|
Febrnarv 24. 1970
<br />
<br /> N~v, THEREFORE, BE IT R~SOLVED by the Council of the City of Portsmouth. Virginia that th '
<br />Portsmouth, Virginia, hereby requests the State Highway Com~n~s~ ....... f :c ' e City of
<br /> - ~ 7 ~ a~u,J~z Lu a~qulre [ne necessary rights of way
<br />for the Western Freeway, Route 164, Project 0164-124-102, R/W 201 within the Corporate Limites of said City
<br />and it is understood that such acquisitions will be handled by the Commissioner under established policies and
<br />procedures and his decision in all instances shall be final.
<br />
<br /> BE IT FURTHER RESOL~.D that the City of Portsmouth hereby agrees tO pay fifteen percent of the cost of
<br />the acquisition of such property."
<br />
<br /> 70-83 - "I submit the attached resolution and recommend it sadoption. This designates portions of the
<br />Western Freeway as limited access. It covers two parcels of land that the Highway Department is in the process
<br />of acquiring for the right-of-way. ~
<br />
<br /> It is necessary that the higllway be designated as limited access as this will be a 65 mile-per-hour
<br />facility and requires this designation. This will preclude any openings or access of any type except at the
<br />designated interchanges."
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Holley, the following resolution was adopted, without dissenting vote:
<br />
<br />~RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A PORTIOH OF THE WESTERN FREEWAY, RObiE 164, PROJECT.O164-124-102,
<br />R/W 201, AS A LIMITED ACCESS FACILITY
<br />
<br /> ~}tEREAS, the Western Freeway, Route 164, Project 0164-124-102, R/W 201, has been designed as a limited
<br />access facility; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, it is necessary that~the boundaries of a portion of the limited access areas be established.
<br />
<br /> NOB, THEREFOKE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Portsmouth, that the Western Freeway, Route
<br />164, Project 0164-124-102, R/W 201, be and the same is hereby designated a limited access facility.
<br />
<br /> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a portion 6{ the limited access coordinates are hereby established as shown
<br />on the plans for the said project, copies of ~]ich are on file ~rith the Virginia Department of Highways and
<br />the City of Portsmouth, as follows:
<br />
<br />B~ihhihM ~ a ~oint on the northern right-of-way line 128.17' left of station 67 + 25 and
<br />continuing easterly to a point 50.00' left of statiun 17 + 14.58 on Ramp B of the Towne Point
<br />Road Interchange and from a point on the southern right-of-way line 151.70' right of ~tation
<br />70 + 50 and continuing easterly to a point 45.00' left of station 15 + 13.76 on rowne Point
<br />Road."
<br />
<br /> 70-84 - "Bids were received on February 4, 1970, for the furnishings for the Civic Center. The bids were
<br />requested in three divisions:
<br />
<br />Division 1 covered desks, chairs, bookcases, etc. The low bidder for these items was Desks, Incor-
<br />porated, in the amount of $81,184.
<br />
<br />Division 2 covered special equipment for the offices of the Clerks of Court. The low bidder was
<br />Everett Waddey Company in the 8mount $47,848.50.
<br />
<br /> Division 3 covers the Courtroom benches and identical bids w~re received in the amount of
<br /> $12,600 from Desks, Incorporated, and Everett Waddey Company.
<br />
<br /> On the total bid, Desks, Incorporated was the low bidder by $4,4~1.26. Their low bid amounts to $142,118.
<br />
<br /> ~%ruile Desks, Inc. was $85.50 higher than Everett Waddey Com3pany in Division 2, I recommend that the entire
<br />contract be awarded to Desks, Inc. in the amount of $142,118. This will eliminate the necessity of dealing
<br />with two suppliers, and places the responsibility with one firm for alt of the furnishings.~
<br />
<br /> Bids were also received for the graphics and signs for the .Civic Center. Architectural Graphics sub-
<br />mitted the low bid in the amount of $tl,992 and I recommend that this be awarded to the above firm."
<br />
<br />5~Otion of Mr. Smith to concur.
<br />
<br /> The City Manager read the following letter from Attorney H. Thomas Fennell, Jr.:
<br />
<br /> "This firm represents Everett Waddey Company. As you know, the consideration of an award of the contract
<br />referred to above will be before the City Council at its meeting on Tuesday, February 24, 1970. ~.~ client has
<br />been advised of the recom~nendation of the Assistan~ City ~{anager and that is the reaion for this letter.
<br />
<br /> It is my understanding that ~he bid in question was broken down into three divisions. ~nere were t~ majoi
<br />bidders, my client and Desks, Inc. Desks, Inc. was the low bidder on Division I. On Division II my client's
<br />bid was $47,848.00 as opposed to a bid of Desks, Inc. in the amount of $48,354.00, a difference in favor of
<br />Everett Waddey in the amount of $86.00. Both of these firms submitted a bid on Division III in the amount of
<br />$12,600.00. Weha~ been advised by ~r. H. M. Myers, Assistant City Manager, that he will recommend to the
<br />Council that all three divisions be awarded to Desks, Inc. due to the fact that the tool on all three divisions
<br />was less than the total bid submitted by Everett Waddey. This recommendation by the Assistant City Mang~r
<br />is, we understand, contrary to the recommendation of the architect that Division II be awarded to Everett
<br />Waddey, tile low bidder.
<br />
<br /> In my conversation with the Assistant City Manager, I was advised that the reason for letting the eAtire
<br />bid to Desks, Inc. was due to the fact that delivery and installation would be more easily accomplished in
<br />this manner. However, a review of the bid proposals from both Everett Waddey and Desks, Inc. will reveal ~hat
<br />these bids include exactly the same items and, further, that these items were to be installed by the manufact-
<br />ur~and not the local representative.
<br />
<br />It, therefore, appears to us that no good reason may be advances for disallowing the bid of Everett Waddey
<br />
<br />
<br />
|