HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-08-04 - Agendas - Final a y
ARKANSAS WATEMEWER COMMITTEE AGENDA
Meeting Date of August 1, 2005
COMMITTEE: Chairman Kyle Cook; Alderman: Lioneld Jordan, Bobby Ferrell, Robert
Reynolds
COPY TO: Mayor Dan Coody, Sondra Smith, ry umas, Steve Davis, Susan
Thomas, Tim Conklin, Jeremy Pat , Petrie
FROM: David Jurgens, WaterMastewater
A meeting of the Fayetteville Water and Sewer Committ is plan d for August 4, 2005, at
5:00 PM, Room 326, Fayetteville City Hall. The topics pr posed for discussion at the
committee meeting include:
1. West Side Treatment Plant Action Plan.
a. Review of existing bids and related laws, per the attached memorandum.
Concurrent actions:
b. McGoodwin, Williams and Yates Bid Repackaging.
c. Construction Management Process per attached state law (act 1889 of 2005)
d. Treatment Process Evaluation. Evaluate alternative design solutions that can meet
regulatory and permitted requirements and be integrated into the current basic plant
design. See attached memorandum.
2. WSIP Revised Cost Summary. The attached spreadsheet identifies the most current
cost estimates for the entire WSIP. This revised estimate takes into account lessons learned
from the West Side plant bid and updated steel, concrete, labor, and other market inflationary
costs. This estimate shall be updated and published quarterly until all WSIP elements have
been bid and awarded.
3. Hamesting Sewer Basin Update. A status update on the Hamestring sewer basin
action plan.
W-S committee 4 Aug 05.doc
war. -
Tayve
i le
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
TO: Fayettevil Sewer Committee
THROUGH: Dan C y r��
FROM: Stephen Davis, FIS Dire for
DATE: August 2, 2005
SUBJECT: Contracting Options — WSIP
The City has two contracting options available for the remaining work phases on the
WSIP: sealed bid and construction management. Construction management, as defined
by Arkansas law, is contracting with a firm to construct a project fully designed by a
separate licensed architect or engineer. Both options require the City to advertise, select
and contract for architectural or engineering services and both options require the
contractor to have payment and performance bonding.
Below is a summarized listing of the requirements of each purchasing option.
Sealed Bid
1 . Bids are solicited on completed design drawing for projects in excess of$20,000.
2. City certifies funds for the project based on the engineer or architect's estimate.
3. Bids are opened and contracts are negotiated if low bid is within 25% of the funds
certified.
4. If the bids are greater than 125% of the funds certified the City must decide to
cancel the project or re-bid the project.
Construction Management (effective August 12, 2005)
1. The City identifies a project that is valued $2 million plus.
2. The City publishes its intention to receive written proposals on the identified
project for three (3) consecutive days in a local newspaper. Proposals are
received at least ten (10) days after the first advertisement.
3. Interested firms submit letters or resumes in response to advertisement.
4. Pre-selection committee consisting of at least three (3) members from the
municipality select no-more than five (5) applicants and schedule interviews.
5. A final selection committee composed of the pre-selection committee interviews
applicants and makes a formal recommendation to the Fayetteville Sewer
Committee and Fayetteville City Council.
West Plant
It is Staff interpretation of Arkansas Purchasing law that the bids opened on July 21 for
the West Plant cannot be accepted. The City Attorney's Office is reviewing the
applicable law and is expected to provide their interpretation. The City Attorney's
opinion is expected prior to the Committee meeting.
The City certified $48 million for construction of the bid package for the West Plant
based on the official engineer's estimate of probable cost. The low responsive bid was
outside of the 25% threshold. This bid was rejected because it is outside of the
negotiating threshold.
A representative of the low bidder stated, during Monday's Sewer Committee meeting,
that a state building services official opined the City could award the bid even though the
low bid is outside the negotiating threshold authorized by the Arkansas Code. Staff
contacted the state building services official. According to the state official, the
consulting engineer would need to state, in writing, that the official estimate was in error
and/or the City would have to state that sufficient funds exist to fund the project. It
should be noted that the City has never accepted any bids that have exceeded the legal
limit for negotiation.
Even if the engineer wrote that their estimate of probable cost was in error the City could
not award the bid because there is not enough money appropriated to fund the probable
remaining cost of the project.
Line work for the East-side was postponed after opening bids in mid-fall 2004 to provide
assurance that sufficient funds would exist for the West Plant and related west-side pipe
projects. The City has approximately $88.5 million of budgeted expenditures remaining
for this project. The engineers revised their estimate for the plant only to approximately
$57 million at the Fayetteville Sewer Committee meeting on August 1, the estimates for
Broyles Road and wet land construction remained at approximately $4.6 million, the
estimate for the west-side line work is $35.6 million, east-side line work is estimated
$18.8 (March 2005 estimate) and a project contingency for these construction phases of
$5.8 million for a total of $122.7 million. Based on the bids for the West Plant and
estimated cost for the line work the city cannot certify more than $48 million for the West
Plant without identifying additional funding for the project.
The City has four options for additional funds to complete this entire project:
1 . Use existing sewer revenues to fund a portion of the increased cost; and,
2. Use of revenue bonds paid for by with sewer revenues; and,
3. Use of sewer impact fees collected ($1 .7 million); and,
4. Use of proceeds from selling 35 acres at the West Plant site ($1 .0 million).
The timeline presented to the Sewer Committee established a bid award on October 4,
2005. Staff has reviewed both options in light of the October 4 bid award. The
construction management option can meet this timeline. The re-bid cannot meet the
October 4 date. Staff is in the process of confirming with Arkansas Soil & Water that
construction management is an option for the revolving loan fund.
ATTACHMENT: ACT 1989 of 2005
Copies:
Brenda Thiel, Alderman Ward 1
Dan Marr, Alderman Ward 2
Robert Rhoads, Alderman Ward 3
Shirley Lucas, Alderman Ward 4
Kit Williams, City Attorney
Sondra Smith, City Clerk
WSIP Team
Stricken language would be deleted from and underlined language would be added to the Iaw as it existed
prior to this session of the General Assembly.
Act 1989 of the Regular Session
1 State of Arkansas As Engrossed: 5 33 1 1 5 110 55 S3118105
2 85th General Assembly A Bill
3 Regular Session, 2005 SENATE BILL 925
4
5 By: Senator AItes
6 By: Representative Glidewell
7
8
9 For An Act To Be Entitled
10 AN ACT TO CREATE ALTERNATIVE NEGOTIATED
11 PURCHASING FOR MUNICIPALITIES ; AND FOR OTHER
12 PURPOSES .
13
14 Subtitle
15 AN ACT TO CREATE ALTERNATIVE NEGOTIATED
16 PURCHASING FOR MUNICIPALITIES .
17
18
19 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS :
20
21 SECTION 1 . Arkansas Code Title 14 , Chapter 58 is amended to add an
22 additional subchapter to read as follows :
23 14-58-1001 . Projects exceeding two million dollars .
24 (a) In the event funds from any sources for a municipal project , other
25 than revenues derived from a performance-based efficiency project, exceed two
26 million dollars ($2, 000, 000) , excluding the cost of land, the provisions of
27 this subchapter and all other provisions of the Arkansas Code governing
28 construction of public facilities , including, but not limited to the
29 provisions of §§ 22-9-201 through 22-9-213 at the election of municipalities
30 shall not be applicable to the projects if the selection and contracting
31 process set forth in this section is followed .
32 (b) ( 1 ) The selection procedures for the construction manager , general
33 contractor, architect , or engineer shall provide for solicitation for
34 qualified, licensed professionals to submit proposals .
35 (2) The procedures shall assure the design and completion of the
II`IIIII�IIIIpIIII�II�IIIIIIIIIIIII 03-18-200510:20 KLL009
As Engrossed: S3/15/05 S3/18/05 SB925
I project in an expeditious manner while adhering to high standards of design
2 and construction quality .
3 (3) The municipality shall:
4 (A) Publish notice of its intention to receive written
5 proposals three (3) consecutive days in a newspaper of local distribution;
6 (B) Allow a minimum of ten ( 10) working days from the
7 first date of publication for the professionals to send letters or resumes in
8 response to the newspaper advertisement ; and
9 (C) Provide additional means of notification, if any, as
10 the municipality shall determine is appropriate .
11 (c) ( 1 ) (A) A preselection committee, which shall be composed of at
12 least three (3) members from the municipality, shall review the proposals .
13 (B) The preselection committee shall select a maximum of
14 five (5 ) applicants and schedule interviews .
15 (C) The municipality shall notify the finalists of their
16 status .
17 (2) (A) The final selection committee shall be composed of the
18 members on the preselection committee .
19 (B) The final interviews shall be held at the time and
20 date as designated by the final selection committee .
21 (C) In selecting a general contractor, construction
22 manager, architect, or engineer , the municipality shall consider their
23 established criteria which shall include but are not limited to the
24 following:
25 (i) The experience of the professional or
26 professionals in similar projects ;
27 (ii) The record of the professional or professionals
28 in timely completion of the projects with high quality workmanship; and
29 (iii) Other similar matters to determine that the
30 professional or professionals will complete the project within the time and
31 budget and to the specifications set by the municipality.
32 (3) (A) The final selection committee shall make a formal
33 recommendation to its governing body of the professional or professionals
34 which it determines to be in the best interest of the municipality.
35 (B) Contracts for architectural, engineering, and land
36 surveying professional consultant services shall be negotiated on the basis
2 03-18-2005 10: 20 KLL009
As Engrossed: S3/15/OS S3/18/05 SB925
1 of demonstrated competence and qualifications for the type of services
2 required and at fair and reasonable prices without the use of competitive
3 bidding, and no rule or regulation shall inhibit the municipality' s authority
4 to negotiate fees for the services .
5 (d) ( 1 ) Construction contracts for the projects shall not be entered
6 into without a payment and performance bond in the amount of the contract and
7 any amendments thereto and shall provide for the manner in which the
8 construction shall be managed and supervised .
9 (2) All project architects and engineers shall be properly
10 licensed in accordance with the Arkansas State Board of Architects and the
11 Arkansas State Board of Engineers .
12 (3) The construction manager or general contractor shall be
13 properly licensed by the Contractors Licensing Board
14 (4 ) (A) All subcontractors on the project shall be properly
15 licensed by the Contractors Licensing Board.
16 (B) Any person who is not considered a contractor under $5
17 17-25- 101 through 17-25-105 may continue to perform subcontracting work under
18 the provisions of this subchapter.
19 (e) The funds may be represented in whole or in part by a written
20 pledge or commitment from a donor, provided that the municipality shall
21 assure itself of the financial stability of the donor to fulfill the pledge
22 or commitment .
23 (f) ( 1 ) All projects constructed pursuant to this section, to the
24 extent applicable , shall be in accordance and compliance with:
25 (A) Sections 17-38-101 through 17-38-105 regulating
26 plumbers ;
27 (B) Sections 17-33-101 through 17-33-106 regulating the
28 heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and refrigeration industry;
29 (C) The Fire Prevention Act, S 12- 13-101 et seg . ;
30 (D) Sections 12-80- 101 through 12-80-107 regarding
31 earthquake resistant design for public structure;
32 (E) Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility
33 Guidelines , 28 C.F.R. pt. 36 , App. A. adopted by the authority; and
34 (F) The minimum standards of the authority and criteria
35 pertaining to projects constructed under this section
36 (2) Notwithstanding anything in this section to the contrary,
3 03-18-2005 10:20 KLL009
As Engrossed: S3/15/05 S3118/05 SB925
1 the provisions of §§ 19- 11-801 , 22-9- 101 , 22-9- 103, 22-9- 104 22-9-213 §§
2 22-9-301 through 22-9-315 , §§ 22-9-401 through 22-9-405 §§ 22-9-501 through
3 22-9-505 , §§ 22-9-601 through 22-9-604 §§ 22-9-701-through 22-9-702 , and all
4 competitive bidding statutes shall remain in full force and effect and not be
5 affected hereby.
6 _3) This section shall not be construed to authorize a design-
7 build project contract .
8
9 /s/ Altes
10
11
12 APPROVED. 04/11/2005
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
.23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
4 03-18-2005 10:20 KLL009
ARKANSAS
Taye
OPERATIONS DIRECTOR
August 2, 2005
Mr. Jim Ulmer
McGoodwin, Williams, and Yates
909 East Rolling Hills
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
1
Dear Jim.-
i
Your presentation last night provided very good guidance to the Water and Sewer j
Committee.
The Committee appears to be moving toward either an acceptance of the current low bid
or rebid situation, depending upon the City Attorney's opinion.
Additionally, following last night's meeting, CH2MHil1 and Black and Veatch have
decided not to pursue offering a proposal to evaluate alternative solutions to the cost
dilemma created by your engineers' estimate.
However, as we discussed in our early team meeting some review of alternative scope
and methods is necessary in order to make certain that the changing inflationary
conditions have not altered the basic assumptions of the earlier value engineering
process. Additionally, with the upward cost movement of steel, cement, and labor,
alternative approaches to the treatment process may also provide a solution to the
ongoing sludge disposal issue.
CH2MHill and Black and Veatch were to provide this alternative analysis at no direct
costs. However, they did not perceive a strong enough interest to warrant their
involvement.
Therefore, within the scope of your present design contract MWY is requested to develop
a conceptual design replacing the currently designed treatment processing system with
the more environmentally advanced membrane bio-reactor technology. This conceptual
membrane bio-reactor design should be evaluated through a benefit/cost analysis against
the current design. This analysis should include all processes affected by either the
membrane bio-reactor system or the current design system. A discreet and identifiable
factor of the analysis should include an element that addresses the long-term operational
113 West Mountain
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Officephone - 479-575-8330
Fax - 479-575-8257
e-mail - gdumas@ci.fayetteville.ar.us
costs of composting the bio-solids produced by the membrane bio-reactor system versus
the current planned method of landfill disposal of sludge.
This conceptual design and benefit/cost analysis will be reviewed by others.
As you move forward, the separate elements of the traditional processing method need to I
be identified so that negotiations can deduct these costs prior to bid award and add
membrane bio-reactor processing if the b/c analysis is positive. If this is the direction
that we continue, then design would need to occur in a timely manner, after bid award
and before the contractor is ready to move to that construction phase.
The conceptual design and b/c analysis should be complete within 2 to 3 weeks.
If you have questions please call.
Sincerely,
I
Gary Dumas
}
Cc: David Jurgens
Steve Davis
Susan Thomas
Tim Conklin
Dan Coody
Fayetteville Water and Sewer Committee
s
f
113 West Mountain
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Office phone - 479-575-8330
Fax - 479-575-8257
c-mail - gdumas@ci.fiayettcvillc.ar.us
�eZ s
cc 0 0 Ch C) CO ' M 0 0 O M0 M M
OO MOI- OLO MOO O OO O O
LO P. O N O d C70 O 1' d LO r CO O
Qx 00 O LO 1— N O O O O It O CO
LO ti � ti O r N LO C`7 CA I r M 19t O
.. tC M LO r r N CO O
ry e_
�" t Ef3 Ei} EH Efl Eft
� 3 0 0 0 ' 0 0 ' 0 0 ' ' O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
zs; O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O 0 O O O O O O N N N
CO r r r 0 O 11' O O ti 1` I%-
Nr CO m 1— r O N O O 1- r-
06
00 d N ti LO u r r t0
F
a C
s, O
r
•1 .M�.`a�zti� O
�j ra .e 11i�
d
F
(a
C/) 0
C: `` CL
co
CD 0
r, 03
o
E pO eE d
0
0 DO
C 0 O .0 O 7
O N C iR of V O_ N
W O U B m co 0 j 0 V -0 Cl) 0 O
LL
OO 0 >co
a 2 J Q OO N CO E
N o 0 >+ c c� cu 0 3
7 U 0 .. O Cv C to 0O-� 0— N
O A-j ai o f U) .L CL O p o r
c 0 0 0 N 7 �-0 coN F- C
co N co c O O N 0 N
V
a O w w w w w a O ; g m H C9 F-