Skip to main content
File #: ID 2025-099    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Consent - Resolution Status: Passed
File created: 4/10/2025 In control: Regular City Commission Meeting
On agenda: 5/7/2025 Final action: 5/7/2025
Title: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MARGATE, FLORIDA, REJECTING THE PROPOSAL RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO RFP NO. 2025-005 - PREQUALIFICATION FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY TRENCHLESS REHABILITATION AND PIPE-BURSTING TECHNOLOGY SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Attachments: 1. RESOLUTION, 2. BACKGROUND, 3. BACKGROUND, 4. BACKGROUND, 5. BACKGROUND

TO: Mayor and City Commission

FROM: Cale Curtis, City Manager

DATE: May 7, 2025


Title
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MARGATE, FLORIDA, REJECTING THE PROPOSAL RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO RFP NO. 2025-005 - PREQUALIFICATION FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY TRENCHLESS REHABILITATION AND PIPE-BURSTING TECHNOLOGY SERVICES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

Body


BACKGROUND:
The City advertised for RFP No. 2025-005 on February 14, 2025. Insituform Technologies, LLC submitted the only timely RFP response prior to the RFP submission deadline. A second response from another contractor was received after the submission deadline. In accordance with the provisions stipulated in the RFP document, the late submission was not opened or considered.

DEES currently has a pipe-bursting project being executed utilizing a piggyback of a competitively bid City of Pompano Beach contract awarded in July 2022. DEES has a significant amount of water main replacement work planned to take place over the next 6 - 10 years, and pipe-bursting is a method that may have some advantages. Therefore, it was preferred to have our own competitively solicited contract(s) in place with multiple contractors available to provide the services needed.

However, only one timely RFP submittal was received in response to the City's RFP and pricing was substantially higher than anticipated and significantly higher than what Staff feels is in the City's best interest. Staff calculated the cost to perform the same scope of work as the project currently in progress under the piggyback of the Pompano contract versus the pricing received in response to the City's RFP, and found the cost would be approximately 300% higher than the cost we are currently paying utilizing the piggyback.

By rejecting the proposal and pricing received in response to RFP 2025-005, Staff is prepared to execute future water main replacements by either continuing to piggyback existing contracts for pipe-bursting projects or individually bidd...

Click here for full text