A resolution for approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and David Evans and Associates, Inc. for on-call professional engineering services. Approves an on-call contract with David Evans and Associates, Inc. for $4 million for three years to provide comprehensive engineering services to support various Public Works capital projects, and general engineering services in connection with the planning, design, and construction of various projects citywide (201631684). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 3-6-17. The Committee approved filing this resolution by consent on 12-13-16.
And when it whenever these on call contracts come up, I get questions from constituents about what's this about? Why don't we get to hear about this? And I don't believe there's anything crooked that goes on with these on call contracts. I understand that they're a part of our city process, but there is some concern about getting regular updates on how the money is spent, etc.. And the second factor on this particular group is that there is a group of folks very concerned about one of our large projects that's going to get underway soon, the plant, the Park Hill Drainage Project. And they wanted to know if this money is some sort of backdoor way, these contracts of spending on that. So I'd like to bring this up and just get the issues out and hear from our folks at Public Works. So I'd like to ask Angelica Sias if she could come up and answer a couple of questions. Yeah, and I think we got a team for this because there are many contracts with these on call. Absolutely. And then, Councilwoman Ortega, do you want to just wait until they respond and then you have some questions as well? Okay. Okay. Go ahead. Angela. I'd like I'd like to start just by asking you if you would explain what these on call contracts are all about. Okay. What I'm going to go ahead and do is I'm going to go ahead and defer to Michael Sheehan and Deb Turner. Deb Turner is actually the person who's overseeing these particular on call contracts. So I'll bring her up and have her explain these. In and that they're in line with the general process of on call contracting. Yep. And so one correction I do want to make to what you said earlier. This is not $56 million in on coal contracts. These are 4 million up. These are for capacity of up to $4 million each over the next three years. Right. But the capacity we'll. Be spending $56 million over. Usually we don't go to the maximum amount. This is just so we have some wiggle room and who we can ask to do different projects. Thank you for that. Could have been council members. And I'm a entering supervisor in public works capital project management, transportation, and these are on calls. We generally use these for contracts under $500,000. To procure engineering services for things like intersection designs. I know. Signal design, small roadway projects that we get throughout the year. General rehab projects like the Bill O'Reilly Rehab. Small roadway. Or an intersection of projects like 56th and Dunkirk. We do median design, small bridge designs, even structural rehab of drainage and bridge facilities with these. We also open this up to other people and public works. And I think the Parks Department, Arts and venues, a lot of people use these contracts. But anything over $100,000, we generally mini bid. So we have a minimum of three bids on those, usually, sometimes more. Most of our contracts are, I think, under $100,000. So this is how we generally use these. Do you have any questions on that? And when will council find out how these monies are spent? I know you want to. So so we have a long awaited report coming to you. And I know that we've we've done some vetting and we've vetted it through the mayor's office and through our department. And so you should be seeing a regular report starting the by the end of this week. And what we're going to do is we're going to send that report around, as is to all the on call contracts that we have currently, their capacity, how much has been used. And what we'd like to do is offer one on one briefings to the council members to explain the on call contracting process and how that all works and how you can read this report so you understand how what we're actually reporting on. So do I understand then that we will hear about on a regular basis every dollar that you spend on these on call contracts. Correct. Thank you, Michael. I think you're the one that will answer this. So as far as the whether or not these contracts are associated with with the plot to Park Hill project, can can you explain. The plat to Park Hills being publicly procured separately from these on calls that are too big for the on calls because they go well over the limits of the on calls. So for example, City Park Golf Course is an active design for build procurement at this time and we anticipate that will come through City Council in Q3 , 39th AV Greenway and Park Hill, that's also in an active design build procurement, which will come through City Council for approval in Q4 of this year. And then thirdly, we also have a program management selection to supplement our staff with resources required to implement those large projects that will come through City Council for review and approval in Q3. So if somewhere along the line you decide you need on call assistance with that, would that be new money or is is that. Now it's all part of the existing plan at the Park Hill budget. All these projects that come through the on calls are either a come through the budget book or they come through our various customers. As Angela referenced in Arts and Venues, Parks and Rec Art Museum, we do projects for we're doing projects for National Western Center and we work with our our team of city attorney's office and contracts folks to evaluate what can fit within the on call versus what needs to be publicly procured. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Yep, no problem. Thank you, Councilman. You just used the question. So all the on call money that we're seeing here now is budgeted in the 2017 budget. Right. Or or will be in the subsequent budgets for three years. Keep in mind that 56 million in capacity will we'd have to really be pushed over utilize out of all the existing nine that expire this fall, only one is close on capacity. The remaining eight have significant capacity remaining. So it was all part of the budget discussion that we had for this year. Yes. All right. Thank you. Great County Councilwoman Sussman. Mr. President. No. No. Now is it? No, it's okay. I think part of the you know, we did get some requests about on calls. It was a confusion between NG calls and the project itself. And I think we had some questions about how the citizen might be able to find a description of the project on which an on call might be used. Because I know on call work is work you need at the time you need it, but it is about a project. And I know when in an RFP we will put a description of the project. And how does a how does an average citizen find out a description of the larger project for which an on call might be used? Hi, Angela can see us again. So we do have a website which lists all of the all of the projects that are in progress on dimmer. Gov. So if you go to Denver gov dot org forward slash DPW and there is a box that says I believe it's like construction, planning and construction if you go there that lists all of the projects that are in process now. So this isn't specific to on call projects, but it is all of the construction projects that are happening in this fiscal year. I think that's really important because I think I heard on those emails that that was what people wanted to know was what, what construction , what, where can I read about these construction projects? And I, I knew that they were on the website. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman, Councilman Espinosa. And I apologize. I was writing my questions as one of the answers was, you've already said this. I'm going to ask to repeat it. So how is overlap handled with the PDP? I mean, Platte, Park Hill contractors, are they preferred because of their familiarity should result in savings or is there no overlap? Actually, the answer to that question is they're typically precluded because they can't sit on both sides. In other words, they can't represent us, the owner, and then pursue the project. So we review them on a case by case basis. But generally, most of the folks who have supported the preliminary engineering for the plant, the particular precluded from pursuing the project, said are out advertising right now. Okay. You know, are there bright lines preventing work within the boundaries of the plants of Park Hill scope and area and the National Western Center? So that that money doesn't come in, that that money for those projects comes out of stormwater or they're dedicated revenue and not out of public works funds. I can tell you it's been vetted very closely as National Western defines their program and how they're going to move forward with it. That's we're waiting on that information, but others are looking at that very closely to make sure there's no conflict there. And we anticipate watching it very closely. I would just to maybe make our job a little bit easier when reviewing these sort of subsequent updates is identify those that are sort of within those boundaries so that we're not trying to, you know, identify intersections and things like that or roadways and trying to make that delineation ourselves. If there's something that is in that sort of work perimeter where the PDP, you know, plant to Park Hill or some of these other larger funded projects or so we can make that so we can if we have versions about that overlap. Understood in our program resource office where we track all these projects we're actually working right now, they'll be able to load them all into gear so we can identify the location of each project with the reports. Yeah, and I think you're getting you can get where my concern is is we've already dedicated a healthy amount of our budgets and fees to those projects. And if and we want our public works money sort of going elsewhere. Interested. Thanks. Thank you. Councilman Espinoza. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. As you know, I routinely call out the call contracts because I don't think we get enough detailed information upfront. And I do appreciate the fact that Angela came over and met with me and provided some information in writing based on some questions that I submitted. But I think we need to make sure that we're getting more information so that when either we get them on a consent calendar or they come to committee, we know upfront and don't have to have you all come out in and be expected to answer the questions here. It should be part of that contract request form that gets filed with City Council on the front end. And Councilman Flynn and I have had some conversations about this to ensure that not just with on call contracts but with other bills that get filed, we're getting more information so that we're not scrambling, trying to get the information on on a monday when in some cases the bills only have the details that are attached on Thursday afternoon. So it doesn't give us a lot of time when the agencies have been working on some of these contracts or ordinances for months and months. And then we're expected to scramble. And, you know, I just have to say that I'm I'm not happy that we changed our process, taking away one week from our review of what used to be two reading ordinances, and now it's a one reading proclamation. And that was a resolution that was done to expedite the contracting process. But, you know, in. In that procedure, we get shortchanged. And I think we need to make sure we're getting a lot more information. One of the questions I have for you, Michael, if you wouldn't mind coming to the podium. Is where would something like the Washington Street design fall? Would that be a separate project? Would that be something that would fall within this for the design work? This is the widening of Washington Street in the Globeville neighborhood. And for those of you who are not aware, we've got Xcel Energy that's going to be doing a pipeline, a gas pipeline down through the Globeville neighborhood. We. Councilman Brooks and I've been encouraging that this happen on Washington Street and not through the residential neighborhood. But, you know, having having that design work would be really important. And I don't know where something like that would fall, whether it's a non-call or whether it's going to be a separate bid project because of the cost. This is I may be able to take this because there's another one in my district just like it and it's bright and boulevard. And I believe it's a separate project, just like what we doing at Park Platte to Park Hill in City Park, because it's so large, it's a 60, $60 million project, correct? If it's an over $500,000, well, generally same as a heartbeat or an RFP out so that the general engineering community can bid on it. So yeah, that one is definitely large enough. It's its own separate project. Okay. I have no further questions or comments. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Ortega. Uh, Councilman Flynn? Yes. Okay. I just make sure that I'm clear on. Since Councilwoman Ortega brought up Angela, maybe you could address this. The administration under the charter, the way it is now, the list that you sent us this afternoon, nearly every one of these projects you could put out individually in a separate contract, because they're all well below the half million dollar threshold in the charter that has to come to us. Now, you did say I believe that or Michael, maybe you said it, that if a task order is more than $100,000, you'll seek many bids among the among the folks who are all who already have the on call. What do you do when the estimate is over half a million dollars. That would go out for a hard bid? That would go out for Harbert. But would it come back to us then? Yes, that's what I thought. Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you, Councilman Flint. Councilman Espinosa, you back up? Yeah. One more sort of question related to the the the way council in Cashman sort of observed that this might. This seems like a $56 million request when the request for services went out, the RFP, RFQ, I don't know what it is. When that went out, was it done as 14 separate RFP or was there one call? There was one. So I think that's sort of important to sort of state. We knew we had $56 million worth of total capacity that we're going to allocate, mean that we're going to approve or disapprove tonight. Doesn't mean you're going to spend it. But we did treat it when we went out and asked for people to send their their qualifications in once. And under that big umbrella. And now we're talking about 14 different contracts. But it is one big ask. So when we do these on call contracts, this doing it this way saves us public works from anywhere from 60 to 120 days in actually getting the work done and out on the street. So this is this is an efficiency for us. And I agree. And I think that's important that we do that as a city to sort of, you know, recognize efficiencies when we can. But I do want to sort of when we go back and we're looking at and we're approving 14 bills that are all essentially the same language with different names, it still looks like $56 million. So that's again, we we rarely go up to that 56 million. And in the time that those contracts are open, it just allows for flexibility as the contractors are bidding for getting work. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. So no one, this isn't you're not putting this on the floor, Councilman Cashman? Yes, I do want to put it on the. Floor for a vote. Okay. Councilman Espinosa, would you please move the resolution, resolutions 1276 through 1289 on the floor for adoption? You're not going to let me do a range. So are there. I move that resolutions 1276, 1277, 1278, 1279, 12, 80, 12, 81, 12, 82, 12, 83, 12, 84, 12, 85, 12, 86, 12, 87, 1288 and 1289 be adopted in a block. All right. It has been moved in second it any comments? Any more comments? Councilman Cashman. Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to say, I do not believe there is any monkey business or malfeasance going on with these contracts. However, I'm going to take the opportunity to vote no tonight to encourage the follow through on the reporting and detail that I hope will be coming across. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. I just want to add that I appreciate the fact that we are going to be getting a report, but that's different from getting detailed information with each bill that gets filed up front. So, you know, it'll be great that we look at things in the RIRs, but I'd like to see it up front before voting. So I know exactly what those details entail. So for that reason, I'm going to be voting down to nine as well. All right. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilman Espinosa, I just want to sort of preface my comment. I will be voting in in favor of the contracts tonight, but I just wanted my colleagues to know that I've already going to formulate a request for sort of more granularity of prior years on how this money was used, sort of to paint a picture and then appreciate the sort of efforts to sort of track this going forward as well. So thank you. All right. It's been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, Raquel Cashman. Can each Lopez. New Ortega? No. Sussman. Black eye. Clark. All right. Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. I heard in. High. Mr. President, I. Politicals voting announce results. Sorry. I'm just looking to make sure everyone feels like a council member with. Tennis, tennis. Tennis Tuesdays Resolutions 1276 through 1289 have been adopted in a block. We've taken off Council Bill 49. This includes all the items that are called out. All of the bills for introduction are ordered published. We're now ready for the block votes on resolutions on final consideration, except for council bills 56 and 58. The two are companion bills and bills to be scheduled for a required public hearing later this evening. Council. Council will vote to pass companion Bill 56 after the conclusion of the public hearing on Council Bill 55 approving the amendment to the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan for the Sloan Sloan's BLOCK three project to authorize the creation of two sales tax increment areas. And Council will vote to pass the companion bill 58 after the conclusion of the public hearing on Council Bill 57 approving an amendment to the St Anthony's Urban Redevelopment Plan for the Sloan's BLOCK nine project to authorize the use of property tax increment financing. Councilmembers. Please remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilman Espinosa, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for on the floor for final passage? Thank you, Mr. President. I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in a block for the following items. 17 007400750034003500850108 12 0500 70 700 70 800 49 and zero zero 51. All series 70. All right. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary Rocha. Black Eye Clark by Espinosa, i Flynn I Gilmore, i Herndon I Cashman can eat Lopez. I knew Ortega i Susman. Mr. President. I. 13 eyes. 13 Eyes. Resolutions have been adopted. The bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 55, which approves the amendment to the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan for the Sloan's Lake BLOCK three project to authorize the creation of two sales tax increment areas and a require