Loading...
Ordinance No. 3,1071 0 3 1 2- 1 4 ORD I NAN C E NO _ 3 1 0 7 AN ORDI NANCE REP EA L I N G ORDINAN CE S NOS _ 3 0 5 0 AN I] 3 0 5 2 WHICH 13AD AWARDED HOUSING REHAB I L I T AT Z ON C ONTRACT S # 7 9- 03 -OS AND #79 -03 -14 TO ALFRED FORD CO�ISTRTJCTION COiIPAi�3Y AND PROVIDING FOR THE E FF'E CT I VE D ATE HERE OF WHERRAS the City of Baytown awarCled two C 2 > housing ReYiabilitatiorx Corxtracts for repairs to Alfred Ford Construc- t ion Comparsy and WHE R EA S t h e t wo p r o j e c t s wa r e P r o j e c t # '7 9- O 3 - 1 4 5 1 3 Oak Street , as awarded by Ord inarnce No _ :3 passed ox3 D e c o mb e r 1 1 1 9 8 0 a rz d P r o j e c t # 7 9- O 3- O S, 1 1 2 5 B o 0 k e r t e e a s awarded by Orciiriarrce iVo _ 3050 passed on December 11 1JSO ; and WHERE A S, n ume r o u x p r o b l e m s D a v e a r i s e rz o n project awarded to Alfred Forcl Construction Company, being Proj ect #"79 -04 -11 irrcl -Lx c3irng : 1_ F a i l u r e t o s up p l y m a t e r i a l s o f t h e cl zz a 1 i t y s p e c i- f i e cl ; 2 _ L7rireasoriable delay in complet ing tYze work ; 3 _ Damage to tyro homeowraers property ; 4 _ Perforrrrirrg work irx a marxrzer which Forced tine homeowner out of her home which is a breach of the contract s terms arrd WHEREAS the lzomaowriors at 513 Oak Street and 1125 Bookertaa have requested triat Alfred fiord Corstruction Company riot do -the work on their homes because of its past failure to adequately per sorrri tree worms a.ncl WHE R E A S t h e Comm u n i t -Sr D ev e l o p m e n t A dv i s o r y C o mm i t t e e rias reviewed the past record of Alfred Ford Construction Company, grid has deterr�aixaecl that tree contract awards on 7 9- 0 3- 1 4 a n d # 7 9- 0 3- O S s h o u l d b e r e s c i n Cl e d; a n d WEIEREAS , Alfred Ford Corrstructiori Company has requested tliaIL; it be a L flowed to withdraw its bid on the two cCD zXX acts , NOW T R E RE FORE , 10312 -14 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAYTOWN: Section 1: That based on the above findings, Alfred Ford Construction Company was not the lowest and best res- ponsible bidder on Housing Rehabilitation Projects #79- -03 -08 and #79- 03 -14. Section 2: That Ordinance 3050, awarding Project #79 -03 -08 to Alfred Ford Construction Company and Ordinance No. 3052, awarding Project #79 -03 -14 to Alfred Ford Construct- ion Company are hereby repealed and declared of to further force and effect. Section 3: That the Community Development Advisory Committee is directed to rebid the above two projects. Section 4: This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, and PASSED by the affirmative vote of the City Council on this the 12th day of March 441ETIT 0. HUTTO, Mayor ATTEST: EILEEN P. HALL, City Clerk APPROVED: A ALL B. STRONG, ZCity At ney -2- . 1981.