Exh 4BAGENDA ITEM #4B
NOVEMBER 11, 2002
,CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH
CITY COMMISSION MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Design/Build Relocation, Installation and Coating of
Elevated Storage Tank at Water Plant 2
Bid No. 0203-2
SUBMITTED BY: Donna Kaluzniak, CEP, Utility Director
DATE: November 4, 2002
BACKGROUND: Camp, Dresser & McKee's (CDM) Water Master Plan
recommended the addition of an elevated storage tank at Water Plant No. 2 (2301
Mayport Road) as part of the Capital Improvement Program. The purpose of the
tank would be to provide additional storage capacity and improve system
reliability.
Late in the budget process, the City received an offer from Mr. Wendell
McKinnon, Vice-Mayor of City of Kissimmee, to donate a 300,000-gallon
elevated tank located on his private property to the City of Atlantic Beach. The
tank was originally owned by the City of Kissimmee, but had been replaced with
a newer tank at a different location. Mr. McKinnon stated he would give the tank
to the City of Atlantic Beach provided the City pay for the cost of removing the
tank from his property and complete the removal prior to January 1, 2003. Mr.
McKinnon's willingness to give us the tank was due to the fact that, in his
opinion, Florida taxpayers had already paid for the tank once, so he wanted to
donate it to another municipality in Florida. The premise was that the City could
save a significant amount of money over the cost of installing a new tank at Water
Plant No. 2.
The City Commission expressed interest in the project, so City staffand their
tank consultant, HGTI, inspected the tank and found it to be in excellent
condition. In order to expedite the project to meet the tank removal deadline of
January 1, staff advertised the tank relocation as a design/build project.
Contractors were allowed to provide innovative ideas or alternatives. Similar to
several previous design/build projects, the contractors were directed to submit
technical proposals, which were scored by staffprior to receipt of bids. Bid
awazd is based on the lowest adjusted score, which is the base bid divided by the
technical score.
Four proposals were received on October 23, 2002, and were evaluated and
scored by staff. WPC Industrial Contractors described alternate options in their
proposal, but did not submit alternate proposals as directed in the RFP, therefore,
scoring for all of their alternates was based on the single proposal submitted.
AGENDA ITEM #4B
NOVEII'iBER 11, 2002
Bids were received on October 30, 2002 from three contractors with various
alternates as follows:
Contractor Classic Gruhn May, Gruhn WPC WPC WPC
Protective Inc. May, Industrial Industrial Industrial
Coatin s, Inc. Inc. Contractors Contractors Contractors
Description Relocate Relocate Provide Relocate Relocate Provide a
existing tank, existing tank, alternate existing tank, existing tank, new 300,000
includes. includes 500,000- includes includes ~ gallon tank
interior/exterior interior/exterior gallon interior/exterior interior/exterior '
blasting & blasting & used recoating only blasting &
recoatin recoatin tank (enca sulatin) recoatin
Base Bid $491,650 $593,273 $647,023 $508,000 $648,000 $676,000
Technical 59.00 89.34 89.67 85.01 85.01 85.01
Score
Adjusted 8333.05 6640.62 7215.60 5975.77 7622.63 7952.01
Score
The bidder with the lowest adjusted score was WPC Industrial Contractors, for
the alternate to relocate the existing tank, to include recoating only (encapsulating
the existing coating) on the interior and exterior of the tank, as opposed to
blasting and re-coating the tank.
BUDGET: Because Mr. McKinnon's offer was received so late in the budget
process, no funds were included in the FY 03 budget for this project. The
estimated cost from our tank consultant was under $350,000.
RECOMMENDATION: Because the bids received were much higher than the
estimated cost, and no funds are budgeted in the current fiscal year, staff
recommends rejecting all bids at this time, preparing a design for anew tank, and
budgeting funds for a new tank in a future fiscal year.
ATTACHMENTS: 1.
2.
3.
REVIEWED BY CITY M
Bid Tabulation Form
Technical Proposal Scoring Sheet
E-mail from HGTI recommending rejection of all
bids
2
AGENDA ITEM #4B
NOVEMBER 11, 2002
LL
(~ N
~ Z
O ~'
U~
zda.
UaZFW-
Q,17 ~
m f' 3 N
O
U ~ ~ N
~ Y ~
~ Z Z d
Z F- o
powo
U
U00
W ~
.~
O w
m_
zW
c~
w
a
°o
t~7
N
c~
0
0
m
0 0 0 0 0 '
~
N
'>
~ o
O 0
O 0
O 0
O >
~,
~~, c
N
O O O O 'n aA
U S V Y O ~ m ~4 : n
n- j~ p•~
.. ?~ X X X X X X X ~.,i M N m m ~t 1~: ~
~
C O
U
E
4
v.
~ N N ..:
r"
I; -, O
'
O
O O
O O
O O
O ;,
:' ~
m
N
A O
o
c a O
O
O O
O
O O
O
O O
O
O ~'~
+--
'::
_ nj
N
m
U 'S v e ~ '' o vo of m : , n
? ~ C
> Q Q X X X X X X X X . •" ; W N ~ ~ ; ~,~ " O
h
C O
. U a i ~
o
c O
O O
O O
O o
O {
- n
n
t6 0 K
~~• O
O O
O O
O O
O ''
'" n
m
U S U o
~ X p c _
~ O v1 f7 YD ; h
Q, N N
? ~
? ~ C ~~
~
~ • ~
° X X X X X X X X . <
N N m
<
N 0
4Y
N - O
If1
C O
. ~
~ ~ W
U c +
e
`e
- ° o
0 0
0 o
0 'c
,:
.~. o
m
~ ~ w
o o ai ai ~
n n
l6
(7 '~ •
-• O Y '. ~
1
+~ N N
N m
M Of
YD
o
e
", ,
.
4 •
o
c O
O O
O O
O =`.
`;' N
U
C o
w e
'~~
~
O
N
P7
t7 -
:if;+:
'
~ ~p
p
L a o • n N !~
'F v ~p
L7 ~ • `X XX X XX XX "~}•~ Nl ' m
C ;'.~`j m ~
N p
j
N d`'.
yp.' Qf
k~
,.y `_~
,c.;
c o O ~ u~ p
o - O O
y~ c
'~ S 'o "'''
X' o o m m ~~;,; o ~
X XX X X XX ', o vi m o. m
UaU ~~
~" N N y !.' N
µ:r
a:
y Cf '
Y.~ ~ £
%r 1- O
~~~ '
~
7 u ~
~ h ;
'~ ~
~ J
L 'd.
~ U
~.. , ~~'
~
<,.' h U
Z
O m
,~ ,
,
~~.; U <
.
; Q
w
S
~
~ c
m
E v
aCi
J W ,.
'
O ,
::
'. O
°' U
H
.~ m N v F.. ~ ,' O
W
~ °i ~ U °
`~ ~ a0 4 w
~ E
ar ~ W" . U ^
m
_ t
U E ti
m cm ' c "
U <<
[~ ~
: _
U ~
m O O tU0
. .U U
o `.. ~
O
~ ~ ,, `,
:
~..., W J
~ Q
m o
` .
a m ; .
, a
c
'c ~
,n a o
~ ~? o E ~ m
v ~
a c a?
~ ;` !
~ o,
cY v
o
'~ '
C V m C m `~ Q '7 H ~ ~, ~ LL W Ir
~n
. O
c
' m
m m
~ ~
~•1 f~ m
~ ~ v
2 J ',
~ (~. fn ~.
W .. d
C
C
~ C $ LL
m C ;
" w LL J
~
Q ' V
~~ l W
U
mO C
in O ¢ t+ m p ° N
U ~
~
- ' a
Q
~n U rn -
- : i a
AGENDA ITEM #4B
NOVEMBER 11, 2002
Z
O
H
a
U
O
J
W
0 0
~ Z
m ~,,,,,
Z Z
C7 Q
~ J
w °-
N W
~ ~
M Q
O
CV
O ~
Z
~Y
. Z
ma
~~
oW
~ c~
~Q
(¢ ~
Q.
-~ W
U J
W
= Q
U ~
W
E.... Z
CL~ Q
Q O
W
Oa
~~Z
ZO
Q J
~ J
Q
~ ~
W ?
c
0
+~ ~
~ O
O O
O 'a'
C7 h
<D r
O r
O
U
~ ~
~ O
O
O
O
O
W
It
~. ~ m '
U 47 e
1 O° ~
U to O
~
C~D
M _
GO
t~O
4 ty ~ f!7 r' O ~.j ,~, N
O. ~" X r r r r r
U IC
~
~ II
m
_ _
E\
.
°O O
~O O
O O
O o
O
~
C~D
X
O v ~ O O pj O
x
a. ~
C ~ II
o = ~,
o
•V ~ lCC ~
`~
V lC'1 O
O ti
CD ti
tp M
C9
M.
_~o.r
i ~M N ~ o 0 0
~ ~ R r M P') C7 M
t0 '~
O II
d
~~ ~.
O
U O
M
M
h
fD
ti
~p
ti
O
~
d 0
t N
~ N
O
t0
~D
t(j (D
U ~.. x r. r r r r
~
~
c '
~ •
~
~ "O U u
~
L O d
o
V~ 'Q o ~'
O
U O
I~
O M
M
O
O
~
CD
~
O ~OL..N ~N ~ ~ O ti h
a .° .«..
p ~ r r r r
~
Q~
C C f9 ~ ~p ~
V
Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L.. ~~ N L..
LL U ' O) ~ u7 ~ ~p ~ C U y C U (O ~
~~ .C
io
o C Q
L o C` O
L a~ n f`0 O
U ci ~° E O
(..) ~
o
m
~aU c ` a
~~. ` Q o
~~a CL. o~
~Ua a 0~ 0
~UQa
C
(ll
C
O
E
a
~~
Z o
U
_~
L ~
(0 ~
Q1
Y L
(~ ~
C ~
N
~ O.
CB ~
C ~
C ~
O ~
~ ~
~ ~
.fl L
•~ ~"'
.._. U
cB a~
N ~
a~
a~ ~-
^~^,,
W
CB p
~ ~
O ~
a.
~ L
~~
AGENDA ITEM #4B
NOVEMBER 11, 2002
Kaluzniak, Donna
From: Tanklnspection@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 2:41
70: Kaluzniak, Donna
Subject: Re: Bid form
DONNA;
FOR NOW...I THINK WE SHOULD INVITE THE THREE MAJOR NEW TANK COMPANIES TO BID IN JAN OR
FEB ON A NEW THUNDRED FIFTY TO THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND GALLON E~Vi'.
THE BIDS ON THE OLD TANK ARE AT LEAST TWICE AS MUCH AS WHAT I HAD FIGURED ON.
FOR NOW IT MAY BE BEST TO SEARCH OUT AND GET SOME HARD NUMBERS FROM
COMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS AND PROCEED WITH A PROPOSAL OR BID.
H. GREENE
11/4/2002