City of Hermosa Beach --- 10-26-99

CIP PROJECT 98-621 PHASE III MUNICIPAL PIER ARCHITECTURAL UPGRADES – AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN

 

Recommendation :

It is recommended that the City Council:

  1. Award the design contract for CIP Project 98-621 Phase III Municipal Pier Architectural Upgrades to Purkiss Rose – RSI of Fullerton, California for a fee of $174,500.

  2.  

  3. Authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the attached Professional Services Agreement subject to approval by the City Attorney; and

  4.  

  5. Authorize the Director of Public Works to make changes to the agreement up to $17,450.

 

Summary :

 

On August 10, 1999, Council authorized Staff to enter into negotiation with Purkiss Rose – RSI to develop the final scope of services and design fee for the project, and return to Council with an agreement. Since the City has acquired valuable electronic data as well as other data in connection with the development of the Pier project, Staff negotiated for cost savings in the area of data collection for this phase of the project. Negotiations have been completed with no cost savings being achieved.

 

Background :

This project is Phase III of a three-phase project that calls for the renovation of the pier. Phase III will include the plaza, lifeguard facilities and restroom improvements. Phase I, which called for the repair of the pier structure, was completed in May 1999. It is anticipated that Phase II, which consists of deck surface repair work, work related to the installation of a new lighting system and safety railing along the pier, will be completed in February 2000.

The 1999-2000 Capital Improvement Project Budget includes funding for the design and construction of these proposed improvements.

 

The services of a consultant architect/engineer are needed to supplement the architectural/engineering capacity of the Public Works office. These services will include the preparation of detailed plans, specifications, cost estimates and other construction documents as required.

 

Staff sent out more than 50 RFP’s to firms Staff felt were qualified and would be interested in the project. Eight firms attended a non-mandatory pre-proposal briefing on July 8, 1999.

Proposals were received from the following firms:

  1. B.M. Barsoum, Architect Hermosa Beach, CA $100,655
  2. Purkiss Rose – RSI Fullerton, CA $174,500

 

On August 3 rd the selection committee evaluated each proposal on the basis of the scope of services, similar projects, resumes of key personnel and work schedule. The committee consisted of City Staff members and a member of the County of Los Angeles Lifeguard

Department.

 

Proposal Submittal Items:

Firm

Scope Of Service

Similar Project Experience

Work Schedule

Location

  1. B.M. Barsoum, AIA

Weak

Weak

Ok

Hermosa Beach, CA

  • Purkiss Rose – RSI

Strong

Strong

Strong

Fullerton, CA

After evaluating the above proposal data and presentation, the consulting firm of Purkiss Rose – RSI was chosen by the selection committee to provide the required services.

 

Analysis:

 

Data collection is a time consuming task and was a major cost factor during the project start-up phase. Since the City has acquired valuable electronic data as well as other data in connection with the development to the Pier project, Staff negotiated for cost savings in the area of data collection for this phase of the project. Negotiations have been completed with no savings being achieved.

 

The following is an excerpt from a letter received from Purkiss-Rose that gives a brief explanation why, from a building architectural standpoint, the consultant team cannot use the current plan data:

 

  1. The David Bartlett plans are preliminary CADD drawings for a different scope project and do not have any public restrooms on the upper level. They also indicate a different beach level plan configuration. If the City wants to have the lower plan as indicated on sheet A1.4, it could save us some preliminary time, but not for the construction documents, since there are no details. In addition, the parking layout would have to be re-worked in order to make it functional.

  2.  

  3. The demolition plan will help in giving us a base sheet, but we had anticipated receiving this in our original fee proposal. If we are to remodel the exterior of the lifeguard tower, we need as-built plans for it.

  4.  

  5. We also need a copy of the coastal permit with their approved plans so that we can compare the permitted plan with the new building program."

 

In addition: "From an electrical engineering standpoint, the plans were prepared thirty-five years ago and may not be the actual condition now. A thorough site investigation is needed to establish the present electrical site condition. An actual electrical load study is necessary to know whether the existing facility has enough capacity for the proposed additional loads or whether the existing service needs to be upgraded."

 

Further: "The other plans reflect an alternate design concept for the Pier Plaza area. Most of the drawings in this set of plans deal more with architectural and structural features of that particular design concept. However, there is one drawing that shows the existing utilities and Pier Plaza layout that may be of some use to our work. This base sheet would at the most save us some drafting and compilation of existing data. The problem is we either assume this data is correct or if we have to check this data for accuracy and completeness it would be the same as doing it ourselves in the first place."

 

In deference to time, Staff concurs with the above and recommends award to Purkiss-Rose RSI so that the project can now move forward without further delay.

Fiscal Impact :

 

With a design fee of $174,500 and a contingency for $17,450, the proposed design budget is $191,950.

 

The total FY 99-00 budget for this project is $1,340,441 for design, engineering and construction; therefore no additional appropriation is required.

Agendas / Minutes Menu     Agenda