement surfaces on the county roads that had not received treatments for decades; there was more surface area and volume to cover than what was expected. The error was compounded in that there were two microsurface treatment layers applied for the Project, based on the same material calculation. Pavement Coatings Co. was able to adjust their operations and complete the entire treatment areas, and not leave the Project incomplete. Pavement Coatings Co. has agreed to complete both additional treatment amounts per the original bid item unit prices.
Due to increases in materials costs from the low estimates for these treatment areas, and to promote completion of the Project ahead of the winter season, staff is requesting approval to increase the maximum compensation by $1,159,867.50 to a new maximum amount of $7,810,163.55 for adjusting quantities for four bid items for the Project with the approval of Change Order No. 1 (Attachment B).
The additional cost for the construction work described above exceeds the statutory contract change order limits for Public Contract Code section 20137. Changes exceeding the Public Contract Code section 20137 limit would ordinarily require competitive bidding. However, under Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency (1980) 104.Cal.App.3d 631, competitive bidding is not required where such bidding would be unavailing and impractical and would not produce any public advantage. For the following reasons, competitive bidding for the extra work in this case would not have produced any public advantage, and it is in both the best interest of the County and the public to work with the existing contractor on the Project rather than competitively bidding these Project changes because:
On September 26, 2023, the Board approved the Project construction budget of $7,000,000 and allowed the Director of Public Works to execute a construction contract with the lowest responsive bidder, and the authority to approve all construction change orders, provided the contract amount does not exceed available funds for the project.
During Project construction, our contractor, Pavement Coatings Co., notified County construction inspection staff that there appeared to be an error in the County’s calculation for the amount of the microsurface treatment layers. Staff reviewed the situation and concurred that there was an error in the cost estimate calculation for the amount of microsurface treatment material needed for the variable, weathered pavement surfaces on the county roads that had not received treatments for decades; there was more surface area and volume to cover than what was expected. The error was compounded in that there were two microsurface treatment layers applied for the Project, based on the same material calculation. Pavement Coatings Co. was able to adjust their operations and complete the entire treatment areas, and not leave the Project incomplete. Pavement Coatings Co. has agreed to complete both additional treatment amounts per the original bid item unit prices.
Due to increases in materials costs from the low estimates for these treatment areas, and to promote completion of the Project ahead of the winter season, staff is requesting approval to increase the maximum compensation by $1,159,867.50 to a new maximum amount of $7,810,163.55 for adjusting quantities for four bid items for the Project with the approval of Change Order No. 1 (Attachment B).
The additional cost for the construction work described above exceeds the statutory contract change order limits for Public Contract Code section 20137. Changes exceeding the Public Contract Code section 20137 limit would ordinarily require competitive bidding. However, under Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment Agency (1980) 104.Cal.App.3d 631, competitive bidding is not required where such bidding would be unavailing and impractical and would not produce any public advantage. For the following reasons, competitive bidding for the extra work in this case would not have produced any public advantage, and it is in both the best interest of the County and the public to work with the existing contractor on the Project rather than competitively bidding these Project changes because:
- Each of the items of the contract change order work is functionally integrated with the overall Project.
- Pavement Coatings Co. is already mobilized and onsite doing the Project construction and able to complete the additional work at the same unit prices in its competitive bid.
- It wouldn’t be practical to have a different contractor perform the change order work items because they are integrated with the overall infrastructure being installed and trying to advertise and competitively bid the remaining items for the Project at this juncture would only further delay completion of the Project at additional expense.
The amount budgeted in the FY 2024/25 Road Fund budget for capital projects is sufficient to cover the cost of the recommended action. Senate Bill 1 (SB1), the Road Improvement and Accountability Act of 2017, and the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) are providing the funds for construction. This recommended action requires a 4/5 vote.
Collaborations (including Board advisory groups and external partner agencies)
General Services Department
County Counsel
County Counsel
Competitive Bid Process/Vendor Performance
The competitive bid process was completed in accordance with State law. The project was advertised on March 29, 2024, and bids were opened and read publicly at the Department of Community Services on April 23, 2024. Four bids were received at the bid opening on April 23, 2024, ranging from $6,650,296.05 to $7,264,688.00.
| 1 | Pavement Coatings Co. | $6,650,296.05 |
| 2 | Doolittle Construction | $6,955,955.00 |
| 3 | VSS International | $7,093,120.00 |
| 4 | American Pavement Systems | $7,264,688.00 |
Pavement Coatings Co. was the lowest bidder and following receipt of the contractor’s bond and insurance certificates, the contract was executed on May 24, 2024.
Fiscal Impact
No Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Impact (Expenditure)
- Total cost of recommended action:
- $ 1,159,868
- Amount budgeted for expenditure:
- $ 1,159,868
- Additional expenditure authority needed:
- $ 0
- One-time commitment:
- Yes
Source of Funds for this Expenditure
- Road Fund
- $1,159,868
Further explanation as needed:
The amount budgeted in the FY 2024/25 Road Fund budget for capital projects is sufficient to cover the cost of the recommended action. Senate Bill 1 (SB1), the Road Improvement and Accountability Act of 2017, and the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) are providing the funds for construction.
Attachments
Form Review
| Inbox | Reviewed By | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Todd Riddiough (Originator) | Todd Riddiough | 10/19/2024 08:54 AM |
| Kimberly Hood | Kimberly Hood | 10/21/2024 10:10 AM |
| Financial Services | mrobertson | 10/23/2024 03:39 PM |
| County Counsel | Hope Welton | 10/23/2024 04:00 PM |
| Berenice Espitia | Berenice Espitia | 10/29/2024 03:05 PM |
- Form Started By:
- Todd Riddiough
- Started On:
- 10/18/2024 04:15 PM
- Final Approval Date:
- 10/29/2024
.png)