SS9402-CN 951114Tha City With ^ Beautiful Future
CITY COUNCIL MEETING: November 14, 1995
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
ITEM CAPTION:
ITEM
Discussion and consideration of awarding the contract for sanitary sewer improvements associated
with Grapevine Creek IV and Bethel Road (SS 94-02) in the amount of $304,782.08 and
$345,454.69 respectfully for a total amount of $650,236.77 to Pate Brothers Construction and
authorizing the Mayor to sign.
APPROVED
BY
ClT Y COUN CIL
SUBM1TYED ..y~enneth~ M.--~f~; ?P. E~. ~ ~
TITLE: AssistantlrRy-/Wmxmger~Ctt~ Engineer INITIAr. S I-~
STAFF COMMENTS:
See attached memo.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval ~
EXPLANATION:
Staff will be available to answer questions ~ the Council m~t~g.
Denial
BUDGET AMT.$
AMT. EST.$ +/- BUD:$
FINANCIAL COMMENTS:
Funds have been allocated for this project in the 1995 l,later/$ewer CIP Accounl~
FINANCIAL REVIEW~
Agenda Request Form - Revised 1/94
CITY MANAGER REVIEW:
Document Name eng.02
To:
From:
RE:
Date:
Mayor and City Council
Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E. Asst. City Manager/City Engineer
Discussion and consideration of awarding the contract for sanitary sewer
improvements associated with Grapevine Creek IV and Bethel Road (SS 94-02)
in the amount of $304,782.08 and $345,454.69 respectfully for a total amount of
$650,236.77 to Pate Brothers Construction and authorizing the Mayor to sign.
November 6, 1995
On August 28, 1995, five bids were received and opened for project SS 94-02, the construction
of sanitary sewer improvements for Grapevine Creek III and IV and Bethel Road. On October
10, 1995, City Council awarded Grapevine Creek III to River Valley Enterprises, the low bidder
for that section. As was noted in that agenda item, River Valley was also the apparent low
bidder for Grapevine Creek IV; however, there were discrepancies in their bid which resulted
in an 11% reduction of the overall bid. In discussion with representatives of River Valley
Enterprises, it was discussed that an 11% reduction would more than likely be the entire profit
associated with the project. Therefore, staff can not support the award of Grapevine Creek IV
to River Valley and is recommending to award to the next lowest responsible bidder which is
Pate Brothers Construction.
The delay in awarding this section of the project was because of the need to acquire several
easements from J.C. Thweatt. Because Mr. Thweatt has been unwilling, in my opinion, to
negotiate in good faith with the City for those easements, the project is being redesigned to avoid
Mr. Thweatt's property. Mr. Thweatt owns property on both the south and north end of
Grapevine Creek IV. His property on the south end is a sliver of land near the creek as it
intersects Denton Tap Road. Mr. Thweatt stated that the property is on the tax roll for about
$54,000.00 and he is therefore requesting $54,000.00 for a 20 foot easement across the
property. Because he is unwilling to negotiate with the City, the project will be stopped short
of Mr. Thweatt's property until such time as the City can begin the proceedings to acquire the
easement across Mr. Thweatt's property through the process of eminent domain. If that process
is completed prior to completion of work by Pate Brothers, then Pate Brothers will construct the
section of the sewer line across Mr. Thweatt's property. If it cannot be completed in that time
period, then at a later date the City will bid out that small section of sewer line and have a
different contractor construct it.
The property that Mr. Thweatt owns on the north end is generally located at Bethel School and
Denton Tap Road. To construct the sewer as designed, the City needs to obtain approximately
a five foot easement adjacent to the north side of Bethel School Road. Mr. Thweatt has
indicated that due to past dealings with the City he would not even take up to a million dollars
for that five foot sliver of land. Because of his unwillingness to negotiate with the City, we are
redesigning the sewer line to place it in the northern portion of Bethel School Road. This will
necessitate a change in the project which will more than likely cost approximately $15,000 to
$18,000. As soon as that number is agreed upon between the City and the contractor, a change
order will be brought forward for approval. Even though it appears there are a few loose ends
associated with Grapevine Creek IV it is important that the City proceed with the project because
of recent development associated with the Burch Addition. It is my opinion that the issues
associated with the north and south ends of the project can be resolved and this project can be
constructed without further delay.
The Bethel Road section was not brought forward until we had the opportunity to meet with the
adjacent property owners. As was noted in the previous agenda item concerning the agreement
between the City and the County, that meeting has been held and there appeared to be a lack of
interest by the adjacent property owners. Therefore, staff is recommending the award of Bethel
Road Sanitary Sewer Line to Pate Brothers. Because of the holiday schedule, it is anticipated
that construction on these lines will begin shortly after the first of the year.
In conclusion, staff recommends the award of Grapevine Creek IV to Pate Brother Construction
in the amount of $304,782.08 and the Bethel Road Sewer Line to Pate Brothers Construction
in the amount of $345,454.69 for a total amount of $650,236.77 and authorizing the Mayor to
sign.
Staff will be available to answer any questions at the Council meeting.
SECTION II - GRAPEVINE CREEK IV (SS94-02)
]] IItem Quanity I IUnit Description Pate Bros Const. River Valley Ent. J.C. Evans Const. BAR Const. Atkim Bros
UnitPrice I TotaiPrice UnitPriceI TotalPrice UnitPrice I TotalPrice UnitPrice I TotalPrice UnitPriceI TotalPrice
BID ITEMS # 3, 5-9, 13-18, 20-23, 30, 31, 33-35 & 41 NOT USED
6" D.I. Pipe 28.07 6,035.05 52.00 11,180.00 75.013 16,125.012 183.00 39,345.00
8" D.I. Pipe 32.47 6,981.05 60.00 12,900.00 80.0t2 17,200.0( 206.00 44,290.00
8" Sewer (15') 161.49 2,099.37 42.00 546.00 50.00 650.01 77.00 1,1301.00
12" Sewer (10') 24.55 13,674.35 25.15 14,008.55 55.00 38.01
30,635.0( 21,166.00
12" Sewer (15') 31.52 49,328.80 31.50 49,297.50 60.00 93,900.0( 47.0G 73,555.00
12" Sewer (20') 40.8~ 23,664.00 46.00 26,680.00 65.00 37,700.00 53.0G 30,740.00
4' M.H. 2,597.01 20,776.08 *25.00 *200.00 1,500.00 12,000.00 1,850.013
4' Type'S' M.H. 2,419.75 7,259.25 *27.25 '81.75 2,000.00 6,000.00 2,000.00 6,000.00
5' Type'S' M.H. 2,381.63 2,381.63 *28.00 *28.00 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,300.00 3,300.00
Siphon 16,168.70 29,500.00 12,600.00
20" Bore 155.62
20" Bore Pipe 22.55
Abandon M.H. 763.43
R&R 8" Paving 59.33
R&R 6" RipRap 53.70
Landscaping 3,946.83
Trench Safety 11.49
Traffic Control 2,819.16
4" Services
TOTAL COST
1,129.27
$ 304,782.08
16,168.70 29,500.00
49,175.92 66.00
7,125.80 20.00
4,580.58 1,200.00
49,362.56 36.00
483.30 55.00
3,946.83 4,500.00
29,885.49 2.00
2,819.16 5,000.0G
9,034.16 850.0~
20,856.00 128.00 40,448.0~
6,320.00 20.00 6,320.0~
7,200.00 400.00 2,400.0~
29,952.00 41.00
495.00 30.00 270.0(]
4,500.00
5,202.00
6,800.00
17,000.00 17,000.00
145.00 45,820.00
20.00 6,320.00
500.00 3,000.00
25.00 20,800.00
45.00 405.00
4,000.00 4,000.00
1.00 2,601.00
3,000.00 3,000.00
800.00 6,400.00
$230,746.80 Il $327,056.00
2,550.00
465.00
2,550.0~
3,720.00
61.00 13,115.00
65.00 13,975.00
54.00 702.00
40.00 22,280.00
81,380.0C
37,120.00
19,280.00
7,410.00
3,450.00
19,000.00
55,300.00
3,792.00
1,200.00
51,584.00
360.00
1,000.0~
650.25
16,700.00
350.00 2,800.00
$348,420.00 II $351,098.25
* There was an error in the written amount for bid items # 19, 24 & 25 for River Valley. Per the
specifications, the written amount controls. Therefore, the total amount was arrived at using $25.00 not
$2500.00; $27.25 not $2725.00; $28.00 not $2800.00 per manhOle.
II SECTION llI- BETHEL ROAD SEWER (SS94-02)
Pate Bros Const. River Valley Ent.
Description
Price Total Price
J. C. Evans Const.
Unit Price I Total Price
BAR Const.
Unit Price I Total Price
Atkins Bros
Unit PriceI Total Price
BID ITEMS # 5, 6, 12-18, 21, 24, 32-34 & 41
6" D.I. Pipe 3,304.40 265.00 29,150.001
8" D.I. Pipe 34.99 3,848.90 30,250.00
8" Sewer (10') 45.80 595.40 24.00 312.00
8" Sewer (15) 45.80 229.00 150.00
10" Sewer (10') 22.84 52,851.76 60,164.00
10" Sewer (15') 24.65 40,623.20 34.00 56,032.00
12" Sewer (5') 27.44 411.60 18.00 270.00
12" Sewer (10') 23.02 20,533.84 27.00 24,084.00
91,649.00
NOT USED
75.00 8,250.00
80.00 8,800.00
45.00
50.00
50.00
55.00
50.00
585.00
250.00
115,700.00
750.00
49,060.00
148,620.00
12H Sewer (15') 24.49 60,661.73 37.00
4' M.H. 2,031.31 26,407.03
5' M.H. 5,719.52
4' Drop M.H. 2,904.8~ 11,619.32
5' Drop M.H. 3,898.08
5' Type'S' M.H. 2,892.29 2,892.29
Siphon 16,168.70
20" Bore 575.11 8,626.65
20" Bore Pipe 22.55 338.25
Abandon M.H.
Abandon C .O. 405.96
55.00
281.0t3
290.0t3
45 .IX]
45.0t3
34.0t2
38.00
39.00
47.00
116
'351.00 1,850.00 24,050.12
*58.00 3,300.00 6,600.00
'124.00 2,200.00 8,800.00
'39.0{ 5,000.00 5,000.00
'28.00 3,400.00 3,400.00
27,000.0~ 11,600.00
975.00 500.00
360.0~ 35.00
7,200.01]
1,600.013 150.0~ 600.00
Class 'B' Conc. 16.01 768.48 62.00 2,976.0~ 14.00
32.00 223,936.0{ 7.50
R&R 6~ RipRap 84.33 590.31 48.00 336.012
Landscaping 6,202.16 6,202.61 6,500.00
Trench Safety 7.54 55,388.84 2.50
Traffic Control 5,074.49 5,074.49
Traffic Control 7,893.66
4" Services 442.52 7,965.36
cos ll, 34S,454.69** II
6,500.0~
18,365.00
14,000.00
20,000.00
15,300.00
1,500.00 19,500.00
2,000.00 4,000.00
2,000.00 8,000.00
2,500.0~ 2,500.0~
3,500.0t3 3,500.0~
17,000.0~ 17,000.~
500.0{3 7,500.0G
20.00 300.0t3
500.012 3,000.012
150.00 600.00
12.00 576.00
5.00 34,990.00
41.00 287.00
9,000.00 9,000.00
1.00 7,346.00
5,000.00 5,000.00
5,000.00 5,000.00
800.00 14,400.00
$ 631,209.00 II $ 565,154.00
30.00
210.00
5,000.0(]
3.50
9,000.012 9,000.00
3,000.012 3,000.0G
465.~
7,920.00
8,360.00
442.00
240.00
90,246.0t3
84,048.0t3
510.0P
36,572.1Y°
133,758.00
26,780.00
6,280.00
14,040.00
4,360.00
3,160.00
17,500.00
9,525.00
180.00
1,200.00
240.00
720.00
55,984.C
280.00
7,000.00
1,836.50
17,600.00
11,600.0~
6,300.0~
$ 531,650.00 II $ 546,681.50
· There was an error in the written amount for bid items # 19, 20, 22, 23 & 25 for River Valley. I
~i~}!~i~?~i~i~i~?~i!~?~i~i?~}~~~!~!~lPer the contract, the written amount controls. Therefore, the total amount was arrived at usingI
; $31.00 not $3100.00; $39.00 not $3900.00