ITEM TITLE:
Approval of Contract with F & W Construction Co. Inc. for the Kelsey Dock Interpretive Center - Phase 1 project in the Amount of $2,728,168.00
SUBMITTED BY: Nathan Duval, Capital Facilities Director
FISCAL NOTES:
Expenditure Required: $2,728,168.00
Unencumbered Balance: 312-6400-49550 - $712,710.36 || 312-6400-49560 - $1,291,922.59 || 312-6400-58000 -$209,763.30 (Current Balance); $1,084,763.30 (Pending Revised Balance)
Funding Source: 312-6400-49550 - City Dock Info & Interpretive || 312-6400-49560 - Dock Improvement || 312-6400-58000 - City Contribution
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the Contract with F & W Construction Co. Inc, for the Kelsey Dock Interpretive Center - Phase 1 Project in the Amount of $2,728,168.00
SUMMARY STATEMENT:
The Kelsey Dock Interpretative Center Project bid closed on 4/10/18. The sealed bids included a qualifications packet to be scored as a percentage of the contract award. The bid price comprised 70 points and the qualification packet 30 points totaling 100 possible points available. Packets remained sealed until 4/13/18 where they were opened at the offices of ECI, inc. (project Architect) in Anchorage, Alaska. The evaluation committee included Nathan Duval, CoV Capital Facilities Director, Maria Kampsen, Alaska Testlabs, and Karen Zaccaro, ECI. Maria represented ATL as the contracted Construction Management firm for the project and Karen represented the Architect. All parties were familiar with the project and process and well qualified to perform the evaluation of the proposals. No one within the scoring committee had a financial interest in the firms proposing on the project and there is no real or perceived conflict of interest.
Each evaluator independently reviewed the proposals; bid packages remained un-evaluated until the qualification scoring was complete as to not bias the packet scoring based on price. After independent review, the committee collaboratively scored each proposal allocating points toward the 30 available for each firm. The 6 criteria evaluated were:
a. The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract;
b. Whether the bidder can perform the contract within the time specified, without delay or interference;
c. The character, integrity, reputation, judgement, experience and efficiency of the bidder;
d. The quality of performance by the bidder of previous contracts;
e. The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinances relating to the contract;
f. The sufficiency of the financial resources and ability of the bidder to perform the contract.
Points were allocated 0-5 per category where 0 equals unqualified or non-responsive and 5 equals highly qualified. Many contractors were tied in many categories.
F&W construction scored the highest based on the qualification packets received (26 points) followed by HS&G and Bore Tide Construction (20 points, tie). In addition to being the most qualified, F&W’s packet was also the most complete of the packets received.
Once qualification scores were tabulated, the bids were evaluated and tabulated (see attached bid summary). Based on the scoring set forth in the invitation to bid, F&W was the best value for the City for the base bid and all the additive alternate combinations.
Bids came in higher than anticipated and one can speculate as to why based on the current market conditions; however, all the bids were within very close margins and are believed to accurately reflect the cost of the project as presented in the contract documents.
If the desire of Council is to complete the entire scope of work, including all additive alternates, Staff recommends approving the contract with F&W for the amount listed above.