MEMORANDUM TERESA MCCLISH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GEOFF ENGLISH, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

Transcription

1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: BY: CITY COUNCIL TERESA MCCLISH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GEOFF ENGLISH, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS MATT HORN, CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, MATERIALS TESTING, AND LAND SURVEYING DATE: RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council approve and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute Agreements for Consultant Services to: 1) Earth Systems Pacific; Pavement Inc.; and Advantage Technical Services Inc. for materials testing services; 2) ; Inc.; and MNS Engineers Inc. for land surveying services; 3) Filippin Inc.; MNS Engineers Inc.; Water Systems Consulting Inc.; Lenhardt Inc.; and Inc. for construction management services; 4) Omni Means Solutions; ; ; Water Systems Consulting Inc.; Michael K Nunley and Associates; Eikhof Design Group; Lenhardt Inc.; and North Coast Inc. for civil engineering services; 5) Direct staff to return to Council prior to contract term completion with either contract extension of up to two years or award of new agreements; and 6) Authorize staff to issue purchase orders for consultant services if the proposed cost is within the City Council approved project or service budget. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: No costs are associated with these contract awards. Cost will be incurred for specific project and services in compliance with City Council approved budget. BACKGROUND: The use of on-call consultants has been found to be an effective tool in the delivery of City projects and services. The current list of on-call civil engineering consultants was established in 2012 and those agreements will expire on February 28, In order to update these services, several processes need to be followed to successfully comply with codes and requirements regulating government entities. Process Requirements In the and portions of local government, the most common contracts issued are for construction work or professional support services. Either the Public Contract Code or the Government Code typically governs the procurement of Item 11.f. - Page 1

2 AWARD CONSUL TANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE2 these services. The Public Contract Code is one of the primary governing codes for construction contracts also defined as "Public Works Contracts". The Public Contract Code defines "Public Works Contracts" as: "Public Works Contract," as used in this part, means an agreement for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind. Public Works Contracts are advertised and awarded to responsible contractors that furnish the lowest cost responsive bid. The intent of the Public Contract Code is to establish a framework for Public Contracts to be issued and administered that provides consistency, encourages a competitive environment, and obtains the highest value work for the lowest cost. This method of procurement works best when all conditions are known, plans are clear, specifications are consistent and uniformly applied. Professional design service contracting is governed by the Government Code Section 4526 which states: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, selection by a state or local agency head for professional services of private architectural, landscape architectural, engineering, environmental, land surveying, or construction project management firms shall be on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. In order to implement this method of selection, state agency heads contracting for private.architectural. landscape architectural, professional engineering, environmental, land surveying, and -construction project management services shall adopt by regulation. and local agency heads contracting for private architectural. landscape architectural. professional engineering, environmental. land surveying. and construction project management services may adopt by ordinance, procedures that assure that these services are engaged on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications for the tvpes of services to be performed and at fair and reasonable prices to the public agencies. Furthermore, these procedures shall assure maximum participation of small business firms, as defined by the Director of General Services pursuant to Section In addition, these procedures shall specifically prohibit practices which might result in unlawful activity including, but not limited to, rebates, kickbacks, or other unlawful consideration, and shall specifically prohibit government agency employees from participating in the selection process when those employees have a relationship with a person or business entity seeking a contract under this section which would subject those employees to the prohibition of Section " The intent of this Code is to obtain competent and qualified consultants to complete professional services. Competent and qualified desigq professionals can typically Item 11.f. - Page 2

3 AWARD CONSUL TANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE3 provide high quality plans and specifications but can also guide staff, commissions, stakeholders and leadership when making decisions about how to use the City's limited resources. Based on this Government Code's guidance, one methodology that has worked well is to establish an "on-call" list of qualified consultants to assist in completing some of the City's required professional services work. On-Call List Establishment In order to establish a list of on-call consultants, the first step is to prepare and publicly advertise a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). The request should establish the means in which the consultant's qualifications will be measured. The consultants interested in responding the City's request will then prepare a Statement of Qualifications (SQQ) that describes the consultant's qualifications and past experience. Staff then evaluates and ranks the SOQs based on the advertised criteria, and makes award recommendations to City Council. Award recommendations are based on numeric rankings. The quantity of contracts awarded are selected to provide redundancy in available service but at the same time to limit the number of consultants selected to increase the likelihood that all consultants will complete some level of work for the City. On-Call List Use Once an on-call list of consultants is established, a request for proposal is prepared and furnished to qualified consultants when the need arises for services. The consultants will then prepare a proposal of services that outline the tasks that are necessary to be completed and costs based on billing rates established in the consultant's proposal. These proposals are then evaluated and the lowest cost proposal that completes the necessary work items is selected, a purchase order is issued, and the consultant then schedules and completes the work. This methodology works well since the consultant's qualifications have already been determined, all the terms and conditions of the contract are in place, and the consultant's insurance information is on record. Background This effort is undertaken to replace an existing on-call consultant list that was established in At that time, staff distributed Request for Qualifications to nine (9) qualified engineering consulting firms. On February 7, 2012 five (5) proposals were received and evaluated by staff. Staff recommended that The and Water Systems Consulting (WSC) receive contracts. On October 9, 2012 Council authorized the award of contracts to WSC and the. On November 1, 2012 the City entered into an agreement with the and Water Systems Consulting to provide on-call engineering services to support City needs. The original contract agreement term length was established at two (2) years. On November 25, 2014 Council authorized a three (3) month extension to the Wallace Group and WSC contracts to provide continued services while staff prepared and issued updated RFQs. Item 11.f. - Page 3

4 AWARD CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE4 ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Outreach In order to provide the City with the greatest diversity of consultants and make this process highly competitive, staff completed outreach work to notify consultants of the City's upcoming RFQs. In addition to this outreach work, the RFQs were made available on the City's website for public review. The following companies were notified of the upcoming work by either phone call, , or in conversations concerning other unrelated work. 4Leaf Inc. Advanced Technical Services Inc. AECOM AMG and Associates, Inc. AT Geosystems Advantage Technical Services, Inc Segur Consulting Benards Dokken Diversified Project Services International Dyer Earth Systems Pacific Eikhof Design Group Filippin Inc. Flowers and Associates Inc. Garing Taylor and Associates Hollenbeck Consulting Joann Head Lenhardt Inc. Michael Baker International Michael K Nunley and Associates MNS Engineers Inc. Moore Twinning Associates Inc. North Coast Inc. Omni Means Solutions Pavement Inc. Rick Company RRM Design Group Vali Cooper & Associates, Inc Vanir Inc. Walsh Water Systems Consulting Inc. Wood Rodgers Inc. Qualifications Received and Evaluation Process On December 8, 2014 RFQs for,, and Materials Testing were issued. By January 9, 2015 the City received SOQs from the following companies: Enaineerina Advanced Technical Services Inc. AECOM Dokken Diversified Project Service International Eikhof Design Group Filippin Inc. Garing Taylor and Associates Manaaement 4Leaf Inc. Advanced Technical Services Inc. AMG and Associates Inc. Filippin Inc. Flowers and Associates Inc. Hollenbeck Consulting Lenhardt Inc. Item 11.f. - Page 4

5 AWARD CONSUL TANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGES Enaineerina Hollenbeck Consulting Lenhardt Inc. Michael K Nunley and Associates MNS Engineers Inc. North Coast Inc. Omni Means Solutions Rick Company RRM Design Group Walsh Water Systems Consulting Inc. Wood Rodgers Inc. Survevina AT Geosystems Dorman Project Services Inc. Diversified Project Service International Joann Head MNS Engineers Inc. North Coast Rick Company RRM Design Group Manaaement MNS EnQineers Inc. North Coast Omni Means Solutions Rick Company Valli Cooper and Associates Inc. Vanir Inc. Water Systems Consulting Inc Materials Testina Advanced Technical Services Inc. Earth Systems Pacific Moore Twinning Inc. Pavement Inc. The City received fifty-three (53) separate SOQs from thirty-two (32) different companies. The number of SOQs received and the qualifications of the consultants are impressive. Each SQQ was received and ranked by three to four City staff based on the following publicly advertised criteria: 1. Understanding of the work involved in completing requested service; 2. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications of proposed staff; 3. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services; and 4. Ability to respond quickly to work requests. Based on staff's review, the following table describes the consultant's average ranking, area of work, services available, and staff's award recommendation. Item 11.f. - Page 5

6 AWARD CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE6 Company Category Ranking Area of Practice Earth Systems Pacific Pavement Inc. Advantage Technical Services Inc. Moore Twining Inc. MNS Engineers North Coast Rick Company RRM Design Group Joann Head Surveyor Diversified Project Service International Dorman Project Services Inc. AT Geosystems Filippin Inc. MNS Engineers Inc. Water System Consulting Inc. Lenhardt Inc., Rick Company Advantage Technical Services Materials Testing Materials Testing Materials Testing Materials Testing Award Recommended 37.3 Geotechnical Yes 34.0 Pavement Yes 30.7 Coatings Yes 28.7 Geotechnical No 34.5 Full Service Yes 33.8 Full Service Yes 33.7 Full Service Yes 33.5 Full Service No 33.3 Full Service No 33.0 Full Service No 32.3 Full Service No 32.0 Full Service No 32.0 Full Service No 31.3 Full Service No 27.8 Full Service No 35.3 Full Service Yes 35.0 Full Service Yes 34.7 Water & Sewer Yes 34.7 Storm water Yes 34.3 Full Service Yes 34.2 Full Service No 33.3 Full Service No 32.3 Full Service No 32.3 Coatings No Item 11.f. - Page 6

7 AWARD CONSUL TANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE7 Company Category Ranking Area of Practice Hollenbeck Consulting Vaniar Inc. Omni Means Solutions North Coast Inc. Flowers and Associates, Inc. Valli Cooper and Associates, Inc. 4Leaf Inc. AMG and Associates Inc. Omni Means Solutions Water Systems Consulting Michael K Nunley and Associates Eikhof Design Group Lenhardt Inc. North Coast Inc. RRM Design Group Rick Company MNS Inc. Diversified Project Service International Filippin Inc. Wood Rogers Incorporated AECOM Manaoement Enaineering Engineerino Enoineerino Award Recommended 31.7 No 31.7 Full Service No 30.7 Full Service No 30.7 Full Service No 30.0 Full Service No 29.7 Full Service No 29.0 Full Service No 26.3 Full Service No 27.5 Traffic Yes 27.1 Full Service Yes 26.8 General Yes 26.8 Water & Sewer Yes 25.8 Water & Sewer Yes 24.6 General Yes 24.5 Storm water Yes 24.5 General Yes 24.4 General No 24.3 Full Service No 23.9 Full Service No 23.5 Full Service No 23.3 General No 23.1 Full Service No 23.0 Full Service No 21.9 Full Service No Item 11.f. - Page 7

8 AWARD CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGES Company Category Ranking Area of Practice Advantage Technical Services Inc. Hollenbeck Consulting Engineerinq Walsh Engin~ering Enqineering Dokken Garing Taylor Associates* *Denotes non-compliant proposal submitted Award Recommended 21.8 Coatings No 21.5 No 20.8 General No 20.5 Roads No NA General No The intent of the award recommendations is to provide the depth and breadth of services needed. Maintaining multiple consultants in a given work area provides redundancy of services and increases the likelihood of receiving competitive proposals for a specific project. The quantity of contracts awarded are selected to provide redundancy in available service, but at the same time to limit the number of consultants selected to increase the likelihood that all consultants will complete some level of work for the City. Increasing the number of contracts awarded might decrease the likelihood that consultants participate in future RFQ processes. The level of effort to complete this RFQ I SQQ process is large. On-Call Use and Duration Once these agreements are in place and a need arises, staff will prepare a project specific request for proposals from the consultants. The consultants will review the request and provide a proposal for work activities and associated cost. Staff will evaluate the proposed work plan, cost and then select the lowest cost proposal that meets the City's needs. If the proposal cost is within the City Council approved project or service budget, the City will issue a purchase order for this work and provide direction to the consultant to proceed with work. Once the consultant begins work, the contract period will not expire until the consultant has completed the purchase order work. While the term length of these agreements are three (3) years, for example if a purchase order is issued for work that will take six (6) months to complete and the contract period expires (3) three months into this purchase order's work, there is no value to the City to restart this work with another consultant. The highest value of fund expenditures will be had by allowing the consultant to complete this work. The term length of these agreements is three (3) years. While staff is not recommending any greater length of time currently, staff recommends revisiting the contract term length in approximately thirty (30) months. The work effort for all parties Item 11.f. - Page 8

9 AWARD CONSUL TANT SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, PAGE9 to establish the list of on-call consultants is considerable. In thirty (30) months, if the Council, staff, consultants and residents are satisfied, staff would recommend extending the agreement length. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: Approve staff's recommendations; Do not approve staff's recommendations; or Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Approving these agreements and process will continue to allow the City to provide high quality services and projects within a reasonable time-period. The on-call firms will develop, over time, a better understanding of the City's procedures, practices, and expectations ultimately enhancing efficiency and product delivery. Working with a new firm each time results in lost efficiencies. Design consistency and speed will be improved, potentially resulting in fewer plan reviews because the on-call firms will better know specific City design preferences and requirements. Cost savings benefits will be generated because staff will not have to produce and widely distribute request for proposals, evaluate submitted proposals, select firms, and prepare contracts and Council reports for multiple projects and consultant needs over the terms of the on-call services agreements. Establishment of these on-call service agreements does not preclude the City from obtaining consultant services through the formal Request for Proposals (RFP) process for specific project needs, specialty work, or grant requirements. DISADVANTAGES: None known at this time. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Environmental review is not required for these agreements. Each underlying project will have comprehensive environmental review and clearance. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted in front of City Hall on Thursday, February 5, The Agenda and staff report were posted on the City's website on Friday, February 6, No public comments were received. Item 11.f. - Page 9

10 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Item 11.f. - Page 10