R2010-059 - 2010-04-26 RESOLUTION NO. R2010 -59
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND,
TEXAS, AWARDING A BID FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
ASSOCIATED WITH FIRE AND EMS STATION NO. 5.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PEARLAND, TEXAS:
Section 1. That the City opened bids for construction services associated with the
construction of Fire and EMS Station No. 5, and such bids have been reviewed and
tabulated.
Section 2. That the City Council hereby awards the bid to the Crain Group, in the
amount of $1,805,000.00.
Section 3. The City Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to execute a
contract for construction of Fire and EMS Station No. 5.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this the 26 day of April, A.D., 2010.
TOM REID
MAYOR
ATTEST:
e NG FING, ,/C n
't
Y SE ETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DARRIN M. COKER
CITY ATTORNEY
•
EXHIBIT "A"
SELECTION CRITERIA
DETERMINATION OF SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT
A. In determining the Selected Offeror, the Owner will evaluate the information derived from the
Offeror's (Contractor's) Qualification Statement required herein, the information submitted on
the Proposal Form, and other selection criteria including, but not be limited to the following:
Criteria Source Scoring Procedure Score Factor Total
1. Base Proposal Contractor to submit their Competitive Sealed 45 1 45
Proposal Form Proposals on the forms included in the Specification
Manual,Alternates proposed and Mark-up for Changes.
Low Price=45 pts. For Subsequent Proposer's,the low
Proposers price shall be divided by the Subsequent Proposer's
price to get a percentage(factor)that is multiplied by the score
to get the total.
2. Contractor's AlA 305 References are asked to rate the contractor 10 1 10
Reputation Reference responses from Project Owners and A/E's
on similar projects.
a. Reference questions on budget,schedule, reporting/
communications and responsiveness.
b. Record of Claims incidences and litigation
experiences over the past five years.
c. Reputation of Change Orders.
Responses are scored as follows:Excellent= 10 pts;
Very Good=8 pts;Average=5 pts; Fair=2 pts;
Poor=0 pts.
Points from multiple references are averaged
3. Experience AlA 305 Count number of similar projects in the Houston 10 1 10
(type and size) area that fall within a+/-25%range of the project budget.
a. Past experience on projects of similar scope,scale,
complexity and type.
b. References: if contractor brings appropriate resources
(personnel &equipment)to assure project completion
by contract target end dates.
Contractor earns one point for each project
up to a maximum of 10 points.
4. Maintenance References References are asked whether or not the schedule 5 1 5
of Schedule was met on their project
Responses are scored as follows:
Completed ahead of schedule overcoming uncontrollable
circumstances=5 pts,Completed ahead of schedule=4 pts
Completed on schedule=3 pts,Completed less than two weeks
behind schedule= 1 pt, Completed more than two weeks
behind schedule=0 pts
Points from multiple references are averaged
0820-00200
•
Criteria Source Scoring Procedure Score Factor Total
5. Project Team Proposal Resumes for Project Manager and Superintendent 36 0.2778 10
Information will each be evaluated and points given to the team for the
following:
(resumes) j Time in business(for each individual): 10+yrs=4 pts;
8-9 yrs=3 pts;5-7 yrs=2 pts;2-4 yrs= 1 pt;
and less than 2 yrs=0 pts.
Number of similar projects completed(for each individual):
4+=4 pts; 3=3 pts;2=2 pts; 1= 1 pt;0=0 pts.
Time with the Company(for each individual )5+yrs=5 pts;
4 yrs=4 pts;3 yrs=3 pts;2 yrs=2 pts; 1 yr= 1 pt;and
less than 1 yrs=0 pts.
Number of projects completed as a team:5+= 5 pts;4=4 pts;
3=3 pts;2=2 pts; 1=1 pt;and less than 1 =0 pts.
6. Approach Proposal The Project Plan or Approach proposed. 5 1 5
Information a. Quality and clarity of proposer's workplan including
schedule, logistics/phasing plan, understanding of the
work and sensitivity to ongoing operations in the
Community.
Responses are scored as follows:
Excellent=5 pts;Very Good=4 pts;Average=3 pts;
Fair=2 pts; Poor=0 pts.
7. Proposed Proposal The Major Subcontractors proposed by Contractor. 5 1 5
Subcontractors Information a. Quality of Major Subcontractors listed.
b. Experience of Major Subcontractors with Projects
of similar scope and size.
c. References: if Subcontractors bring appropriate
resources(personnel and equipment)
to assure project completion by contract target end
dates.
Responses are scored as follows: Excellent=5 pts;
Very Good=4 pts;Average=3 pts; Fair=21 pts;
Poor=0 pts.
Points from multiple references are averaged.
8. Safety A/A 305 Contractors to provide the Owner with their 5 1 5
Rating Experience Modifier Rate(EMR).
Those with EMR of 0.50 or less=5 pts;
EMR of 0.51 —0.85=4 pts; EMR of 0.86—0.99=3 pts;
EMR greater than 1.00=0 pts.
a maximum of 5 points.
9. Warranty References References are asked to rate the contractor. 5 1 5
Responses are scored as follows: Excellent=5 pts;
Very Good=4 pts;Average=3 pts; Fair=2 pts;
Poor=0 pts.
Points from multiple references are averaged
Total Possible Score 100
0820-00200
-, :. EXHIBIT B
pE// rfgq' Dv, at PEARLAND. COMPETITIVE SEALED PROPOSAL QUALIFICATIONS SCORESHEET
e .o' y
Fire & EMS Station #5, City of Pearland Bid No.: 0310-28
1. Base Proposal.
2. Contractor's Reputation: References in the Houston and Texas area are asked to rate the contractor.
3. Experience: Number of similar Projects in the Houston and Texas area that fall within a +/-25% range of the
project budget.
4. Maintenance of Schedule: References in Houston and Texas area are asked whether or not the schedule was
met on their project.
5. Project Team: Resumes for Project Manager and Superintendent will each be evaluated and points given to
the team.
6.Approach: The Project Plan and Approach proposed.
7. Proposed Subcontractors: The Major Subcontractors proposed by the Contractor.
8. Safety Rating: Contractors to provide the Owner with their Experience Modifier Rate (EMR).
9.Warranty: References in the.Houston and Texas area are asked to rate the contractor.
1. 2. 3. .4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Total
Contractor 45 pts. 10 pts. 10 pts. 5 pts. 10 pts. 5 pts. 5 pts. 5 pts. 5 pts. 100 pts.
The Crain Group 45.00 10.00 8.00 3.75 3.06 5.00 4.75 4.00 5.00 88.56
GRG Commercial 42.34 5.00 10.00 1.75 0.28 2.50 2.50 3.00 2.50 69.87
Teal Construction 41.53 9.00 10.00 3.50 2.99 4.75 4.00 4.00 4.75 84.52
EXHIBIT C
1''t4 PROPOSAL TABULATION SHEET
.'- w Proposal Date/Time: Thursday,April 8,2010 at 2:00PM
.Irl1a'�°` .� Fire &EMS Station#5
I�LAN,Q, City of Pearland
nt 4 %F*'"'• COP Project No.F020101
T. 1 g9 a. Bid No.:10310-28
Davidson Dean Douglas The Crain Group GRG Construction Teal Construction Construction Masters Bass Construction Palmer Construction Urban Constructors g Stor
Construction,Inc. Development Consi
:5% Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
}
:MENT 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 I-3 1,2,and 3 1,2,
tractor's Information and No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
a Document A305) (Non-responsive Bid) Yes Yes Yes }
if stated different from Bid 206 220 210 270 Not Stated(330 days) 300 285 270
210
story Pre-Proposal Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes '
Yes Yes }
.AL:(Price) $1,750,000.00 $1,860,000.00 $1,896,000.00 $1,943,000.00 $1,945,000.00 $1,969,000.00 $1,975,000.00 $1,984,351.59 $1,999,000.00 $1,99!
I:Natural Gas Generator $55,000.00 $14,000.00 $26,000.00 $44,000.00 $18,750.00 $13,000.00 $39,900.00 $84,500.00 $25,000.00
$63,1
$1,805,000.00 $1,874,000.00 $1,922,000.00 $1,987,000.00 $1,963,750.00 $1,982,000.00 $2,014,900.00 $2,068,851.59 $2,024,000.00 $2,06:
Davidson Dean Douglas Stor
The Crain Group GRG Construction Teal Construction Construction Masters Construction,Inc. Bass Construction Palmer Construction Urban Constructors Development Consi
nt Low Proposal
EXHIBIT C
- PROPOSAL TABULATION SHEET
,<y Proposal Date/Time: Thursday,April 8,2010 at 2:00PM
4;1; Fire&EMS Station#5
RAN a City of Pearland
COP Project No.F020101
r �
T" t p9 Bid No.:10310-28
Bartlett Cocke General Civil Concepts Triad
J.E.Dunn Pillar&Strong,Inc. Hull&Hull,Inc. Contractors Construction,LLC Dycor,Inc. Herring Construction Stewart Builders The Gonzalez Group
Cons
':5% Yes Yes Yes No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid Nc
°MENT 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3 1,2,and 3
1-3
dractor's Information and Yes Yes Yes
A Document A305)
if stated different from Bid 206 220 210
iatory Pre-Proposal Yes Yes Yes
SAL:(Price) $2,030,000.00 $2,086,000.00 $2,250,826.00
1:Natural Gas Generator $38,500.00 $85,000.00 533,786.00
$2,068,500.00 $2,171,000.00 $2,284,612.00
Bartlett Cocke General Civil Concepts Triad
J.E.Dunn Pillar&Strong,Inc. Hull&Hull,Inc. Contractors Construction,LLC Dycor,Inc. Herring Construction Stewart Builders ' The Gonzalez Group Cons
nt Low Proposal
10
ARCHITEcTs
April 16, 2010
Jennifer Lee
Project Manager
City of Pearland
3519 Liberty Dr.,
Pearland, TX 77581
RE; Project#0824
Pearland Fire and EMS-Station#5
Dear Ms. Lee:
On April 8, 2010, the City of Pearland received thirteen (13) proposals for the referenced
project. The proposals were evaluated for price and qualifications. Ms ourrecommendation
that the Crain Group be awarded the contract for their bid amount of s1,70,000.00,plus
$55,000 for the Add Alternate,of'a,natural,gas emergency.generator for a total of$1,805,000.00.
The proposals provided by the remaining 12 contractors ranged in priced from $1,860,000.00 to
$2,250,£326. Detailed qualifications were requested and received from the lowest 6 proposers:
The information collected was reviewed and several references checked on each firm. After a
thorough review, we think that the Crain Group has the best overall price and value for the City.
In addition to the Crain Group's lowest bid price and good qualifications, they are also a
Pearland company,
If you have any questions or require additional information, please call me.
Sinderely,
HALL BARNUM LUCCHESI ARCHITECT
Utb R4'1 0.1 UtWA—
Susan Dieterich, RA, LEED AP
HALL BARNUM LUCCHESI ARCHITECTS
3701 Kirby Drive Suite 1166 Houston.Texas 77098-3916 713 621 7581 713 623 8258 Fax www.hbl-architec1s corn