My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 4:19:28 PM
Creation date
8/10/2011 10:26:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10111
Title
Demolition/Abatement Constracts (Folders 1-2)
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Project Coordination
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
346
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• Price <br />• Demolition time schedule <br />• Qualifications <br />~ Recycling <br />After review of the demolition proposals, the two low proposers were asked to <br />clarify their costs with respect to 70, 80 and 90% recycling efforts. In order to <br />provide adequate time for contractors and staff to review recycling proposals, the <br />contract award a.nd startup date was delayed. Base on the analysis of the new <br />information, submitted by both contractors, the review team believes it is in the <br />county's interest to encourage a 90% recycling program. <br />The contract was scheduled to be awarded on Aprii 16, 1997. However, an objection <br />was filed by Northwest Demolition & Dismantling questioning the fairness of the <br />review/selection process. The awazd was delayed one week in order to give the <br />affected contractors and staff attomeys time to evaluate the selection process. At <br />issue, was the request by the owner's agent, Mr. Dan Berrey, to have the two <br />finalists submit additional information on their recycling plans. <br />Sta.ff attorneys have concluded that the RFP process gives the owners flexibility to <br />review and clarify contract proposals. Both finalists were given the same amended <br />requests regarding recycling plans and both fmalists took advantage of changes in <br />specifications and the startup date to submit new cost proposals. It appears from the <br />aznended proposals that both contractors benefitted from our request for additional <br />information. <br />Informafion contained in the proposals regarding recycling efforts were not detailed <br />enough to allow for a complete analysis. The two finalists were contacted, asked <br />questions regarding their proposals and subsequently requested to submit additional <br />information related to recycling and starlup dates. Should there be a continued <br />challenge to the contract award on the basis of the modified recycling plan, the <br />county has the option to award the contract on the basis on the original "base <br />proposal amount" only. Since further delays would have a substantial impact on the <br />project schedule, this option represents a viable alternative even though recycling <br />efforts would be reduced. <br />Recommendation: It is the recommendation of the review committee that the <br />contract for demolition of the Senator Block be awarded to Staton Construction of <br />Eugene Oregon. Staton's base cost proposal was for $547,489. The proposal at the <br />90% recycling level is $518,579. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.