HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-07-16 Meeting•c •
t.A PORTL: l:RE:r, i:A'TLR AUTHORITY
f~,I?dUTr S
JULY 16, 1987
1. The meeting- was called to order at 12:14 P.t9.
;fE;fEERS PRESENT: President Cary Burnley, Secretary Rick
~~atthews, ;•;ember Jerry Bramlett.
MEMBERS ABSENT: I~tember Claude Graves
OTHERS PRESENT: City Manager Bob Herrera, Director of Public
tt'orks Steve Gillett, hater/Wastewater Superintendent Buddy
..;acobs.
2. Cary Burnley distributed a memorandum from the Final Evaluation
Committee regarding the interviews and their final selections
(copy attached), he also advise those present that all the
ratings were completed individually. Discussion was held on the
final selection of civil engineering proposals for the design
and construction of a potable water transmission line and
distribution system.
Bob Herrera commented that the selection process was not very
complex and he feels the selection process was fair with the
final ratings being close.
Cary Burnley stated any of the applicants would have done the
job but the committee felt that Espey Houston is the very best
selection for this job.
Rick Matthews made a motion to accept the Final Evaluation
Committee"s recommendation of Espey/Houston. Seconded by Jerry
Bramlett. Passed unanimously.
Rick Matthews and Jerry Bramlett complimented the committee
members for an excellent and very thorough job.
Rick Matthews made a motion to create a committee for
negotiations with Espey/Houston. Seconded by Jerry Bramlett.
Passed unanimously.
After discussion it was decided that the committee members for
negotiations would be: Bob Herrera as General Manager, Steve
Gillett, Rick Matthews and Jerry Bramlett. Bob Herrera stated
he would schedule a meeting with Espey/Houston.
~ .~'.rr (':n '. ~. 1"'. •~ (.i ~; n, !' ~ 1 ~](') •7 ~s ~'{. r' .. . S•s ,l Tl , sc. i j T '
r:: . r, ~ J. t. ~ ~ r'., . r ~ i • ~ ~~ ,• , , r e. , G (~ r~ ~; f • r• r y
i'iC'.}:qt-I+';T~,i }~}?^~F~;~:1'I': ~'r'~SlC'i('nt: c~C?rC'~/ i•r'=:fiil.F?tt, ',!',.C?E? ~re$1(:}rTlt I~I.C;~'
i`c!f;t;}'iC:S:;;, :~C:C:rE'.t~r•,.1, C'i.F;11(;E? '?.,Vf!:. , i'G'i:.t) :'r i'' I•: ii rct kt.
_ c"": r i ~: ~. c. ~~ c r t.
()fit'}'I"}?S ,~i',r~~'~'~.,1'. ~,S;:i:?t:c:r';t ~.itl+ i'il:1:`'~~,{'c'.'1" ..10~':r, Jo;rns, 1''Uf)].iC
;:'or;; ~'i.r'ec:tcr' :it•.r?'•rr-• .~:;.1.] Ft t: , ~',<;.t;,;r'/;•'a ~:t:.c;vr~^f,e;" ~;l~r,(~r'i?ltender;t:•
i?1JCi~'•y .T;;C•ok%~, ,"•t,r};ar:i~ .; p,t ;or•nr,t- ~Tnt.~n i',r•..:~:tron~.
','- F i 'lut. :~f' t'.,~r F. t.; G i-,. n i:u,;ll t-. 1 , , 1~: 7 Ldt.re rep nd
,~,pt:;roved .
3. ,Jo:n .?cF:r'ns cistr•it~!;*.rc! an(? di_sclissei -~ l.c?ttE:r' t,r?~t :;ins received
f.r'or^ i'~: -:e .'r~ir'c.~o`.t.n c, f' ~:k•.e C'~.*'.i o; .ior'stc',t~. 7.'!';i.^ :Letter i.s in
rFSt)or::~(:: to t•he :~~E:nti.r,~': :,eJ.d .•, i. t; !•: t' ?. 1: 6• i•'.r~.r'cotte, Rol, t:Prrer'e,
J~Thr! A.r~~;tron~, ctF':•l= ~~i.-iJ.!'t _, rr?:: Jerry Fr?rnl.ett rel=ardinr~' the
contract 1•~i.th the c',~.ty of. 5ousron. 7'k:e areas of chan7e t:ere
k,ro1.1TYi~t to ar.r,ent,i.or; ~/ "tr':c ('i1l~~Y.t-. ~+r•;c ~!isnllf:~:i.on ~•aas ~~Erld.
John %=rr~'St-.rCirl~; ,L'•"'"°Sr.E'C~ !."' CF'V1.5`; t!?C C'nritr£iCt', f?r1C1. Cle~.].Ver t0
f17_S Ci:"i'1CG-' Or' rt'Vl.!~:: i3" Cil)iC;~:l_y 8:i r!~:~:3J.~!i8. 'Ti'lls Li].J.J i;J.:iO kiE?
an al~-~r•(.':.a item ~,t. i.tit nE':: r ^-;ne:ta_r.,-~,
.TUk',r: •TC)Pr1~S :::tatC%; ~}1?t:• t:~OC: !(?r'C'C.'.r~3 h%l:i ;'•I.1rSl.lE?.C: the ].nter].m
.(:' ] rr .`.•.'• n ! : l ri ~% ~...:"1 d t h J. r ~ :. °' ~?. I'' E; [:O .i. "! `'' ins C J. ~..
ti Jerry t~rc'l-•.!]tett C+iSC.:t.S C?C.'; 1".klt? !r:~?('t lnf% il.~'J.() ~•rir..h }~°()E?V/~iUStOrI Cn
t:~r:,ir' core*,rar:t, ar:d v~~,ricus t~oil~~.i ti'E=rc~ hrou~ht to attention. k?e
fe).i, tk;(=v :•;r~irl.c'. do an ~::nFi J.er,` ~o`?. ..Jol~r? ftrrr,stron;?; ste.tc,:.i k~e
k;F:`~ r'FV i r:t+iE': tt'iiS COnt.r~+.Ct e'.infl C:VC?rJ/tliiri,, ]..~ ir• order. ~, "lOtl.On
4:?`~ "'%~ClP_ l;', l'1_^~::(:C i~r?V(',:; t0 _i':Yt;^OV:; tklc ~aSpg`~/~+`l1Sf;.or1 COI:tr~Ct
~L+n?E:Ct t0 f'!l.r'1C~C' Ct:%:n~*e?:,. ~:e(":()r:C~E?C: ::~; ~1.Cn !":dtt!"leLJS. i'~OtlOCI
~. :'hP.rE'. t'C'.].!'?~: t)q f'l:rt!"E?r til.i`::i.l'?(?SS, tk:e E'~er.'.tln?; 41c'!~ ?C'~'.CUrrI::L at
j :~, t''.tii.
respect ruJ.>_y .`.';ut);:;i tt.e;t ,
~~c~c:~E=t.~:.r;:/7'r'eacurtr .
,
. ~~ 1~~
~ ~ A ~, '
# • •
~~~~~ ~''~ L~ forte Are~W~terAuthorit
~~ ./ Y
"~\ 1 PHONe ~ 713 ~ 471 .5020 • P. O. Box 1 1 15 • Lw PORTE. TERAS 77571
July 15, 1987
T0: Board of Directors
La Porte Area Water Authority
FROM: Final Evaluation Committee
SUBJECT: INTERVIEW AND FINAL SELECTION OF
CIVIL ENGINEERING PROPOSALS FOR THE DESIGN OF
POTABLE WATER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
A final evaluation committee, appointed by the Board of Directors of
the La Porte Area Water Authority at a meeting held July 2, 1987, was
directed to conduct interviews and make recommendations on the
selection of an engineering firm to design the above referenced
project. The committee is composed of Cary Burnley (LPAWA Board),
Claude Graves (LPAWA Board), Robert T. Herrera (LPAWA General
Manager), and Steve Gillett (City of La Porte Public Works Director),
and Pat 0"Malley (City of La Porte CIP Coordinator).
This committee met on July 7, 1987 to discuss the format and
procedures to conduct interviews with the four (4) firms selected as
finalists by the Initial Evaluation Committee. The four (4) firms
selected for interviews were Dannenbaum Engineering, Espey Huston &
Associates, CRS Sirrine, and Turner Collie & Braden. The following
format was adopted:
1. Brief introduction and opening statement by LPAWA Board
President Cary Burnley.
2. Brief introduction and opening statement by a principal of
the firm on the firm"s philosophy.
3. Brief discussion of the firm"s understanding of the project
and the proposed methods and scope of work to accomplish
the project by the proposed Project Manager.
4. Question and answer session by committee members on a
rotating basis. Questions were individually formulated by
each member.
5. Brief closing statement by the firm clarifying and
expanding on any perceived area of concern.
~`
Page Two
Interview and Final Selection
July 15, 1987
The entire process was limited to one and one-half (1 1/2)
hours. Parts 1, 2, and 3 were limited to twenty (20) minutes,
Part 4 approximately one (1) hour, and Part 5 approximately five
(5) to ten (10) minutes. The interviews were conducted as an
executive session of the LPAWA. Copies of the necessary legal
certification are attached. In addition, all interviews were
taped.
Interviews were held on July 9, 1987 with the firms CRS Sirrine (6:00
to 7:30 P.M.) and Turner Collie and Braden (7:30 to 9:00 P.M.). On
July 10, 1987, interviews were held with Dannenbaum Engineering (2:00
to 3:30 P.M.) and Espey Huston (3:30 to 5:00 P.M.) After the final
interview on July 10, 1987, the committee briefly met, and decided to
use the same evaluation and rating system developed and used in the
initial selection process. It was agreed to meet again on July 14,
1987, at 6:30 P.M., to tabulate the findings.
The committee met on July 14, 1987, and compiled the results of the
individual committee members, and established weighting factors for
the three (3) categories used in the evaluation.
The results of the combined evaluations are shown on Exhibits A and
B, copies of which are attached. Exhibit A shows the determination
of weighting factors for each category. Exhibit B shows the ratings
by individual committee members, the average rating, the agreed
weighting factor, and the final rating for each of the three (3)
categories, "Personnel Qualifications", "Experience of Firm", and
"Methodology", as well as the final tabulation of all three (3)
categories with a ranking of the firms.
Based on the interviews and evaluations, the committee submits the
following summary and recommendations:
A. The final ranking of firms, from highest rated to lowest,
are as follows:
1. Espey Huston and Associates
2. Dannenbaum Engineering
3. CRS Sirrine
4. Turner Collie & Braden
B. The LPAWA Board appoint a committee to conduct negotiations
with Espey Huston and Associates on scope of work and
professional compensation.
~ !
Page Three
Interview and Final Selection
July 15, 1987
C. If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated
with that firm, the committee terminate negotiations and
initiate negotiations with Dannenbaum Engineering. This
procedure is followed until a satisfactory contract has
been negotiated.
D. When successful negotiations are completed
committee develop, in conjunction with the
to be presented to the LPAWA for approval.
of the LPAWA will prepare a recommendation
to the La Porte City Council, along with t
contract, for approval.
with a firm, the
firm, a contract
The President
to be presented
he proposed
The committee feels that the evaluation and recommendation submitted
is a fair and impartial selection, and reflects the members" combined
and unanimous judgement. It is felt that all four (4) firms
interviewed are capable of performing the work. We will be happy to
respond to questions from the Board regarding details of the
interviews and the final recommendation.
Respectfully Submitted,
~ c^~i~ •
Cary rnley Cla a Graves
LPAWA Board President LP W Board Member
~'
Robert T. Herrera at 0 Malle
LPAWA General Manager La Porte C P Coordinator.
Steve Gil e t
La Porte ublic Works Director
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
Agenda Date Requested: Se 7
Requested By:
X
S. Gillett epartment:
Report Resolution
Exhibits: July 2, 1987 Minutes - La Porte Area Water Authority
Recommendation for Survey Services
Survey Proposal
Letter from Coast Water Authority
SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION
On July 2, 1987, the Board of Directors of the La Porte Area Water
Authority authorized the City Manager to enter into a contract, not
to exceed $10,500, to have the necessary surveying performed in order
to apply for an easement in the Coastal Water Authority R.O.W. between
West Main (Spencer) and the proposed Southeast Water Purification Plant.
This easement is necessary to deliver water from the plant to the
Authority's customers.
Because the "take-point" at the Southeast Water Purification Plant was
not established at ,that time, the Board authorized the City Manager to
enter into a contract with the firm that was the lowest price for the
given scope of work.
The "take-point" has been clarified with the City of
located at the east property line of the plant at its
the C.W.A. R.O.W. As recommended and approved by the
Authority, the firm selected to perform the work with
located at the property line of the plant is Baseline
the amount of $8,900.00.
Action Required by Council:
Authorize the City Manager to
Corporation, in the amount of
in the Coastal Water Authority
Availability of Funds:
3ouston to be
intersection with
La Porte Area Water
a "take-point"
Corporation, in
enter into an agreement with Baseline
$8,900.00, to perform necessary survey work
R.O.W. as required to obtain an easement.
General Fund Water/Wastewater
Capital Improvement General Revenue Sharing
X Other
Account Number: Funds Available: YES NO
Approved for City Council Agenda
Robert T. Herrera DATE
City Manager
Ordinance
Public Works