Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHANGE ORDER - BID - 7426 TRANSFORT MAINTENANCE FACILITY EXPANSION (4)9� Change Order No. 3 PROJECT TITLE Tranfed Melnieneae Fecllity Erpana on CONTRACTOR: Heath Construction BID NUMBER: 7420 DESCRIPTION: 1. Reason for change: Incorporation of Pricing Change Request (PCR) #8 Into the Contract. 2. Description of change: PCRXI - Provide a Continental Systems access control system for the entire handing 3. Change In contract costa: $25,106.10 4. Change In contract time: 0 Days ORIGINAL CONTRACT COST $2.150.000.00 TOTAL APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS $1 D,044.07 TOTAL PENDING CHANGE ORDERS $24,268.07 TOTAL THIS CHANGE ORDER 425,100.10 TOTAL % OF THIS CHANGE ORDER TOTAL C.O. % OF ORIGINAL CONTRACT Z76% ADJUSTED CONTRACT COST $2,215,410.24 REVIEWED BY: QQ�v� e �(�_ = DATE: b / Z D/ 3 FbccfliiUsa Project Manager ACCEPTED BY:L±%-,'<=- DATE: Contractor's RepAsentatm REVIEWED BY: 1LDATE: / 3 Constnxllon Manager APPROVED BY. cc: Casracw PwdMlng Pr*d Fib System for Award Management Page 1 of 1 R. C. HEATH CONSTRUCTION CO. DUNS: 086341062 CAGE Code: 4LGA6 Status: Active Entity Information Entity Overview Name: R. C. HEATH CONSTRUCTION CO. Doing Business As: HEATH CONSTRUCTION CO Business Type: Business or Organization POC Name: None Specified Registration Status: Active Expiration Date:03/28/2014 Exclusions Active Exclusion Records? No SAM I System for Award Management 1.0 Note to all Users: This is a Federal Government computer system. Use of this system constitutes consent to monitoring at all times. 141 RACQUETTE DR FORT COLLINS, CO, 80524-3244 , UNITED STATES IBM v1.1016.20130614-1637 WWW3 https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/?portal:componentId=8db50911-803 7-43 be-8794-... 7/9/2013 �of t� Collins Independent Cost Estimate Date of Estimate: 27-Jun-13 Contract Type: Fixed Price Existing Contract or PO (Y/N): Yes Description Services (B): Provide a complete Continental Systems access control system complete with conduits, Superterms, server, cabling, card readers & rim cylinders for 2 storefront doors, card readers and electric strikes for 9 doors and one card reader for the main entrance gate and 6 latch protectors. I have obtained the following estimate from: Engineering or Techincal Estimate (performed by) - Ron Kechter/Dave Grice B Transfort Maintenance Facility Expansion Materials or Work Description Quantity Unit Unit Cost *** TOTAL Change Order #3 - PCR No. 8 Superterm & Associated Equipment 1 LS 7 8,000.00 8,000.00 HID Thinline II Card Readers 10 EA $ 425.00 $ 4,250.00 Electric Strikes 9 EA $ 600.00 $ 5,400.00 CIC Proximity Card Readers 2 EA $ 425.00 $ 850.00 Rim Cylinders for Storefront Doors 2 EA 1$1,690.00 $ 3,380.00 Latch Protectors 6 EA $ 50.00 $ 300.00 CaBle and Installation Subtotal 24,180.00 Bond @ 1% $ 241.80 ver ea Protit ° ota *** Unit Cost Based on Recent Experience & Pricing from Lock Depot Signature of Preparersa—".`' ' '`' may: MAX Field Construction Office 3000 South College Ave., Suite 201 Fort Collins, CO 80526 fcgov.com/maxconstruction Delivery by hand June 28, 2013 Ms. Erika Keeton, PE MAX Project Manager City of Fort Collins — Engineering Dept 281 N. College Ave. Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: MAX Bus Rapid Transit Project —Transfort Maintenance Facility Expansion 7426 Independent Cost Analysis — Change Order No. 3 Heath Construction Proposed Change Request #8 Heath Construction was requested to provide Proposed Change Request #8 in order to provide access control for the building. This was originally going to be an Owner furnished item, but in view of the need for placement of conduit and integration of this work with the Electrical Subcontractor it was decided to incorporate this work within this contract. Proposed Change Request #8 provides a complete Continental Systems access control system, which is the City's standard. This system will provide access control for 2 storefront entry doors, 9 hollow metal exterior doors and one entry gate, thereby providing security for the perimeter of the entire facility. The labor, materials and equipment costs proposed by Heath Construction were evaluated against an Independent Cost Estimate and are consistent with pricing for similar work. As such, I find the cost of this Proposed Change Request from Heath Construction converted into Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $25,106.10 to be reasonable for the required increase in scope. As such, I recommend acceptance of this additional cost to the contract. Ron Kechter Project Engineer City of Fort Collins Operational Services - Facilities Cc: job file Change Management Checklist ... �.te Reviewed Reference Initials Safety and Security EA Re-Eval Reviewed for compliance with 6/28/13 18 — This change enhances the RK Environmental Assessment overall security of the Transfort facility Reviewed for construction/safety impacts 6/28113 This work will follow all standard construction and safety practices RK Costs were determined to be in Independent cost estimate prepared 6/28/13 keeping with recent costs on RK similar work Reviewed for PCGA grant compliance 6/28113 Part Build Alternative Scope RK inncc luded in SCC 20.04 Reviewed for real estate impacts/needs 6/28/13 Construction is not in the right -of- way; City owned facility RK Reviewed for compliance with design criteria/ADA htta:lhwvw.access-board.00v/ada-aba/ada- 6/28/13 N/A RK standards-dot.cf n Heath construction Job: Project No. 12BOS31 - - " Pricing Change Request No. 8 Title: Card Reader Access - Back up tMem,erwn Project: Transfort To: Attn: Ron Kechter - .. City of Fort Collins - Facilities Management Originating Document: Oww Asquea 281 N. CollegeAve.. Originating Document Date: 6/1/2013 Fort Collins, CO 80524 - PCO Date: 6/20I2013 j DFSCRIPnON OF PROPOSAL ProAde card access and security for facility - .. . Rem Description Tvoo Oty Unit nit Labor Material I Equip Subcontractor Other Total 1 Colorado Doorways S.. 1.00 LS 0.00 0.00 0.00 23,685. 0.00 $ 23 685.00 2 S 1.00 Ea 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $ 3 S 1.00 - LF - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -. 0.00 $ 4 - - S 1.00 EA - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ 0.00 $ - 5 _. _. S 1.00. Ea - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $ 15- a 7 - - - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $ 8 _ _ 0.00 .. 0.00 0.00 0.00 -... 0.00 $ - 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 $ 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.00 S 11 ..:. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 S .. .. 12 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $ 13 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 $ 14 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 _ 0.00 $ 15 Additional General Condillons O 0.00 Days 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - 0.00 - - 0.00 $ - - - 16 GC Carpenter Labor L 0.00 hr 35.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. $ 17 GC Supervision - L 0.00 hr - 72.47 0.001 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 0. $ 18 GC ProactMana ment L 1 0.00 1 hr 1-- -- - - - 0.00 - 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 _ 0.00 -0. $ - 19 - - 0.00 0.00 ,..0.00 o. - 21 subtotal 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 605.00 0.00 s 23,685.00 23 Sales Tax NA % 0.00% 0.00 $ 24 Bond Premium O 23 685.D0 % 1.00% $ 236.85 25 Liability Insurance - O 23 685.00 % - 0.63% - - $. - 26 Builders Risk 1 O 1 23,685.00 % 1 0.39% - $.... - 28 Subtotal - 0.00 S 236.85 30 Labor Burden 1 0 1- _ -1 1 .0-06%1 0.00 $ - 32 - Subtotal. - - - - - 0.00 S - 34 Overhead O 1 23 685.00 " $ 1 3.00% - - - . 710.55 S 710.55. Profit O 1 23 685.00 - 2.00% - - - 473.70 $ 473.70 36 iSubtotal - - 0.00 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 1,184.25 Note: 0 Addteroi days of dine are requesled me result of thischange. . . Total Cost $ 25,tos.10 Issued By Reviewed ay: Approved Bin Paul L Ehrlich Jr., Project Manager Ron Kechter Project Architect Heath Construction City of Fort Collins Alter Ungle Massey. - oats Data Date - Title: 7428 Transfort Maintenance Facility Date: 7-9-13 CONTRACT CHECKLIST FOR NON-COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS (SOLE SOURCE) Checklist Item Contract File Comments Location 7) Independent Cost Estimate The City made and documented an YES independent cost estimate before receipt of proposals. 10) Unnecessary Experience and Excessive Bonding Unnecessary experience and excessive NO bonding requirements were not included in this solicitation or contract documents. 11) Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) If there is an apparent or potential OCI the solicitation contains provisions to eliminate or mitigate the conflict (e.g. by inserting a clause NO that prohibits the contractor from competing for the follow-on contract to the current design or research contact) and OCI Certification is submitted by the contractor. 12) Arbitrary Action There was no arbitrary action in the procurement process. (An example of arbitrary action is when award is made to NO other than the contractor who most satisfied all the City requirements as specified in the solicitation and as evaluated by staff. 13) Brand Name Restrictions Brand Name or Equal. When it is impractical or uneconomical to provide a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements of the property to be acquired, a "brand name or equal" description may be used to define the performance or other salient characteristics of a specific type of property. The City must identify the salient characteristics of the named brand that NO offerors must provide. When using a "brand name" specification, the City does not need to reverse -engineer a complicated part to identify precise measurements or specifications in order to describe its salient characteristics. FT A's "Best Practices Procurement Manual," (BPPM) contains additional information on preparation of specifications including examples with specific language. 14) Geographic Preferences The solicitation contains no in -State or local NO geographic preference except where Federal statutes mandate or encourage them. 15) Contract Term Limitation The contract period of performance for rolling stock and replacement parts does not exceed five (5) years inclusive of options without prior NA written FTA approval. For all other types of contracts, the procurement file contains evidence that the contract term is based on sound business judgment. 18) Award to Responsible Contractor The City made a determination that it was awarding to a responsible contractor considering such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and 1. Y technical resources. 2. Y 1. Appropriate Financial, equipment, facility 3. Y and personnel. (Y/N) 4.Y 2. Ability to meet delivery schedule. (Y/N) 5. Y 3. Satisfactory period of performance. (Y/N) 4. Satisfactory record of integrity, not on declined or suspended listings. (Y/N) 5. Receipt of all necessary data from vendor. (Y/N) 19) Sound and Complete Agreement This contract is a sound and complete agreement. In addition, it includes remedies YES CHANGE ORDER for breach of contract and provisions covering termination for cause and convenience. 24) Clear, Accurate, and Complete Specification A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchased description was YES available and included any specifications and pertinent attachments which define the items or services sought in order for the bidder to properly respond. 38) Sole Source if other Award is Infeasible The contract file contains documentation that award of a contract was infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids, or competitive proposals and at least one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The item was available only from a single source. (Verify prices are no higher than price for such item by likely customers.) CHANGE ORDER (2) Public exigency for the requirement did CONTRACTOR IS Heath not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation. (3) An emergency for the requirement did not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation. (4) The FT A authorized noncompetitive negotiations. (5) Competition was determined inadequate after solicitation of a number of sources. 39) Cost Analysis Required Cost analysis and profit negations were performed (initial award and modifications) And documented for price reasonableness YES was established on the basis of a catalog or market price of a commercial product sold in substantial quantities to the general public or on the basis of prices set by law or regulation. 40) Evaluation of Options The option quantities or periods contained in the contractor's bid or offer were evaluated in order to determine contract award. (To be NA eligible for Federal funding, options must be evaluated as part of the price evaluation of offers, or must be treated as sole source awards. 42) Written Record of Procurement History The file contains records detailing the history YES ORIGINALLY SELECTED of this procurement. At a minimum, these BY BID PROCESS records include: CONTRACTOR HAS BEEN (1) the rationale for the method of RESPONSIVE AND PRICES procurement, (2) Selection of contract type, ARE FROM EXISTING LINE (3) reasons for contractor selection or ITEM PRICING FROM BID rejection, and 4 the basis for the contract price. 43) Exercise of Options The grantee exercised an option on this contract adhering to the terms and conditions of the option stated in the contract and determined that the option price was better NO than prices available in the market or that the option was a more advantageous offer at the time the option was exercised. If an option was not exercised under this contract, check NA. 44) Out of Scope Changes The grantee amended this contract outside the scope of the original contract. The YES, THE WORK IS OUTSIDE amendment was treated as a sole source THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT procurement (complying with the FTA requirements for a justification, cost analysis and profit negotiation). 45) Advance Payment Provisions The contractor did not receive an advance payment utilizing FTA funds and the contract NO does not contain advance payment provisions or, if it did, prior written concurrence was obtained from FTA. 46) Progress Payment Provisions The contract contains progress payments based on costs incurred (as opposed to percent of completion) and the contract contains a provision giving the grantee title to YES property (materials, work in progress, and finished goods) for which progress payments are made. The contract may contain other security in lieu of obtaining title. 47) Time and Materials Contracts This is a time and materials contract; the grantee determined that no other type of NO contract is suitable; and the contract specifies a ceiling rice. 48) Cost Plus Percentage of Cost This is not a cost plus a percentage of cost NO type contract. 49) Liquidated Damages Provisions This contract contains liquidated damages provisions and the assessment for damages NO is specified in the contract at a specific rate per day for each day of overrun in contract time. 50) Piggybacking 1) The file contains: Assignability provisions. NO 2) The procurement file contains: Price reasonableness determination. 56) Clauses This contract contains the appropriate FTA YES required clauses. Excluded Parties Search YES EPS run and include in the file.