Laserfiche WebLink
AWARD CONTRACT - I. R. BLVD. PHASE IV (GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES) <br />The Board reviewed memo from the Public Works Department: <br />TO: William G. Collins II <br />Acting County Administrator <br />THROUGH: James W. Davis, P.E. <br />Public Works Director �--� <br />FROM: James D. White, P.E. <br />.Capital Projects Manager <br />SUBJECT: Award of Contract - <br />Phase IV Indian River Boulevard - <br />Geotechnical Services <br />DATE: August 23, 1988 <br />DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS <br />As required by Contract, Glace & Radcliffe obtained fee proposals <br />from three area consultants to provide the geotechnical investi- <br />gation for the project: <br />The proposals and fee prices received were as follows: <br />S & ME Inc., Altamonte Springs-- $23,181 <br />Fraser Engineering & Testing, Fort Pierce, - $17,120 <br />Ardaman and Associates, Port St. Lucie - $15,320 <br />ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS <br />The following alternatives are presented: <br />Alternate #1 <br />Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached proposal <br />acceptance. Retaining the services of Ardaman & Associates <br />to do the work for a fee of $15,320. <br />This is the lowest cost of the three proposals and provides <br />a thorough investigation, and report with a reasonable time <br />frame and also is to be fully coordinated with the Engineer <br />and with all land holders/landowners along the route. <br />Alternative #2 <br />Retain the services of one of the other two firms submitting <br />proposals. This alternative would be at a higher cost than <br />Alternative #1 and the proposals do not seem to be as <br />carefully planned or scheduled. <br />Alternative #3 <br />A third alternative would be to reject the above proposals <br />and seek additional proposals from the other firms. This <br />alternative would. involve some delay in this phase of the <br />project as proposals were being prepared and at unknown <br />cost. <br />RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING <br />Staff recommends awarding the work as presented in Alternative <br />#1. This work was planned for at the time of contracting with <br />Glace & Radcliffe by recognizing this item as an "additional <br />service for direct payment" at an expected cost of $23,181. <br />Alternative #1 represents a savings of $7,861. <br />The funding, as with the engineering design, is to be from zone 4 <br />Traffic Impact Fees. <br />93 <br />POOF <br />1 74 rl�GE 93 <br />