AGENDA REPORT
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: 03/18/2020
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT:
Title
City Council consideration of awarding Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 20-014HC for the Park Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project; and to appropriate $230,000 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) titled, “Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project.”
End
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Recommended action
That the City Council:
a. Authorize an appropriation of $230,000 from the General Fund to the CIP No. 7384, Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project.
b. Award RFP 20-014HC titled, “Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project” to Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC, for the amount not to exceed $263,732.72, and waive any and all minor irregularities in the proposal.
c. Authorize the City Manager, or Acting Public Works Director, to execute the Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC, in the amount not to exceed $263,732.72 and approve necessary change orders up to ten percent of the contract amount.
d. Authorize the Purchasing Manager to issue a purchase order to Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC, in the amount of $263,732.72.
Body
ANALYSIS:
The City of Corona has thirty-seven (37) parks totaling 367 acres and six (6) community centers, two (2) swimming pools, a stand-alone gymnasium, theater, and other recreation facilities. Of the parks in Corona’s system, approximately 134 acres, were developed prior to 1990. Corona added another 128 acres in the 1990s, and an additional 105 acres were developed between 2000 and 2010 as the community expanded and population increased.
The City created its last Park Master Plan in 1989. An inventory of facilities was included in the Master Plan, as well as, a large number of unfunded, planned amenities that are not feasible. A contemporary, regularly updated Master Plan maintains a relevant inventory of assets, guides the development and maintenance of assets, and provides collaboration with recreation and programming activities. Another major component of a Master Plan is to provide funding strategies that are needed for development, maintenance, and programming. It is also imperative that a Master Plan contains stakeholder input in order to properly reflect local priorities, while still considering broader trends and best practices.
As a step towards developing a new Park Master Plan, $60,000 was included in the Fiscal Year 2020-2021 budget for CIP No. 7384, titled, “Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project” (“Inventory”). Similar in concept to the Trails Master Inventory, the intent of the Inventory is to provide the basis for a future Park Master Plan, as well as, to develop an Asset Management Program (AMP) for Corona’s parks, which is currently non-existent.
The primary purpose of the Inventory is to account for City-owned assets including parks, recreation facilities, fields and courts, playgrounds, splash pads, shelters and their various amenities, record their estimate age and remaining useful life and current condition, and develop a replacement plan to project future funding needs as replacements become necessary. The Inventory will guide future Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Projects by establishing priorities and helping to maximize the use of available funding to meet the most pressing needs.
City staff developed the scope of work, as shown on Exhibit “A,” for the Parks Facilities Inventory and Assessment Project, which was published as Request for Proposal (RFP) 20-014HC on January 8, 2020. A total of twenty-five (25) consultants downloaded the RFP documents through PlanetBids. Three proposals were received by the February 12, 2020, due date and time. One proposal did not meet the City’s technical qualification phase. The other two proposals had wide-ranging costs from a low of $263,733 from Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC, to $454,914 from BMLA, Inc. City staff evaluated the two proposals and recommends proceeding with Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC. However, given the available budget of $60,000, doing so would require appropriating additional funding of $230,000 for the project, which would include the contract amount and given the recognized age and condition of many amenities, a 10% contingency for unforeseen circumstances.
Staff explored four options for this project, including some that could potentially reduce costs. A discussion of the various options evaluated is listed below.
Option 1: Proceed with the recommended vendor and existing scope, and appropriate additional funding. Additional funding in the amount of $230,000 would be required and could be appropriated as a one-time appropriation from the General Fund. While this option is the most expensive, the advantage of this option is that the consultant has the necessary resources and technical expertise to complete the project scope within a reasonable timeframe. Additionally, the use of a consultant to properly document the process provides an objective and thorough assessment of facilities using a tested methodology consistently applied.
Option 2: Reduce the scope of work. The scope of work, as shown on Exhibit “A,” includes an optional Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) building survey to help identify and prioritize ADA improvements needed at the City’s community facilities. Another component listed in the scope of work was community surveying on the condition of existing park amenities and facilities and desired new amenities. The cost for these two components of $75,000, represents 26% of project costs. However, the ADA survey was included to avoid future potential lawsuits regarding building access and the community survey would elicit essential resident input regarding recreation needs and priorities. Staff believes the remainder of the proposed scope is crucial to developing a thorough Inventory and actionable Capital Improvement Plan. Eliminating these two elements from the project scope would leave an unfunded project balance of $155,000, which could be appropriated as a one-time appropriation from the General Fund.
Option 3: Perform the work with in-house staff. Staff reviewed the proposal and developed the following cost analysis of a project to be performed in-house for the inventory, data gathering and report activities:
|
Position |
Project Mgmt. |
Doc. Review |
Data Collection |
Criteria Development |
Inventory Report / Presentation |
Total Hours |
Billable Hourly Rate (Regular or Overtime) |
Total |
|
LaRS Director |
10 |
20 |
|
10 |
8 |
48 |
$202.43 |
$9,717 |
|
MS General Manager |
10 |
20 |
|
10 |
8 |
48 |
$232.14 |
$11,143 |
|
Project Manager |
30 |
40 |
20 |
40 |
160 |
290 |
$140.22 |
$40,664 |
|
Parks Superintendent |
10 |
40 |
10 |
20 |
8 |
88 |
$115.43 |
$10,158 |
|
Maintenance Supervisor |
10 |
40 |
10 |
20 |
8 |
88 |
$120.64 |
$10,616 |
|
Lead Parks Services Worker |
10 |
20 |
5 |
20 |
|
55 |
$108.01 |
$5,941 |
|
Parks Services Worker |
|
|
222 |
|
|
222 |
$80.35 |
$17,838 |
|
Lead Building Maintenance Technician |
|
|
48 |
20 |
|
68 |
$103.93 |
$7,067 |
|
GIS Analyst |
|
|
20 |
|
20 |
40 |
$114.57 |
$4,583 |
|
Total by Task: |
80 |
180 |
335 |
140 |
212 |
947 |
|
$117,727 |
|
Optional ADA Assessment |
$20,000 |
|
Optional Public Survey |
$55,000 |
|
Playground Inspection by Certified Playground Inspector |
$10,000 |
|
Estimated Project Total: |
$202,727 |
Based on the above assumptions, the City would still require additional funding to complete the project, if work was performed in-house.
The advantage of having in-house staff is their familiarity with the City’s facilities. The limits of existing staff include a lack of technical expertise and protracted timeline for the project. In-house staff does not have the necessary expertise to conduct the ADA assessment of buildings, a statistically valid community survey, or a certified playground inspector. These activities, if desired, would need to be outsourced and funded. Additionally, the project would be added to existing staff workloads. As a result, much of the work would need to be performed after normal business hours and would incur overtime costs. Further, given past experience, such projects are set aside in the event of storms, fire or other emergencies and for community events having broad staff impact (i.e., July 4th and Holiday Lighting celebrations). Finally, if there is not a consistency to assigned personnel, assessment results and recommendations will also be inconsistent. An appropriation would still need to be made from the General Fund to cover overtime personnel expenses.
Option 4: Choose not to proceed with the project. The City Council can decide not to appropriate any additional funding, and thus not to proceed with the project. This project is, however, supported by the Parks and Recreation Commission as a means of developing a long-term, easy to explain plan for CIP. Without such a plan in place, it is more difficult to prioritize available funding and quantify system-wide replacement costs.
Staff requests approval of the recommended actions which includes Option 1 of awarding an agreement with the recommended vendor and existing scope, and appropriation of additional funding.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
This project was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission on several occasions, including most recently on January 8, 2020. The Commission supports the development of this inventory as a tool to develop a long-term Capital Improvement Plan.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Not applicable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Currently, the Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project (CIP No. 7384) has a balance of $59,860. Approval of the recommended actions will result in a one-time appropriation from the General Fund.
|
GENERAL FUND |
|
|
Budget Workshop May 23, 2019 - Estimated Revenue Over Expenditures |
$ 152,247 |
|
Previously approved/revised budget adjustments (net)* |
568,685 |
|
Current Revenue Over Expenditures |
720,932 |
|
Parks Facilities and Amenities Inventory Project Appropriation |
(230,000) |
|
Revised Estimated Revenue Over Expenditures |
$ 490,932 |
|
|
|
|
Budget Balancing Measures Reserve - Actual 06/30/19 |
34,433,788 |
|
Additional Contribution to CalPERS - Unfunded Liability |
(30,000,000) |
|
Estimated Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Change in Budget Balancing Measures Reserve |
490,932 |
|
Estimated Budget Balancing Measures Reserve - 06/30/2020 |
$ 4,924,720 |
|
* Approved through Council Action or other operational process. Includes other General Fund items on the March 18, 2020 agenda. |
|
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
This action is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which states that a project is exempt from CEQA if the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. This action merely authorizes City staff to proceed with the development of an inventory of existing park facilities and amenities, and there is no possibility that approving this action will have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no environmental analysis is required.
PREPARED BY: tracy martin, utilities project manager
REVIEWED BY: TOM KOPER, ACTING PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
REVIEWED BY: DAVID MONTGOMERY-SCOTT, LIBRARY AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
REVIEWED BY: SCOTT BRIGGS, PURCHASING SPECIALIST V
REVIEWED BY: kim sitton, ACTING ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR
SUBMITTED BY: JACOB ELLIS, CITY MANAGER
Attachments:
1. Exhibit A - Scope of Work
2. Professional Services Agreement