Remnants of former public restroom at foot of Brighton Ave. in Ocean Beach. Port-a-potties can be seen in the background. The restrooms were closed in July 2009 and are not expected to be built until May 2012.
Councilmember Kevin Faulconer is so concerned about the failure of the City of San Diego to yet successfully put out to bid – or to have built – the public restroom at the foot of Brighton Avenue in Ocean Beach, that he plans to have the Council audit the department that is responsible for the bidding process.
Mr. Faulconer, who represents Ocean Beach as part of District 2, has added and has had approved an audit of the City’s Purchasing and Contracting Department within the 2012 budget. A recent series of bids for the project have been denied by that Department as being “non-responsive”. Apparently, three of the last 4 bids were denied, and the one accepted as a bid totals $915,000.
In inquires by Faulconer’s office about the future of the project, they have been told that the Department has to complete the design and either send the only bid on the table out for construction of the project, or yet again, for another time, send another bid out for the proposal.
Faulconer’s office is still waiting for a response from the Purchasing and Contracting Department for details and clarifications as to the reasons 3 of the 4 bids were deemed “non-responsive” to the original proposal.
The Department has also assured Faulconer’s office that they still plan to meet the construction deadline of May 2012. (There is a summer construction moratorium at the coast.)
This project for the Brighton Ave restrooms – the City calls it a “comfort station” – has been mired in controversy for several years now, a helpless victim of budget cuts and apparent fund transfers.
Closed in July 2009 due to interior hazards, a new design for the restrooms was approved by the OB Planning Board a year later with a price tag of less than half a million dollars. That was nearly two years ago. In the meantime, port-a-potties have been installed – the City rents them for a little over $1300 a month, and working showers remain.
The bottom line: if the project is finally built by May 2012, that means it took the City nearly 3 years to replace what was torn down in the summer of 2009. Three years to build a small, concrete shelter with running water, toilets, and benches.
For details of this controversy and the amazing funds “needed” for a restroom, you must check my earlier post here from early February of this year, and Dave Rice’s much earlier report of the July 2010 OB Planning Board hearing on the project here.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Just like the last time, the three out of four bids were probably rejected because they were not submitted in a three-ring binder. And no, I’m not kidding, that actually happened. It’s why the project had to go out to bid a second time.
It would be nice to have this ‘project’ done before the $2 billion dollar football stadium gets built.
either way, it will be ‘The Kevin Faulconer Memorial Toilets’ and thanks for the alcohol ban on the beach Mr. F., another city hall blunder.
would love to see the reason “non responsive” to what a 3 ring binder or rules that constantly change.
What does it take to get around the Summer building moratorium? They could rebuild that bathroom during the Summer months without causing traffic problems.
It looks like the entryway project at North OB has also been stalled by the silly moratorium. They are now at a point where they could complete the project without interfering with bicycles and pedestrians using the old asphalt ramp. Unfortunately the rules don’t allow building during nice weather in our bizarro city. In reality the tournaments at Robb Field impact traffic far more than construction workers at the entryway.
OK. So….let me get this straight. Faulconer sits around and fails to deliver a very simple community level infrastructure project for over two years and then…instead of actually spending a little staff time or personal time ensuring that a community gets what it needs…ignores it, then tries to make good after an EPIC fail by spending the taxpayer’s money on an audit?
We wanted a restroom…. But all we got was an audit. Sounds like a great T-shirt. Kevin went to OB….and all I got was this audit.
I’m sorry…but you missed the opportunity to trick me into thinking that you had the community’s best interest in mind the first time the bids were rejected. Now…we are looking into year 3 of not having restrooms at the beach because of the ineptitude of our City government.
This is pathetic. I want my money back. Hey Mr. Faulconer….your application to the OB Christmas Parade just got denied!
Ahhh…Yes… You go boi Captain Kill-Joy back at it again. I for one agree with naming the toilet after Faulconer… with an addition… His picture etched (b/c a photo wouldn’t last very long) at the bottom of each and every commode.
Take aim and fire #2
BTW did the math $1300/month x 36months = $46800
Wonder if there is any contractor out there, able to build a suitable crapper for that or less?
Another audit? Well it that is what is takes to get the job started I guess that is what has to happen but what Iexpect is after they determine who screwed up in doing their job they must be fired. Not a slap on the hands and a move to a new department. Get rid of those that waste tax payers money and time.
OB deserves a bathroom and it shouldnot take $900k for place to poop and pee!
not having enough public bathrooms in ob is the MAJOR cause of public urination/defication. i would think the obma would want these bathrooms finished sooner than later since their storefronts and alleyways are currently the solutions for those who can’t or won’t find a public restroom.
if the rented police trailer in the pier parking lot is a good enough bathroom for meter maids, why can’t they install others at the brighton location and various other locations for public use?
i still say there are enough out of work obceans that are eager and willing to work to solve this in a few short weeks.
Frank,
I’m confused by this article. As far as Iknow, the project only bid once so far, in January. It is currently back out on the street with a bid deadline of 7/8/11. See this link: {4D15468D-B557-4A14-98ED-507AFC7CA44A}
The RFP has been out since 6/17/11 and has attracted only three general contractors. It is again being put out as a design-build project. I haven’t had time to look at the plans yet, but I’m guessing they eliminated some of the more expensive components to bring the price down, but the fact that only three GCs have the plans, in this construction climate, tells me there are still big problems with the proposal.
I also agree with the comments about Faluconer jumping on the bandwagon now when he should have been on this a long time ago. I personally sent his office messages about it back when they condemned it but got no response.