The Brea Superblock I Parking Structure Project, CIP 7903 ("Project") was initiated in 2011. The original concept and goal for this Project was to construct a four-level parking structure (one ground level, three elevated floors) on the City owned South Orange Street/Birch Street surface parking lot that provided approximately 470 parking stalls (300 stall increase) with dedicated office spaces/store frontage along the north side (Birch Street). The west side was envisioned as a 32-foot alley passageway with the main entrance and exit from Brea Blvd. Additionally, the west side area would be the main pedestrian thoroughfare with access to and from the structure via stairs and a central elevator with back glass cab and an exterior west facing elevator shaft wall with glazing. The secondary vehicle entrance/exit was planned from South Orange Ave.
In April 2012, a Request for Prequalification ("RFQ") of Bidders was sent out to six (6) design-build entities. Staff reviewed the submitted prequalification documents from the six (6) bidders, but did not pursue the next step of issuance of a Request for Proposals ('RFP") and the Project was placed on hold. In early 2015, staff re-initiated the Project and looked into several options. In April 2015, City Council directed staff to confirm costs and schedules of the proposed parking structure design concepts, provide funding options, and look into other design concepts inclusive of mixed-use. In May 2015, staff with design consultant obtained a quote from Bomel for a Parking only design concept in the amount of $9,975,532. The total Project cost at this time was estimated at $12.6 million, which included a $10 million design-build contract plus $1 million contingency (10%) and $1.6 million for construction inspection, material testing, and administration costs ("construction engineering"). The quote contained a price to install a glass cab elevator of $170,000. The elevator shaft costs were separated out into the various items such as masonry, steel reinforcement, exterior glazing, stucco, and paint.
In June 2015, staff presented two parking structure options with costs and schedules as well as two added design concepts related to housing proposals from Jamboree Housing and Bear Development. Soon thereafter, in August 2015, City Council directed staff to pursue the Parking Structure Only option and initiate a RFQ package. In September 2015, City Council approved funding in the amount for a $10.5 million Project; an approximate $9 million design-build contract estimate with $1.5 million for 40% design, contingency, and construction engineering. In October 2015, staff received five (5) RFQ's, and after review, narrowed the list to three (3) qualified bidders: McCarthy, Swinerton, and Bomel. In November 2015, staff solicited these three qualified bidders though a RFP and, in January 2016, staff received three proposals in the amount of $8.92 million, $8.95, and $9.39 million respectively.
The November 2015 RFP documents specified various elements that continued the 2011 design goals such as number of stalls, number of levels, access points, etc. However, there were several updates to the 2011 specifications and design with the intent to stay within a $9 million design-built contract. One such design update was related to the central elevator, which was modified to a non-glass cab with a masonry only elevator shaft (no exterior glazing). Furthermore, as part of the proposed pedestrian bridge alternative bid item, a second non-glass elevator was added at the north-west location (Birch Street). Other nonstructural/architectural, landscape and hardscape features were also minimized to stay within a $ 9 million design-build contract.
As part of their proposals, each bidder provided individual item lump sum costs within a proposal schedule as provided in the RFP that identified various item costs such as: excavation/grading, concrete and formwork, masonry, and elevators/glass and glazing. The proposed costs from each of the three bidders for the elevators were $258,000, $260,600, and $259,000 respectively. Although the bid schedule title for the elevators shows glass/glazing, Section I.F of the RFP, Outline Specifications states "Elevators are not to have glass openings." Therefore, the schedule proposed prices mentioned previously covered only the specified non-glass elevator costs. Furthermore, the RFP scope did not include exterior glazing for the elevator shaft wall, which is designed as a Cement Masonry Unit ("CMU") Wall system.
In April 2017, the subjects of Project schedule, architectural features, and the elevators was discussed at the regular monthly Brea Downtown Owners Association and McCarthy coordination meeting. At this meeting, it was mentioned that the original design concept depicted a glass elevator at the west alley area adjacent to the paseo between Lilly Q's BBQ and Tower Records and that the approved design plans did not. Soon thereafter, staff looked into the matter further and requested McCarthy to provide a quote to modify the two elevators with a glass back wall cab and back elevator shaft wall with glaze openings in the CMU. McCarthy's estimated price for this change was $173,695 for two and $95,233 for one (See Exhibit A). The cost for the elevator located at the west alley (Elevator #1) was more than the Birch Street elevator (Elevator #2) due to the extra height of the system. Additionally, this price assumed that the CMU elevator shaft wall system could accommodate the glass openings.
At the May 2, 2017 City Council Study Session, staff presented a brief history of the Project and the topic of the elevators with the proposed quote from McCarthy. During this presentation, staff discussed the original concept design, which included a glass elevator at the west alley location, and potential safety concerns with elevators. Staff did consult with the Police Department ("PD") regarding safety concerns with elevators, which provided no recent history of reported incidents at the two existing downtown parking structure elevators. However, the general consensus of PD is that the glass elevators provide a safer visual environment versus no glass. Additionally, at this meeting, staff discussed the concern from McCarthy's structural engineer that the redesign of the back CMU wall with glaze openings might not work and that a steel or concrete frame system might be required, which would increase the cost. Thereafter, City Council directed staff to work with McCarthy's structural engineer to determine if the initial quote was valid with the CMU design, or if a new design would be required and to report back.
On May, 16, 2017, staff reported back to the City Council during Study Session and presented the finding from McCarthy's structural engineer. The conclusion from the structural engineer was that the elevator shaft would need to be designed as a steel frame with ply and plaster in order to accommodate a 5 foot by 43-45 foot full framed glass opening at the exterior elevator shaft wall. Additionally, McCarthy provided an updated quote for this design, inclusive of the two elevators with back wall glass cab, of $572,446 (See Exhibit B). The quote from McCarthy is separated out into two components for both elevator locations; 1) deductions and additions of work items (i.e. added glazing, deducting for CMU, added steel frame, etc.) in the amount of a net Contract Price increase of $401,186, and 2) General Conditions costs related to extending the project schedule by 76 days in the amount of $171,260 ($2,100/day). From this meeting, City Council directed staff to further evaluate the updated quote from McCarthy, look into other elevator options, and to come back to the City Council to report the findings with costs. This staff report provides such findings with the following elevator options and costs for City Council to consider:
Option 1 - Modify the design of the two (2) elevator locations to accommodate an elevator cab with back wall glass and a steel frame elevator shaft with full glazing on the exterior wall.
- McCarthy's proposed Contract Change Order Price of $572,446 with 76 calendar days added to the Contract (Exhibit B).
Option 2 - Modify the design of one of the elevators (Elevator #1) to accommodate an elevator cab with back wall glass and a steel frame elevator shaft with full glazing on the exterior wall. Retain the existing design of Elevator #2 location with no change.
- McCarthy's Proposed Change Order Price of $402,214 with 76 calendar days added to the Contract (Exhibit C).
Staff also evaluated a third option, which would provide the same change to Elevator #1 as Option 2, but with the elimination of Elevator #2. This option would provide a significant Contract deduction, which would reduce the overall change order cost. However, this would provide only one elevator for the parking structure. McCarthy did not provide a quote for this option, however, staff estimates this cost reduction to the Contract Price could be in the range of $125,000 to $200,000.
Pursuant to City Council direction staff completed an evaluation of the two McCarthy's proposed change costs and has determined that most of the additions and deductions appear to be within a reasonable probable cost range. However, there could be further cost reductions realized within the proposed General Conditions component pursuant to revisions to McCarthy's proposed sequencing and schedule logic.
Based on the findings herein, staff is seeking City Council's direction with respect to the selection of a preferred option for a "not to exceed" price. Additionally, staff is requesting City Council consider authorizing the City Engineer to negotiate and execute a Contract Change Order with McCarthy for the preferred option at a "not to exceed" price.
|
On April 19, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution 2016-021 appropriating an additional $10.4 million to the Project for a total budget of $10.5 million. $10.3 million was programmed for the Design-Build work with $203,000 for the 40% RFP development. The Project was further programmed in the 2016-2017 Capital Improvement Program budget with $203,000 (Fund 182), $5,063,000 (Fund 140) and $5,237,000 (Fund 517 - Bonds). The following table provides the most recent costs incurred on this Project up to April 2017 (not including the design costs associated with the development of the November 2015 RFP documents), as well as encumbered costs within the approved Design-Build Contract and Purchase Orders:
| Cost Item |
Estimated
Costs |
Expenses Paid
To Date |
Approved Contract Changes |
Pending Contract Changes |
Remaining
Balances
|
|
Design-Build
Contract |
$ 8,927,383 |
$ 2,301,450 |
$ - |
$ - |
$ 6,625,933 |
| Contingency (6%) |
535,643 |
0 |
52,270 |
4,000 |
479,373 |
| Total |
9,463,026 |
$ 2,301,450 |
52,270 |
4,000 |
7,105,306 |
| Construction Engineering |
565,000 |
169,401 |
- |
- |
395,599 |
| Contingency (10%) |
56,500 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
56,500 |
| Totals |
10,084,526 |
2,470,802 |
52,270 |
4,000 |
7,557,405 |
| Approved Budget |
10,272,628 |
|
| Remaining Budget (1) |
188,102 |
Note (1) - Based on the Design-Build Contract amount, pending and approved Contract Change Orders to date, and remaining contingency, there is approximately $188,102 remaining in the budget that has not been encumbered or expended. Therefore, there is a total available unencumbered amount of $723,975($479,373 plus $56,500 plus $188,102) using the remaining contingency amounts and remaining budget amount identified in the table.
The Project is currently in construction and is now in the vertical phases of the parking structure with the construction of the concrete columns and concrete slabs. The approved design depicts two (2) elevators without glass back cab wall enclosed within a CMU wall system with no exterior glass facade. The original concept design depicted one glass elevator with an exterior glass facade centrally located along the west alley adjacent to the paseo between Lilly Q's BBQ and Tower Records. McCarthy's schedule depicts the milestone to initiate the ordering of the current elevator design fabrication as June 7, 2017. City Council directed staff to evaluate the options to modify the approved elevator design to a glass back cab and back wall glass facade. Staff worked with McCarthy to developed two main proposed change options with a third for City Council to consider as; 1 - Two Glass Back Cab Elevator/Steel Frame back Glass Elevator Shaft ($572,446), 2 - One Glass Back Cab Elevator/Steel Frame back Glass Elevator Shaft and One As Designed ($402,214), and 3 - One Glass Back Cab Elevator/Steel Frame back Glass Elevator Shaft, Eliminate one Elevator (McCarthy to provide cost), staff estimated $125,000 to $200,000 Contract Deduct for eliminating the one elevator. Staff seeks City Council's direction on the preferred option with a "not to exceed" price. Staff also requests City Council consider authorizing the City Engineer to negotiate and execute a Contract Change Order with McCarthy for the preferred option with a "not to exceed" price.
|