RM 03-21-75 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5. 01-D BUSINESS (Cont'd) 1) The low bid ($277,555.57) exceeded the engineer's estimate of $245,162.25, by a considerable amount, which is in violation of RHA 7209.1, Chapter 4, Section 3, Page 2, subparagraph 4. 2) The practice of reducing the unit price quantities in order to obtain a contract price lower than the price obtained by competitive bidding is unacceptable, and the only apparent action open at this point, to pro- ceed with the project, is to re- advertise Contract No. 1, with the scope reduced so that the low bid will be within the revised estimate. Mr. Brownell advised that he and Mr. Dan Lawson, with Lawson Associates, had attended a meeting with HUD officials, in Indianapolis, to attempt to find a way around the difficulty. HUD had orally indicated they might waive it and if it would not be waived, they might allow the engineers to file a new estimate, but neither was approved. What is being suggested today is to reject the three (3) bids received on Contract No. 1 and rescind conditional award to Arco, in amount of $240,322.63, as proposed. This contract was awarded subject to HUD ap- proval and Commission Legal Counsel approval. We did not get HUD approval. When this motion is made, we then are requesting another motion to have Commission authorization to re- advertise the Plaza Park Contract No. 1, with adver- tising dates of March 28 and April 4, 1975, with a bid opening date of April 11, 1975. Lawson Associates, as per their letter of March 20, 1975, have prepared the revised Plans and Specifications for this project to permit a rebidding. The recommendations for award of the bids will be presented to the Redevelopment Commission in meeting of April 18, 1975. The Chair stated that Mr. Brownell has worked hard to push the awarding of Contract No. 1 through, but HUD will not ap- prove it, but will accept the modification of the plans and specifications. We have set up a base contract and alternates to assure our being able to keep the project within the budget available and within the revised Engineer's estimate. The con- cern was stressed on the possibility of getting higher bids than prior, and Mr. Karl King, Chairman, River Bend Plaza Advisory Committee, inquired if we get higher bids if we would then lose the project? Mr. Brownell advised that we are very apt to get higher bids, but we are cutting the base bid and placing the alternates in separately, and then we can select the alternates that we can afford within our budget. This is the legal way we can go.