Proposed Utility Line and Pavement Replacement Process Proposed Utility Line and Pavement Replacement Process Pre-Council June 28, 2016 Presented by: Transportation and Public Works Water

2 Utility Line and Pavement Replacement Process  Description of Current Process  Proposed Changes to Procurement Process  Proposed Implementation  Questions

3 Separate Water/Sewer and Paving Replacement Contracts  Intended to minimize bid prices and maximize competition 58 pre-qualified water/sewer replacement contractors 27 pre-qualified concrete pavement contractors 13 pre-qualified asphalt pavement contractors  Warranty issues Trench settlement affecting paving performance, resulting in warranty disputes  Delays between temporary and permanent paving Utility work schedule coordination with large paving contracts

4 Separate Water/Sewer and Paving Replacement Contracts

5 Recent Utility and Paving Replacement History  2014 Bond – Year 1 (2015) 10.9 miles water/sewer replacement 8 water/sewer construction contracts, $7.6M construction costs 36.1 lane miles of street replacement 3 street replacement contracts, $13.5M construction costs  2014 Bond – Year 2 (2016) 16.1 miles water and sewer replacement 9 water/sewer replacement contracts, $11.2M construction costs 28.7 lane miles of street replacement 3 street replacement contracts, $9.2M construction costs 3 combined water/sewer/paving contracts, $7.3M cost

6 Unit Price Comparisons  Year 1 – Avg. Utility/Paving Replacement Costs Water Replacement Costs - $140/LF Sewer Replacement Costs - $127/LF Street Pulverization/Overlay Costs - $375,000/LM  Average Lane Miles per Contract = 12 miles  Year 2 – Avg. Utility/Paving Replacement Costs Water Replacement Costs - $144/LF Sewer Replacement Costs - $135/LF Street Pulverization/Overlay Costs - $425,000/LM  Average Lane Miles per Contract = 10 miles  Combined – Avg. Utility/Paving Replacement Costs Water Replacement Costs - $156/LF (10% increase) Sewer Replacement Costs - $149/LF (14% increase) Street Pulverization/Overlay Costs - $493,000/LM (23% increase)  Average Lane Miles per Contract = 2.3 miles

7 Contractor Feedback  Water and TPW Management Staff attended April 13 Tarrant County Contractor’s Association Meeting  Feedback Received from Contractor’s included: We would receive balanced unit pricing if we included mobilization costs for both utility and paving work Combining utility work with paving work would simplify the warranty response and repair Combining utility work with paving work would minimize the time between temporary and permanent pavement replacement Combined contracts could include sequencing language to further minimize impacts of utility and paving work on residential neighborhoods.

8 Proposed Procurement Process  2014 Bond – Year 3 (2017) 4 water/sewer design projects, 9 construction projects planned 7.1 miles water/sewer replacement planned 27.7 miles of street replacement planned  Combined engineering agreements Four water engineering agreements already approved by Council will be amended to include paving design costs. New water and sewer replacement project engineering agreements will include both utility and paving design (where applicable) in the engineering agreements.  Combined construction contracts Year 3, 2014 bond program – use combined contracts Water/sewer rehab projects with TPW street participation will be bid as combined projects.

9 Proposed Coordination Process  Monthly Water and TPW Staff Coordination Meeting Further facilitate the use of combined projects through strategic programming of water/sewer/street capital funds Develop single tracking tool that allows both TPW and Water to review status of on-going utility replacement projects requiring permanent pavement replacement

10 Moving Forward  Combined Projects – design and construction Water/Sewer/Street projects to be designed and constructed as combined projects over next year. Continue inter-departmental coordination meeting Track unit prices to quantify cost impacts  On-going dialogue with contracting community Incorporate input from contracting community to improve procurement process and facilitate increased interest in bidding combined projects.  Future report to Council on cost implications Report back to council on combined project unit costs in comparison to historical unit price costs Benchmark with other cities

Platypus Process

12 QUESTIONS