|
In This Issue...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County Rejects Bids for Repaving a Dozen Crumbling Roads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County Rejects Bids for Repaving a Dozen Crumbling Roads
By Michael Thomas
Santa Cruz County supervisors rejected a preventative maintenance project that would have resurfaced a dozen of the worst roads in the County after public works staff recommended that supervisors bank the money instead for critical winter storm repairs.
Supervisors had agreed on a list of roads in early summer and put them out to bid as a package expected to cost $1,073,030. The work would have been paid for mostly with state Proposition 42 funds. But when the lowest bid received was $1,238,024, Public Works staff recommended that supervisors reject the bids and save the money for emergency repairs to roads such as Vine Hill Drive in Scotts Valley and Cathedral Drive in Aptos.
On Tuesday, Sept. 26, supervisors voted to put off the “rubberized sealcoat” project, against the urging of Supervisor Ellen Pirie, who had suggested the maintenance work. Supervisors Mardi Wormhoudt and Mark Stone voted against the project, while Supervisor Campos excused himself because he lives on one of the roads in question.
Four “yes” votes would have been needed to proceed.
Pirie said it was disappointing to reject bids on a project that supervisors had previously agreed on.
“This is particularly bad because we told people those roads were going to get done,” Pirie said. “It went out to bid in July, so it’s not a lot of time that has passed or things have changed. It’s just that they are getting nervous.”
The 12 roads in the plan were spread through the entire county. Pleasant Valley, Varni Road, parts of Soquel Drive, Soquel-San Jose Road, Empire Grade, Graham Hill Road, and Summit Road were among those that would have been resurfaced.
“The idea is that this rubberized seal would keep them from falling apart,” Pirie said.
A bid protest had also been filed by Watsonville’s Graniterock, which claimed that the County had insisted on using a seal material that is only available from one supplier. Graniterock claimed that the only competing bid was from a company with ties to the high bidder. However, Public Works staff concluded that the process had produced competitive bids.
An additional $327,394 in General Fund money would have been needed to cover the higher-than-expected bid. However, the County could have awarded the contract and then reduced the scope of work to bring the total cost down to the range of the original expected cost.
|
