|
<br />Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. "Williams to award contract on low bid for Pro-
<br />
<br />posal N.o. 1 as recommended. Rollcall vote. M.otion carried, all councilmen
<br />
<br />._ present voting aye7
<br />
<br />f.ii
<br />::Tr)~:1 ';i'.I,,;1\1
<br />lq.lc~..cn Sally Way nnd Mnrlow Lone
<br />from tlorwuo<l St. to CUhom R<l. (812)
<br />nA~IC ALTERIIA'l'E
<br />(WUhln Enncmcnt) 10n Snlly Wny)
<br />
<br />\, Wll<ltnh Conatructlon Compally.......110 81d.........$46,122.00.......................$ 14.89 fr/ft..................$3S,147.00...........$30,66S.0Q
<br />I. ~Iour-W,'y Co'nracturo.............. .110 l\J.d........ .$52,303.80
<br />J. ~~nnotb R. DeGtic~ Conat. ~ompnnj..No D1d.........$51,057.80
<br />. 'h . _ . ...- _ . _. .._.,. . . .. COllPU:TlON DATllr Octobt.~. 15, 1973 .~~
<br />..-.-_......_"-~-- ,'- -~--_._--
<br />
<br />
<br />Public Works Director explained that City Attorney's .opinion was sought with regard t.o
<br />legality of awarqing contract .on low alternate bid (construction on Sally Way) when n.o
<br />bids were received on the basic proposal -(construct/ion within the easement). Public
<br />hearing was heid with no testimony presented.
<br />
<br />
<br />I ~~ '~as:"~nderst.ood the c.ontract award w.ould be held until the July 9 Council meeting to
<br />
<br />give opportunity to receive the Attorney's opinion.
<br />
<br />_..,...:._ _,' .,_____f,.~f3;'tV.:~~..~l..~iI"W"-...,.-. :"':s,.",~,.'",,,:..l.............~ _...._
<br />: p,wr~. .~~Hr~l~ !iF.Qr;R I. STORM :'il,'1F.~1
<br />: ~TLloIn IIdoon Plot, and ~an1tary Sewer .' '>.'
<br />i la Mea htn 450 ft. went and 1000 Ct.., . I
<br />.."t ot Bertelo,,>> ltolld from 11th Avcnuo.1 ,
<br />,) iOOO ft. South (920) . '; . i
<br />r.::i ~ ALTERNATE i I
<br />
<br />. i l. Eugene Sand & cravel Comp'my.......No Bid..........$127,189.85...~........44' Pvg..$.. 18.55 fr/ft.............5totlll ~27,203;00.......$70,640.00:
<br />. I. Wlldhh (:onnnuctlon Comp'tny.......$lJl,608.20....$127,629.60 Lat......$ O.OOoq.ft.
<br />,;>", J. Devereaux & Prott..................$1l.3,083.00....$139,570.00 Lovy.....$. 0.005 aq.ft. '
<br />Dcrv.....$. .644.0u cn. (J)
<br />5torm....$l,972.00 per lot (20)
<br />...- .. . _. _ h,,' "h.__ COMP.~.:TION DATIlI O~.t..obe:.!.5, 1973 ~
<br />
<br />) , '~....~, ',.:'
<br />... t :~.:.,:;'
<br />
<br />100% petition on paving, 50% on sewers. Public Works Director said only verbal prot~~ts
<br />had been received. Recommended award on l.ow alternate bid.
<br />
<br />Public hearing was held with no testimony presented.
<br />
<br />In answ~r to ~?uncilma? McDonald, Public ~~rks.Direptpr said City's poptiqn, .of the c.ost
<br />would come' from the newly auth.orized bond issue. .~....
<br />
<br />
<br />Mrs. Beal m.oved seconded by Mr. Williams to award contract on the low
<br />
<br />alternate bid. Rollcall vote. Motion carried, all councilmen present
<br />
<br />voting aye.
<br />
<br />~~!S.?;.~!."~I.:!.g:::.I(,R. ST~ .!'!L~I~,~_,y_I~-!!!':.!!>!&.1
<br />n.",.k I'~tch 1104<1 trulII 11th Av". tOl lUth Avol
<br />5anltaty S~wcr wIthin arco bct~ccn 160 ft.
<br />~~.t . 160 It. oust ot Oak 'utch Rd. fraM
<br />11th Avo. to lAth Avo. (946)
<br />
<br />
<br />. " )
<br />, 1':tOPOSAL NO.1. Pl\ofOSAi.. 110. 2 BRIDGE .. . ')
<br />. BAS!!: Al.n:HIlATP. !\ASIC Al.TEHlIATE Pftal'. 1 PROP. 2. SANITARY SE1mR STOfJ{ SEI.'r:R \
<br />1. .dldish Canst. CO....:S57;-{1.9.90...$5J,51.1.65 $63.407,6S..~$60.6i5.35 $6Q.349;SO.....'f64:76ii.60 $3-;-O'26.UO ~2",3UO..50 "
<br />2. "..Vdr""UJ(' Putt......~70.2J1.06...0G4,306.97 075,942.60...$72,333.64 $63,3"9.69....$67,969.43 $4,567.75 $33,765.95 .
<br />~. ~u~eno 50tld...........No 111d.......$60,198.59 110 B1d.....:.$69,697.35. $60,31.9.80....$64.768.60 $4,496.00 . $33.881.~O;:~
<br />
<br />I Coat to Coat to Cit.!. \.
<br />^b"ttln!~~. 1 2 ./
<br />~. !~., ~~.l_nt: nll.~.A1~~ '
<br />:1.:'::Jlclcni;1nl $ lJ~4] tr/Ct.............Extro Width....$ 2.970.00 -0- .......................$HJ.IJ:).OO
<br />:.J.,lUcrcl01 $ 1/0.56 trllt Dlkn........... - $13,700.00 $ 4.000.00 1
<br />'""ltMY SClJer Lot.$ 0.05 "'l.ft. Snnitnry.......$ 252.00 $ 252.00 -0- \
<br />;..;cr Serv. (2) $201.00oor.h Dridgu.........$GO.350.00 $64,7G1l.00 $6/,.260.00 ,
<br />Otorm..........$23,990.00 $23,990.00 $ 9,450.00
<br />
<br />COMPLETION DATEI October 15,.1973
<br />
<br />
<br />Poll indicated 37% in favor, 57% against, and 6% no resp.onse. Public W.orks Di~ector
<br />explained that Proposal 1 did not provide for bike lanes within the street, Proposal 2 ,
<br />does provide f.or...bike lanes within the curb secti9I:!. The Bicycle Committee.,has r.ecoin~.
<br />mended that tQis street ~ot be included in the arterial bike'system,and.for*hat reason
<br />award was recommended on the low bid price on Proposal N.o. 1.,.,
<br />
<br />, , .
<br />Public hearing was opened.
<br />
<br />Jack Adkins, 2816 Ion~ Street, asked that the project be delayed a year because of in-
<br />~. convenience in attempting t.o rent apartments. Letter,from,George Wi~gard, 2323 Fairmount
<br />Boulevard, was read requesting postponement because of creation of hardship for apartments
<br />under constructi.on in that area.
<br />
<br />Public Works Director calculated fr.ontage. in Mr. Wingard's ownership as about 13% of the
<br />pr.oject. Anticipated increase in costs for the project were 10 to 15% if it is delayed a
<br />year and concern was expressed about the effect of that increase on the assessment against
<br />other properties inv.olved. Also of concern was rebuilding .of the bridge north of the apart-
<br />ment comp~exes which cannot be delayed another year. .In answer to Councilman McD.onald,
<br />
<br />6/25/73 - 9
<br />2..09
<br />
|