Laserfiche WebLink
7,10.1 <br />- REPORT <br />To the Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From the City Manager <br />June 2, 2003 <br />Subject <br />Reject Bids — Redwood Shores Sewer Pump Stations #1 & #3 Rehabilitation Project <br />Recommendation <br />Council reject all ten (10) bids received for the subject project in accordance with <br />Section 00100, Paragraph 1.10 -C and Section 00210, Paragraph 2.10 -13 of the Contract <br />Documents, and authorize the readvertisement for bids. <br />Background <br />These two sewer pump stations are part of the sewer pumping system in Redwood <br />Shores (RWS). The RWS Peninsula has a flat terrain that requires sewerage to be <br />pumped through a series of pump stations to get to the treatment plant at the end of the <br />Peninsula. These two stations were among the first to be built, and have served out <br />their useful life. The rehabilitation will bring both pump stations up to standard. <br />The bid opening was held on April 30, 2003, and a total of ten bids were received, <br />which are summarized below. <br />No. Bidder <br />Pacific Infrastructure, Inc. - Pleasanton, CA. <br />1. McGuire and Hester — Oakland, CA <br />2. Clyde G. Steagall, Inc. — Loomis, CA <br />3. Anderson Pacific Engineering Const. Inc. — Santa Clara <br />4. John Clay General Engineering Contractor Inc. — <br />Hayward, CA <br />5. Trinet Construction, Inc. — San Francisco, CA <br />6. NCCI, Inc. — San Francisco, CA <br />7. SG Barber Construction Inc., Belmont, CA <br />8. Diamond Oaks Construction. — Concord, CA <br />9. Blocka Construction, Inc. — Fremont, CA <br />Average I <br />Bid Amount <br />Cannot Comvute <br />$608,900 <br />$614,9591 <br />$673,9001 <br />$679,899 I <br />$686,270 <br />$731,7001 <br />$739,6001 <br />$787,5161 <br />$829,3431 <br />$705,787 <br />Engineer's Estimate ........................ $750,000 <br />Unfortunately, the apparent low bidder, Pacific Infrastructure, Inc., made an error in <br />filling out the Proposal Form by leaving out one bid item. Staffs opinion is that this <br />omission results in a "material" defect of the bid because, without that price filled in, <br />-1- <br />