STAFF AWARD REPORT
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
December 17, 2009
|
|
Prepared
by:
|
|
PURPOSE
To obtain approval to award the maintenance,
modifications and general repairs of the traffic signal devices throughout the Town.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
Beacon
Utility Contractors Limited (Lowest Priced Supplier)
|
|
Current
Budget Available
|
$ 135,000.00
|
700-505-5308 See Financial Consideration
section (see below)
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 130,359.00
$ 130,359.00
$ 130,359.00
$ 391,077.00
|
Exclusive of GST for 2010
Exclusive of GST for 2011*
Exclusive of GST for 2012*
Total
|
|
Budget
Remaining after this award*
|
$ 4,641.00
|
*
|
*
Subject to Council approval of the annual operating budget. The remaining funds will be used for
emergency traffic control requirements.
Note: The financial considerations include PST (8%), any maintenance monies
expended after July 2010 will be subject to the implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND
The contractor
will oversee maintenance, modifications and general repairs of the Town’s
signal devices to provide safe, reliable and efficient operation for roadway
users.
Large part of the
maintenance work will be inspecting or replacing of traffic control equipment
before it fails, including: semi-annual inspections and testing of control
equipment, intersection hardware, vehicle detector loops, pedestrian
pushbutton, signs and signal heads.
BID INFORMATION
|
Advertised
|
ETN
|
|
Bids closed on
|
October
28, 2009
|
|
Number picking up bid documents
|
15
|
|
Number responding to bid
|
3
|
|
Supplier
|
Price, Exclusive of GST*
|
|
Beacon Utility
Contractor Limited
|
$ 172,714.27
|
|
Guild Electric Limited
|
$ 186,483.53
|
|
Stacey Electric Company Limited
|
$ 216,392.68
|
Note: The tendered
scope of work includes goods and services of varying quantities that may or may
not be required over the duration of the contract. Actual usage is dependent on field conditions
and the performance of the traffic control system over time (65 signalized
intersections). For the purpose of this
award, the quantities/estimates of services are aligned with the approved
operating budget. Additionally, Staff is
guaranteed fixed pricing for the items which may or may not be used for the
duration of this contract.
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative
Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
December 17, 2009
|
|
Prepared
by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to obtain approval to award the contract
for lighting improvements at the Markham Village Library.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
ALJ
Electrical Contracting Ltd. (Lowest Priced Supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$ 83,282.90
|
750-101-5399-9202 Library Facility Improvements
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 113,842.58
$
11,384.26
$
125,226.84
|
Exclusive of GST
Contingency of 10%
Total Award
|
|
Budget Remaining after this award*
|
($
41,943.94)
|
|
*Budget
shortfall to be funded from account 076-5350-8526-005 Markham Village Building
Upgrades, which has funds remaining in the amount of $166,576. The purpose of the Markham Village Building
Upgrades project is to carry out various building upgrades which were not
originally part of the initial Markham Village Library building renovation project. Outstanding projects to be completed include
exterior and interior signage, way finding and landscaping. Based on current estimates for outstanding
work remaining to be completed, this budget has sufficient funds to cover the
shortfall for the lighting project in the amount of $41,943.94.
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as works are targeted to
be completed prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND:
The
Markham Village Library staff has requested some lighting improvements to
several areas of the library. The scope
of work includes revising and adding lighting in selected areas of the
building. Areas to be upgraded are the Information Centre, Children’s Area, Audio/Visual
Media Centre and the washrooms at the front entrance. Staff at the library has requested that this
work be completed as soon as possible as the lighting is poor in these
locations.
During
the mandatory site visit, it was determined that the work in the Children’s
area is to be completed after hours in order to reduce the effect on library
patrons and for safety reasons. Another
unknown at the time of tender was the access to the ceiling space above the information area.
BID INFORMATION:
|
Advertised
|
N/A
|
|
Bids closed on
|
November 5, 2009
|
|
Number picking up bid documents
|
7
|
|
Number responding to bid
|
3*
|
*One submission was disqualified as it was submitted after the bid
closing time. Under the Town’s General Terms and Conditions
section 13,”Late Bids will not be accepted”.
Note: Purchasing
contacted other bidders who did not submit a quotation. One bidder
accidentally missed the mandatory site meeting and one bidder stated that their
current work load and commitments would not allow them to bid on this project.
PRICE SUMMARY:
|
Supplier
|
Price, Exclusive of GST
|
|
ALJ Electrical Contracting Ltd.
|
$ 113,842.58
|
|
Kudlak-Baird (1982) Limited
|
$ 239,180.00
|
Note: The original estimate of $85,000
was based on four areas in the library. The scope of work increased as the
fixture installation in the Information
area became more difficult than originally anticipated. The installation
involved working in the attic space as well as attaching guide wires to the
spines in the ceiling. In addition,
during the tender site meeting, the library staff advised that work in the
Children’s area would have to take place after hours for safety reasons. This work was originally contemplated in the
bid document to be done during the day and as such, an increase in cost can be
associated with this as the Children’s Area represents a large portion of the work
in this project.
Staff reviewed the price submission with the supplier
who has confirmed the price submitted is a good price for this scope of work.
|
To:
|
Brenda Librecz,
Commissioner, Community & Fire Services
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
January 8, 2010
|
|
Prepared
by:
|
|
PURPOSE
To obtain approval to award the contract
for the installation of traffic control signals at three Town Intersections (Bur Oak Avenue and Brunswick Avenue, Bur Oak Avenue and Berczy Community
Park and Brimley Road and Wilclay Avenue).
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
Beacon
Utility Contractors Limited (Lowest Priced Supplier)
|
|
Current
Budget Available
|
$ 319,850.00
|
083-5399-9289-005 Traffic Control Signals
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 289,278.00
|
Price inclusive of PST, exclusive of
GST
|
|
Budget
Remaining after this award
|
$ 30,572.00
|
*
|
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as works are targeted to
be completed prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND
The project involves installation of
traffic control signals at three Town intersections (Bur Oak Avenue and Brunswick Avenue, Bur Oak Avenue and Berczy Community
Park and Brimley Road and Wilclay Avenue). Three intersections have met the necessary
technical warrants for traffic control signals.
BID INFORMATION
|
Advertised
|
ETN
|
|
Bids closed on
|
December
2, 2009
|
|
Number picking up bid documents
|
5
|
|
Number responding to bid
|
3
|
|
Supplier
|
Price Including
Provisional Items, Exclusive of GST*
|
|
Beacon Utility
Contractor Limited
|
$ 289,278.00*
|
|
Black and McDonald Ltd.
|
$ 402,482.00
|
|
Fellmore Electrical
|
$ 428,723.07
|
*Staff have analyzed low bidder’s price to previous
intersections awards of similar size and scope and confirm the pricing supplied
within this tender is comparable. The
low bidder’s price is also comparable to budgetary estimate.
References were satisfactory and Staff is confident
that the low bidder has the experience to do a satisfactory job for the Town.
FINANCIAL ATTACHMENT
STAFF AWARD
REPORT
Page 1 of 2
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative
Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
December 17, 2009
|
|
Prepared
by:
|
|
PURPOSE
To obtain approval
to award the purchase of eight (8) PRECOR AMT
Cross Trainers from Vo2 Fitness (distributor), for the Centennial CC (4) and
Thornhill CC (4) fitness centres.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
Vo2
Fitness (Preferred Supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$ 51,423.02
$ 96,000.00
$ 147,423.02
|
070-6150-9126-005 Fitness Equipment Replacement
(2009)
070-6150-10133-005 Annual Recreation Fitness
Equipment (2010)
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 79,814.16
|
Inclusive of PST , exclusive of GST
|
|
Budget
Remaining after this award
|
$ 66,852.86
|
*
|
*All funds remaining in account 070-6150-9126-005
(2009) shall be fully drawn and the remaining budget in account 070-6150-10133-005 (2010) in the amount of
$66,852.86 will be used for other fitness equipment replacement
requirements as budgeted for in this account.
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as delivery of products
is prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
Staff further
recommends:
THAT the tendering process be waived in accordance
with Purchasing By-Law 2004-341,
Part II, Section 7 Non Competitive Procurement, item 1 (h) where it necessary
or in the best interests of the Town to acquire non-standard items from a
preferred supplier or from a supplier who has a proven track record with the
Town in terms of pricing, quality and service;
BACKGROUND
Annually
Fitness equipment is reviewed and if required, is replaced and updated with
newer equipment to meet the increasing demands of our users. Currently, the
Town has fifteen (15) Elliptical Trainers (7 in Centennial
/ 8 in Thornhill) that average
approximately 10 years old and have outdated technology. 7 out of the 15 are showing signs of wear and
tear in the form of rust, de-lamination of the consoles, and varying degrees of
wear on moving parts. It is proposed
that 8 units be replaced and staff is requesting an additional unit at Centennial CC
(currently 3) to deal with the growth in our membership and increased user
demand for this particular equipment.
358-S-09 Purchase of Eight (8) Cross
Trainers for the Town’s Fitness Centres Page 2 of 2
OPTIONS/DISCUSSIONS
On an
annual basis staff research the market for the latest fitness equipment with
the fitness staff actively participating in demonstrations on a variety of
Cross trainers. The Town’s fitness
centres currently have only Life and Precor types of Cardio units, which have
proven to perform exceptionally well.
Staff has been consistent in staying away from the introduction of too
many brands in our facilities to try and maintain ease of use, and decreased
confusion for our user population. When
investigating the addition of a Cross Trainer to our current compliment of
equipment, Staff only entertained those from lines that we currently have in
our facilities. For this reason, only
the Precor AMT and Life Summit Trainer
were considered in the replacement process.
Concurrently, staff solicited information
from three (3) municipalities on the Precor brand of Cross trainer in their
facilities.
Staff
reviewed the following Cross trainers:
·
Precor - AMT
·
Life Fitness Summit Trainer
Both
these units were brought into the facilities to use as demos for the Town’s
client base to try-out.
RATIONALE
Members are requesting more options to
their training regime. This is one of
the ways to do this, by varying the model/type of equipment from the current
models that we have in our elliptical line.
We already have Precor Elliptical units in our facilities and this
Precor “AMT” Cross trainer model
would simply be in addition to the current ones we have.
Key Product Features:
§
User defined range of motion;
this is a unique feature to this unit.
Other similar units have a track system which do not allow the user to
define their own range of motion
§
No impact training
§
Arm motion for added calorie
expenditure (cross training feature)
§
Variety of user programs
r Manual
r Interval
r Heart Rate
r Fat Burner
In order to maintain current level of
service for our users, purchasing the same brand to maintain consistency was an
important part of the decision making process.
The cost of Precor “AMT”
Elliptical Trainers including installation & shipping is $11,523 (before
discount) and $9,630 (after discount) vs. the other noted Elliptical Trainers
with unit cost of $8,981 (before discount) and $7,659 (after discount). This
represents a price difference of $2,542 (28% higher) before discount and $1,971
(25% higher) after discount. However, given the feedback from the Towns fitness
staff, the solicited opinions from the Towns clients based on the in-house
demos for their use and the other local municipalities, it is deemed to be one
of the most robust, solidly built and most forgiving (less strain on the
joints). The machines are smaller and
the workout is superior to cross trainers, which is important for the
demographics of the user.
The recommended supplier has also provided
the Town with a special discount rate from the list price for a cost reduction
of approximately 17% or $1,893.00 per unit versus the list price.
The proceeds from the sale of the
trade-in equipment (7 Cross Trainers) in the amount of $4,550.00 will be
deposited into account # 890 890 9305 (Proceeds Sale of Other F/A).
STAFF AWARD
REPORT
Page 1 of 2
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
December 10, 2009
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
To obtain approval to award the contract for the storm
sewer collection system trenchless repair and rehabilitation in various area of
Thornhill.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended
Supplier
|
D.M. Robichaud
Associates Ltd. (Lowest Priced Supplier)
|
|
Current Budget Available
|
$ 188,700.00
$ 71,400.00
$ 51,000.00
$ 311,000.00
|
058-6150-9237 005 Storm Water Sewer Rehabilitation
(09)
050 6150 8228
005 – Storm Water Sewer Repairs (2008)
058-6150 9240-005 – Storm Water Management (2009)
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 232,763.00
$ 23,276.30
$ 256,039.30
$ 30,724.72
$ 286,764.02
|
Storm Water Sewer Trenchless Rehab
Contingency (10%)
Total award (Excluding GST)
Engineering Dept Project Management Fees (12%)
Total Project Cost
|
|
Budget remaining
after this award
|
$ 24,335.98
|
*
|
* The remaining
amount on account 9240 is to be used for the Construction Administration
portion of this project.
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as works are targeted to
be completed prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND:
The Operations Department
initiated annual storm water sewer video inspection program using Closed
Circuit Television (CCTV) to determine the existing conditions of the storm
water sewer line and to plan repair and rehabilitations schedules. The CCTV
inspection revealed that some of the Town storm water sewer lines specifically
in Thornhill area (137 locations) are in need of repair and cleaning. In
addition, the accumulated debris within the storm pipe has clogged/restricted
the flow. The defects identified by the CCTV inspection can be corrected by
cleaning the clogged pipes and by repairing the severely damaged pipes through
a trenchless technology method (without excavating and exposing the pipes).
This way there will not be any disturbance/excavation to the Town’s road
network. As part of the E3 initiative under Centres of Excellence, Engineering,
Asset Management (Right-of-Way) and Operations jointly budgeted a total of
$322,400.00 towards the cost of repairs and transferred the budget to Engineering Department. Engineering
Department will administer the storm water sewer rehabilitation project.
OPTION/DISCUSSION:
On October 22nd, the Purchasing Department issued a two (2) stage Tender
for the repair and rehabilitation of the storm water sewers.
BID INFORMATION:
|
Advertised
|
ETN
|
|
Tender issued on
|
October 22, 2009
|
|
Tender closed on
|
November 11, 2009
|
|
Number picking up tender documents
|
19
|
|
Number responding to Tender
|
4
|
STAGE
ONE (1)
Bids submitted for
this procurement opportunity were evaluated in accordance with a two (2) stage
process as detailed within the bid document.
278-T-09 Storm Water Collection System Trenchless Repair and
Maintenance @ various locations Page
2 of 2
Stage one of the Evaluation Process was
based on the evaluation of the Bidder’s submission in accordance with the
criteria set out in bid document. Stage
one (1) was evaluated by the following: Company Experience and Qualifications
(20%), Staff Experience and Qualifications (20%), Project Methodology,
Materials and Customer Service (40%), Project Schedule and Work Plan (15%) and
Health and Safety (5%). A minimum of 80%
was required in order to pass the first stage. Stage two (2) was evaluated
based on pricing.
|
Supplier
|
Score (out of 100 Points)
|
Ranking
|
|
D. M.
Robichaud Associates.
|
91.67
|
1
|
|
Veolia ES Canada Industrial
|
89.00
|
2
|
|
Liquiforce
Services
|
75.33
|
2
|
|
Sewer
Technologies Inc.
|
68.33
|
4
|
Stage
one (1) Scoring
The evaluation
confirmed D.M. Robichaud Associates & Veolia
ES Canada Industrial to be
the highest ranked bidders as both D.M. Robichaud and Veolia ES have well
qualified trenchless rehab experience in terms of working with larger pipes
specified in the RFP document. Based on the sample DVD
provided by both companies, they have the latest state of the art technologies
to perform the trenchless rehab and maintenance services. The storm water sewer
pipes mentioned in the RFP range in diameter from 250mm to 2000mm. As per the
proposals received from Liquiforce Services and Sewer Technologies, it seems
they have experience only in smaller pipes less than 600mm in diameter.
STAGE TWO (2)
Having met the
Stage 1 criteria, both Bidders were eligible to move to Stage two (2), pricing
section, where their bids were opened and the award of the contract was based
solely on price. The results of the Stage 2 pricing are:
Stage Two (2) Price
|
Contractor
|
Price
|
|
D.M.
Robichaud Associates Ltd.
|
$232,763.00
|
|
Veolia Environmental Services.
|
$281,303.00
|
|
To:
|
Alan Brown,
Director, Engineering
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
January 4, 2010
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
To obtain approval to award a contract for
the detail design, contract administration and construction inspection for the
illumination of six specific locations on Denison Street, 14th Avenue and 16th Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
Moon-Matz –
(Lowest Supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$
257,569.80
|
083-6150-7276-005 Town Wide Illumination
|
|
Less
cost of award
|
$
54,390.00
$
5,439.00
$
59,829.00
$
4,487.18
$ 64,316.18
|
Exclusive
of GST
Contingency
allowance (10%)
Total
award cost
Engineering
Fees (7.5%)
Total
Project Cost
|
|
Amount Remaining after this award
|
$ 193,253.62
|
*
|
*Remaining
balance in the account is to be used for other Town Wide Illumination projects.
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as works are targeted to
be completed prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the Engineering Department’s 5
year Capital Town Wide Illumination Program the Town requested pre-approved suppliers
to submit quotation for the detail design, contract administration and
construction inspection for the illumination of the following six locations:-
·
Denison Street - North side from Woodbine Avenue to Esna park Drive.
·
Denison Street - South side from Birchmount Road to Gorvette Road.
·
14th Avenue - North side from Kennedy Road to Noble Street.
·
14th Avenue - South side from Noble Street to Brimley Road.
·
16th Avenue - South side from Highway 404 to Woodbine Avenue.
·
16th Avenue - South side from Markham Road to 300m westerly.
It is expected
that the detail design will commence in January 2010 and be completed by April,
2010. Tender for the installation is anticipated in May 2010 with construction
by July, 2010.
BID INFORMATION:
|
Advertised
|
By Invitation*
|
|
Issued
|
November 20, 2009
|
|
Closed
|
November 27, 2009
|
|
Number of suppliers invited
|
4
|
|
Number responding to Quotation
|
4
|
*All
of the invited suppliers have been pre-qualified by the Region of York as approved
electrical suppliers. The evaluation of quotations was based solely on price.
373-Q-09
Consulting Services for Illumination on Denison Street, 14th Avenue and 16th
Avenue Page 2
of 2
PRICING INFORMATION:
|
SUPPLIER
|
QUOTATION
PRICE
|
|
Moon-Matz
Ltd.
|
$54,390.00
|
|
Lumentech Engineers Inc.
|
$60,500.00
|
|
AECOM
|
$83.800.00
|
|
Nexgen Utilities
|
$91,500.00
|
All
prices are exclusive of GST and inclusive of disbursements
|
To:
|
Jim Baird,
Commissioner of Development Services
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
January 4, 2010
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
To obtain approval to award the contract for the
construction administration of 3.1 kilometers of sidewalks along Woodbine Avenue, McCowan Road
and Yonge Street as part of the Sidewalk
Program.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended
Supplier
|
G.D. Jewell
Engineering Inc. (Highest ranked and lowest priced supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$ 1,448,137.49
|
083-5350-9302-005 Sidewalk Requests
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 57,898.90
$ 8,684.84
$ 2,894.95
$ 69,478.69
$ 5,210.90
$ 74,689.59
|
Contract Administration / Disbursements
Design
& Contract Admin Contingency (15%)
Field and Laboratory Testing Contingency (5%)
Total award (Excluding GST)
Engineering
Dept Project Management Fees (7.5 %)
Total Project Cost
|
|
Budget remaining
after this award
|
$ 1,373,447.90
|
*
|
* The remaining
balance of funds will be used for the construction of the 2009 sidewalk program
as budgeted for.
Note: The financial considerations include PST (8%), any monies expended after
July 2010 will be subject to the implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND:
The Engineering Department
administers sidewalk construction with funding from the Development Charges
(DC) program. These funds are used to provide sidewalk along Regional Roads and
Local Collector Roads. Staff has
developed a five year sidewalk Capital Program to schedule the design,
approvals and construction. In August
2009, staff has completed the design of 3.1kilometres of sidewalks along Yonge Street, Woodbine Avenue and
McCowan Road
as part of the 2009 and 2008 sidewalk program. At the time, the contract
administration work was not part of the design contract. In October 2009,
Engineering Department issued an RFP for the contract administration of these sidewalks. This staff award report is to award the contract administration part of the 2008 and 2009 sidewalk program to the selected
supplier. The construction of these sidewalks is scheduled to be tendered in
2010.
BID INFORMATION:
|
Advertised
|
ETN
|
|
RFP closed on
|
November 11, 2009
|
|
Number picking up Proposal (RFP) documents
|
9
|
|
Number responding to RFP
|
9
|
PROPOSAL EVALUATION
The evaluation team was comprised of staff from the Engineering Department with purchasing acting as the
facilitator. The evaluation was based on
pre-established evaluation criteria as listed in the Request for Proposal: 20% for
past experience of consulting firm, 20% for understanding the project, 20% for qualifications
of lead supplier and project team, resumes, organizational chart and quality
management, 10% for qualification of geotechnical services and 30% for price,
totaling 100%, with resulting scores as follows:
|
Suppliers
|
Total Score
|
Ranking
|
|
G.D. Jewell Engineering Inc.
|
86.33
|
1
|
|
Chisholm Fleming and
Associates
|
83.07
|
2
|
|
Trow Associates
|
78.43
|
3
|
|
SCS Consulting Group
|
70.82
|
4
|
|
Genivar Consultants
|
69.91
|
5
|
Prices ranged from $57,898.90 to $91,530.00.
255-R-09 Yonge St and 2008 Sidewalk
Program ( Woodbine Ave and McCowan Rd) Page
2 of 2
G.D. Jewell Engineering
Inc. was the lowest bidder for the contract administration of the proposed 3.1 kilometers
of sidewalks.
All companies scored well
technically with only six (6) points separating
the highest technically ranked to lowest technically ranked. G.D. Engineering
Inc. provided a good proposal with good experience in this field, their price
submission allowed them to gain seven (7) points on the other bidders making
them the highest ranked submission.
The bids have been verified for
accuracy and compliance with the RFP terms and conditions. Purchasing has reviewed the references of G.D.
Jewell Engineering Inc. and is
satisfied with these recommendations of references.
STAFF AWARD
REPORT
Page 1 of 3
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
Re:
|
269-R-09
The Design & Construction
Administration Services for the Restoration of three Erosion Sites along
Pomona Mills Creek, the East Don River south
of the CN Rail Bridge and the East Don River
upstream north of Proctor Avenue.
|
|
Date:
|
December 18, 2009
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
To
obtain approval to award the contract for Design
and Construction Administration Services for the Restoration of seven (7)
erosion sites along the East Don River and Pomona Mills Creek, Rouge River, German Mills and
Morningside Creeks.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended
Supplier
|
Clarifica (Highest Ranked and Lowest
priced supplier)
Award # 1
Clarifica (Highest Ranked and Lowest
priced supplier) Award # 2
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$ 933,752.15
|
640-101-5699-8377
|
|
Less cost of award
|
$ 90,048.76
$ 13,507.31
$ 103,556.07
$ 103,261.00
$ 15,489.08
$ 118,750.08
$ 222,305.65
$ 16,673.93
$ 238,979.58
|
Award
# 1
Design and
Construction Administration (Excluding GST)
Contingency (15%)
Total Award
Award
# 2
Design and
Construction Administration (Excluding GST)
Contingency (15%)
Total Award
Total
award # 1 & 2
Engineering Dept Project Management Fees (7.5%)
Total
Project Cost award # 1 & 2
|
|
Budget remaining after this award
|
$ 694,772.07
|
|
* The balance will be applied to
the remainder of the design for the design and restoration of erosion sites as
budgeted in account # 640-101-5699-8377.
Note: The financial considerations include PST (8%),
any monies expended after July 2010 will be subject to the implementation of
the HST.
PURPOSE:
To
obtain approval to award the contract for Design
and Construction Administration Services for the Restoration of seven (7) erosion sites along the East Don River and Pomona
Mills Creek, Rouge River, German Mills and Morningside Creeks.
BACKGROUND:
A study for Markham Watercourse Erosion Restoration Implementation Plan
was undertaken along with the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process
to establish existing and potential future erosion conditions in the Town’s
watercourses and to identify potential restoration strategies. The study has
prioritized a list of sites with specific erosion problems deemed to require
remedial work in the near future. In 2009, an addendum to the Erosion
Restoration Implementation Plan was undertaken to evaluate additional sites
that residents had brought to the attention of the Town. The addendum concluded
that two erosion sites had deteriorated and should be added to the priority
action list for restoration (listed as sites nos. 6 & 7 in Award #2). Award # 1 of this report is for the detail
design and construction administration of three sites, (nos. 1, 2 & 3),
while Award #2 covers four sites (nos. 4 through 7).
·
Erosion Site 1: Pomona Mills Creek downstream of Kirk Drive
·
Erosion Site 2: East
Don River south of CN Rail Bridge
·
Erosion Site 3: East
Don River upstream north of Proctor Avenue.
·
Erosion Site 4: The Morningside
Creek upstream of Steeles Avenue
·
Erosion Site 5: The Rouge River
upstream of CN Rail adjacent to Rouge
River Drive
·
Erosion Site 6: The Rouge
River Tributary at 7 Victoria Avenue
·
Erosion Site 7: The German Mills
Tributary at Huntington Drive
269-R-09 & 285-R-09The Design & Construction Administration Services
for the Restoration of Erosion
Sites along the East Don River
& Pomona Mills Creek, Rouge River
Creek, German Mills Creek &
Morningside Creeks Page
2 of 3
Note: Staff released two separate request for proposals due to one
project (269-R-09) having a requirement for bridge work that required the
technical ability to be scored separately from that specified in project
285-R-09 (Award #2).
AWARD
# 1
BID INFORMATION (269-R-09)
|
Advertised
|
Electronic Tendering Network
|
|
Bids
closed on
|
November 4th, 2009
|
|
Number
that picked up bid documents
|
30
|
|
Number
responding to proposal
|
5
|
PROPOSAL EVALUATION (269-R-09)
The evaluation team was comprised of staff from the Engineering Department with Purchasing
staff acting as the facilitator. The
evaluation was based on pre-established evaluation criteria as listed in the
Request for Proposal, 20% Past Experience, 20% Understanding of the Project,
30% Project Management and Delivery and 30% Price totaling 100%.
The ranking
results are as follows: (269-R-09)
|
Supplier
|
Total Score
|
Rank
|
|
Clarifica
|
79.50
|
1
|
|
Aquafor Beech
Ltd.
|
70.86
|
2
|
|
Aecom Canada
|
64.12
|
3
|
|
Dillon
Consulting Ltd.
|
61.00
|
4
|
|
Conestoga Rovers
& Associates Ltd.
|
59.50
|
5
|
Note: Prices ranged from $90,048.76 to
$277,347.50 (exclusive of GST).
The evaluation confirmed Clarifica (A division
of Cole Engineering) as the highest
overall ranked bidder and lowest for pricing. Clarifica price was $57,000 lower
than the 2nd lowest priced bidder which provided them with
additional 20 points on price in the evaluation. Their ranking in the scoring
on technical criteria was lower when compared to the other proponents which was
partially due to their limited involvement with bridge rehabilitation, however,
their proposal demonstrated to the Town’s satisfaction that they have the
ability to undertake the project and that they have a good understanding of the
project deliverables, key issues and challenges.
The bids have been verified for accuracy and compliance with the Request
for Proposal Terms and Conditions. Purchasing
has reviewed the references of the recommended bidder and is satisfied with
these recommendations.
AWARD
# 2
BID INFORMATION (285-R-09)
|
Advertised
|
Electronic Tendering Network
|
|
Bids
closed on
|
November 6th, 2009
|
|
Number
that picked up bid documents
|
20
|
|
Number
responding to proposal
|
5
|
PROPOSAL EVALUATION (285-R-09)
The evaluation team was comprised of staff from the Engineering Department with Purchasing
staff acting as the facilitator. The
evaluation was based on pre-established evaluation criteria as listed in the
Request for Proposal, 20% Past Experience, 20% Understanding of the Project,
30% Project Management and Delivery and 30% Price totaling 100%.
269-R-09 & 285-R-09The Design & Construction Administration Services
for the Restoration of Erosion
Sites along the East Don River
& Pomona Mills Creek, Rouge River
Creek, German Mills Creek &
Morningside Creeks Page
3 of 3
The ranking results
are as follows: (285-R-09)
|
Supplier
|
Total Score
|
Rank
|
|
Clarifica
|
89.50
|
1
|
|
Aecom Canada.
|
74.68
|
2
|
|
Aquafor Beech
Ltd.
|
69.00
|
3
|
|
Conestoga Rovers
& Associates Ltd.
|
57.50
|
4
|
|
Dillon
Consulting Ltd.
|
52.50
|
5
|
Prices ranged from $103,260.50 to $280,724.50
(exclusive of GST).
The evaluation confirmed Clarifica (A division
of Cole Engineering) as the highest
overall ranked bidder scoring 3rd highest for technical criteria and lowest for
pricing with a background in similar projects and a good understanding of the
project deliverables, key issues and challenges.
Clarifica price was $60,000 lower than the 2nd
lowest priced bidder which provided them with additional 18 points on price in
the evaluation. Whereas, they only lost
2.5 points on the technical score compared to the highest technical ranked
bidder.
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
December 7, 2009
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to obtain
approval to award the contract for engineering services including condition
survey, design, financial analysis, contract administration and site
inspection, for the rehabilitation of two existing culverts at Green Lane (C08)
and Bronte Road (C28).
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
G.D. Jewell
Engineering Inc. (Highest ranked – 3rd lowest priced supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$1,122,000.00
|
058-6150-8111-005
Culvert Improvements
|
|
Less
cost of award
|
$ 118,501.00
$
17,775.15
$
136,276.15
$ 10,220.71
$
146,496.86
|
Design and Contract Admin.
(Exclusive of GST)
Contingency
allowance (15%) – (Excluding GST)
Total
Award
Engineering
Fees (7.50%)
Total
Project Cost
|
|
Amount Remaining after this award
|
$ 975,503.14
|
*
|
*Remaining balance
will be used for construction and or returned to the original funding account.
Note: The financial considerations include PST (8%), any monies expended after
July 2010 will be subject to the implementation of the HST.
BACKGROUND:
The Town retained a consultant in 2008 to carry out
structural inspection and provide reports on five existing culverts Green Lane
(Structure No. C08), Bronte Road
(Structure No. C28), Elgin
Mills (Structure No. C32), 19th
Avenue (Structure C60) and Drakefield at Banfield
(Structure No.C66). The consultant’s reports identified various state of
deterioration in two culverts, Green
Lane (Structure No. C08) and Bronte Road (Structure No. C28) and that
rehabilitation is required.
Deteriorations identified include poor conditions at the inlet and
outlet ends, scaling, spalling, cracks in the culvert barrels, deteriorating
concrete around drain pipes, disintegration of concrete, exposed corroded reinforcing bars, settlement of gabion retaining wall,
sedimentation and hard deposits in barrels, failure of waterproofing, etc. This
rehabilitation work is necessary to avoid further deterioration of the
culverts. Minor rehabilitation was required for Elgin Mills (Structure No. C32)
and 19th Avenue
(Structure C60) and this was performed by Operations. Drakefield at Banfield
(Structure No.C66) was identified as being under the jurisdiction of the TRCA
so no action is required on the part of the Town.
BID INFORMATION:
|
Advertised
|
Electronic Tendering
Network
|
|
Bids closed on
|
Friday, October 16, 2009
|
|
Number of Suppliers that picked up
documents
|
19
|
|
Number responded to proposal
|
5
|
PROPOSAL
EVALUATION:
The Evaluation Team was comprised of staff from the Engineering
Department with Purchasing acting as
facilitator. The evaluation was based on pre-established criteria as listed in
the Request for Proposal. 20% Past Experience,, 20% Qualification of Lead Supplier
and Project Team, 20% Project Delivery and 30% Price totaling 100%.
231-R-09
Culvert Rehabilitation at Green
Lane and Bronte
Road Page 2 of 2
The ranking
results are as follows:
|
Supplier
|
Score (out of 100 points)
|
Overall Ranking
|
|
G.D. Jewell
Engineering Inc.
|
86.5
|
1
|
|
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
|
80.0
|
2
|
|
Planmac Inc.
|
72.0
|
3
|
|
SNC-Lavalin Inc.
|
63.0
|
4
|
|
CMP Engineering
|
51.5
|
5
|
Prices ranged from $98,754 to $265,045.
The evaluation confirmed G.D. Jewell Engineering
Inc. to be the overall highest ranked, scoring 2nd highest for the
technical requirements (only 0.50 lower than highest technical) and third for
pricing ($19,756 higher than low bidder).
G.D. Jewell Engineering Inc.
presented a proposal that had strong previous background in similar projects,
good understanding of the project deliverables, key issues and challenges.
|
To:
|
John Livey, Chief Administrative Officer
|
|
Re:
|
|
|
Date:
|
November 30, 2009
|
|
Prepared by:
|
|
PURPOSE:
To obtain approval to extend the contract
and increase the Purchase Order (D9 96) for additional design work required for
the Rodick Road Phase 3 - 14th Avenue to Esna Park Drive.
RECOMMENDATION
|
Recommended Supplier
|
AECOM –
(Preferred Supplier)
|
|
Current Budget
Available
|
$ 11,597,510.16
|
083-5350-9300-005 Rodick
Road Extension – Ph 3
|
|
Less
cost of award
|
$
94,450.00
$
10,000.00
$ 104,450.00
$
4,700.25
$ 109,150.25
|
Exclusive
of GST
Contingency
allowance
Total
award cost
Engineering
Fees (4.5%)
Total
Project Cost
|
|
Amount Remaining after this award
|
$ 11,488,359.91
|
*
|
*Remaining balance in the account is to be
used for the construction of the project.
Note: The financial considerations do not include HST as works are targeted to
be completed prior to the July 2010 implementation of the HST.
Staff further recommends:
THAT the tendering process be waived in accordance with Purchasing By-Law 2004-341, Part II, Section 7 (c)
when the extension of an existing contract would prove more cost-effective or
beneficial;
BACKGROUND:
The detailed design of Rodick Road Phase 3
was awarded to AECOM (the highest ranked/lowest priced bidder) on March 4, 2008. The design has now been substantially
completed but additional works, which were not part of the original scope of
work as detailed below, is required to complete the detailed design.
|
Project management
|
Additional meeting, reviews and co-ordinations for the following
extra works
|
$5,010
|
|
Road design
|
After the demolition of 60 Esna Park Drive (the former Fire Dept.
building), a topographical survey has to be redone to be incorporated in the
design to generate the latest contours, cut and fill quantities for earth
work and new cross sections.
|
$15,930
|
|
Design in private
properties (allowance)
|
Survey and design work required in 2 private properties that are
to be acquired/expropriated by the Town.
|
$11, 400
|
|
Streetscaping
|
Landscaping design was not part of the original scope of work and
is required to plant trees and landscaping according to the Streetscape
Manual. Opportunities to plant more
trees for the Trees for Tomorrow program in the ROW
will also be reviewed. The landscape
consultant will meet some of the landowners to finalize compensations for the
mature trees removed during the construction.
|
$15,010
|
|
Utility investigations (not part of the original work)
|
It is necessary to confirm the location and depth of some of the
utilities to avoid conflicts during construction. It involves test pits, survey of the
exposed utilities, incorporate the information
in the drawings and make any design adjustment to avoid conflicts.
|
$44,600
|
|
Disbursements
|
|
$2,500
|
|
|
Total above (excluding GST)
|
$94,450
|
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
The
estimated cost of this additional work is $94,450.00 which is adequately
covered by the approved budget for this project of $11,597,510.16. The remaining funding after this award
($11,488,359.91) will be used for the construction.
The unit prices
quoted by the supplier for this additional work are comparable to the current
fee structure and in some cases lower than those in its original proposal.
