Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 5, 2015 For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Linda Roberts Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: lroberts@pickering.ca Executive Committee Agenda Monday, October 5, 2015 Council Chambers 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor McLean Anything highlighted denotes an attachment or link. By clicking the links on the agenda page, you can jump directly to that section of the agenda. To manoeuver back to the agenda page use the Ctrl + Home keys simultaneously, or use the “bookmark” icon to the left of your screen to navigate from one report to the next. 2 PW 03-15 Subject: Quotation No. Q-26-2015 October 5, 2015 Page 2 On May 21, 2015 an advertisement was placed on the City's website and 14 potential respondents were invited to download the quotation document. One company has responded by the revised (extended) closing date of Tuesday, July 28, 2015. The quotation submitted by Maciver Dodge Jeep has received an acceptable score from the Evaluation Committee, meets the required specifications, and is recommended for approval. · In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.12, virhere the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering best value to the City is acceptable and the estimated total purchase price is over $125,000.00, the Manager may approve the award, subject to consultation with the appropriate Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council. Financial Implications 1. Quotation Amount Quotation No. Q-26-2015 One-One Ton Dump Truck with Aluminum Dump Body One-One Ton Dump Truck with Side Tip Dump Spreader Subtotal HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Cost 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary .Quotation No. Q-26-2015 for Supply and Delivery of Two-One Ton Dump Trucks One-One Ton Dump Truck with Alumin.um Dump Body One-· One Ton Dump Truck with Side Tip Dump Body Licenses Subtotal HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%) Total Net Project Cost CORP0227-07/01 revised $56,645.00 84,290.00 140,935.00 18,321.55 $159.256.55 $56,645.00 84,290.00 600.00 141,535.00 18,400.00 159,935.00 (15 909.00 $144.026.00 PW 03-15 Subject: Quotation No. Q-26-2015 3. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Parks Capital Budget Description One-One Ton Dump Truck One-One Ton Dump Truck with Side Tip Dump Body Account Code Source of Funds Available Budget 5780.1502.6157 Vehicle $60,000.00 Replacement Reserve 5780.1503.6157 Vehicle 85,000.00 Replacement Reserve October 5, 2015 Page 3 Required $57,947.00 86,079.00 Total Funds $145.000.00 $144.026.00 Net Project Cost under (over) Approved Funds: $974.00 Discussion: The replacement of a One Ton Dump Truck and a One Ton Dump Truck with Plow was approved in the 2015 Parks Capital Budget, funded from the Vehicle Replacement Reserve. The requirement for a plow attachment was removed from the quotation specifications as a compatible snow plow unit was re-purposed from a vehicle that was replaced in 2014. The specifications for this unit were revised to in.clude a side tip dump body instead of the standard rear tip function. A side tip dump body is a more expensive option that offers more versatility. Although this vehicle exceeds the approved budget, the balance of funding is available by combining the net amount of the two capital budgets, which is within the approved budget amount. An Evaluation Committee consisting of Public Works staff met on August 20, 2015 and each committee member evaluated the quotations based on the rated criteria. A combined average score for each quotation was determined as part of Stage II of the evaluation process. After careful review of all submissions received, the Evaluation Committee and the Engineering & Public Works Department recommends acceptance of the quotation submitted by Maciver Dodge Jeep for a one ton dump truck in the amount of $56,645.00 (HST extra) and a one ton side tip dump truck in the amount of $84,290.00 (HST extra), and that the total net project cost of $144,026.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved. CORP0227-07/01 revised 3 ·---"----~~-~---:·---------~---~--------,·-------M~cHM·E-N1#---~f::~o-REPORnrJ~~~---t-C--~-------.· --~-~---· -·-'~L. '2-of :3 --'-"""--"-. - 8 Pricing will be scored based-on a relative pricing formula using the total price for each unit set out in the Rate Bid Form. ' Each will receive a percentage of the total possible points allocated to price for the particular category it has bid on by dividing that respondent's price for that category into the lowest bid price- in that category. For example, if a respondent bids $120.00 for a particular category arid that is the lowest bid price in that category, that respondent receives 100% of the possible points for that category (120/120 = 100%). A respondentwho bids $150.00 receives 80% of the possible points for that category (120/150 = 80%), and a respondent who bids $240._00 receives-50% of the possible points for that category (120/240 =50%). Lowest total price -------------------------------x Total available points = Score for quotation with the second-lowest Second~lowest total price total price Lowest total price ---------------~----------------x Total available points= Score for quotation with third-lowesttotal Third-lowest total price . price · And so on, for each quotation. ' -·In the.event of a tie score, thE! selected Respondent will be determined in accordance with the City's Purchasing Procedures. · A summary_ of the three (3) Evaluation Committee members' average ·points for each bid and pricing poi,nts· is shown below, as well as in the attached spreadsheet: Item #1 Average of Quoted Points Total Evaluation Amount Awarded Points Vendor Name Committee-(excluding Price Awarde -Points HST) d .. Awarded Maciver Dod~e Jeep 68.33 $56,645.00 30 . 98.33. .. Item #2 Average of Quoted Points · Total Evaluation Amount Awarded Points Vendor Name Committee (excluding Price Awarded Points HST)· Awarded Ma~lver Dodge ·Jeep 68.00 $84,290.00 30 98.00 D'elivery times provided by the Respondent are also indicated on the attached spreadsheet. A budget of $145,000.00 was provided to Supply & Services for this procurement. Maciver Dodge Jeep has been awarded the highest overall points. Page 2 of 3. A11.ACHMENni--Z. ro REPORT#~ D 3-\ S . ---· .. ·... 3 "f ~ -.J..t.:_:.:s:d' . em \J In accordance with Purchasing Policy, S-ection 6, Item 06.12;where the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and. offering best value to the City is acceptable or where the highest scoring proposal is recommended and the estimated total purchase price is: · (c) Over $125,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to the approval of the Director, Treasurer, GAO and Council. Once this approval is received, an approved "on-line" requisition will be required to proceed. - Please direct all enquiries to Supply & Services. Respondents will be advised in due course. If you require further information or assistance, do_ not hesitate to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. 1\ VAF/sb F{2- 'l<>( Atlachments (2#~, Page 3 of 3 9 Report FIN 23-15 Subject: Tender/Contract Approval Council's Recess 2015 October 5, 2015 Page 2 Discussion: Purchasing Policy Item 07 authorizes the Chief Administrative Officer to act on . I behalf of Council in approving an award of a project, and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing for same, during any recess, break or absence of City Council, on the condition that: (a) The project is in a budget approved by Council; (b) Such actions are in compliance with the Purchasing Policy and the Financial Control Policy; (c) The project is not debt financed; and (d) A report respecting those approvals is subsequently submitted to Council. The circumstances were such that on proposal, one tender and three quotations required approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's 2015 recess. It is recommended that Council receive this Report for information and ratify the approval of RFP-4-2015, Consulting Services for Structure Repairs & Associated Works-Palmer Bridge; Tender No. T-14-2015, Asphalt and Concrete Repairs; Quotation No. Q-19-2015, Supply and Delivery of Two Sidewalk Tractors; Quotation No. Q-38-2015, Tree Canopy Replacement-Tree Removal Services; and Quotation No. Q-39-2015, Phase I Tree Canopy Replacement-Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery and Planting of Trees (As Required). Therefore, pursuant to the Purchasing Policy, the following was approved by the Chief Administrative Officer during the "recess" of Council. Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 RFP-4-2015, Consulting Services for Structure Repairs & Associated Works -Palmer Bridge That Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015, in the amount of $155,100.00 (HST extra) submitted by AECOM Canada Ltd. be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. Proposal Amount Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 HST 13% Total $155,100.00 20,163.00 $175,263.00 11 1 2 Report FIN 23-15 Subject: Tender/Contract Approval -Council's Recess 2015 2. Estimated Pro"ect Cost Summa Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 Contingency (10%) Subtotal HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%) Total Net Project Cost 3. Approved Source of Funds Detail Design & Approvals Total Funds Account Code 5320.1408.6250 Source of Funds York Region SEC Funding Agreement I Project Cost under (over) approved funds by Tender No. T-14-2015, Asphalt and Concrete Repairs October 5, 2015 Page 3 $155,100.00 15,510.00 $170,610.00 22,179.00 $192,789.00 (19,177.00) $173,612.00 Budget Required $285,000.00 $173,612.00 $285,000.00 $173,612.00 $111,388.00 That Tender No. T-14-2015 for Asphalt and Concrete Repairs submitted by Serve Construction, in the amount of $146,861.58 (HST included) be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount _ Tender No. T-14-2015 Part A-Engineering-Maintenance Work Asphalt and Concrete Repairs Sidewalk Repairs Part B -Development Services - Maintenance Work Sub Total HST (13%) Total Gross Tendered Amount $35,416.00 86,292.00 8,258.00 $129,966.00 16,896.00 $146,862.00 Report FIN 23-15 Subject: Tender/Contract Approval -Council's Recess 2015 2. Estimated Pro·ect Cost Summa Tender No. T-14-2015 HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%) Total Net Project Cost 3. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Approved Current Bud et Account Source of Funds 2320.2408.0002 Property Taxes 2323.5981.0000 Federal Gas Tax 2613.2407.0000 Property Taxes Total Funds I Project Cost under (over) approved funds by Available Budget $50,000.00 100,000.00 25,000.00 $175,000.00 October 5, 2015 Page.4 $129,966.00 16,896.00 $146,862.00 (14,609.00) $132,253.00 Required $36,039.00 87,811.00 8,403.00 $132,253.00 $42,747.00 Quotation No. Q-19-2015, Supply and Delivery of Two Sidewalk Tractors That Quotation No. Q-19-2015, submitted by R.P.M. Tech Inc. for one new latest model year non-articulating, tracked sidewalk tractor with snow plow and sand/salt spreader in the amount of $149,433.00 (HST extra) be accepted; and That Quotation No. Q-19-2015 submitted by Joe Johnson Equipment for one new latest model year articulating multi-purpose sidewalk tractor with snow plow and sand/salt spreader be accepted in the amount of $111,717.00 (HST extra) be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. Quotation Amount Quotation No. Q-19-2015 One Non-Articulating Tracked Sidewalk Tractor One Articulating Multi-Purpose Sidewalk Tractor Subtotal HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Cost $149,433.00 111,717.00 $2611150.00 33,949.50 $295,099.50 13 Report FIN 23-15 Subject: Tender/Contract Approval -Council's Recess 2015 2. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Approved Capital Budget Account 5311.1509.6131 Total Funds Source of Funds Rate Stabilization Reserve [Project Cost under (over) approved funds by Available Budget $550,000.00 $550.000.00 October 5, 2015 Page 6 Required $251,856.00 $251,856.00 $298, 144.oo 1 Phase 1 Quotation No. Q-39-2015, Tree Canopy Replacement -Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery and Planting of Trees (As Required) That Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Part 1-Stump Removal Services, in the amount of $42,500 (plus HST) submitted by M. Franks Landscaping be accepted; That Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Part 2-Supply & Delivery of Trees, in the amount of $119,250 (plus HST) submitted by Dutchmaster Nurseries Ltd. be accepted; and That Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Part 3, Planting of Trees, in the amount of $73,000 (plus HST) submitted by M. Franks Landscaping be accepted. Financial Implications: 1. Quotation Amount Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Part 1 -Stump Removal Services Part 2-Supply and Delivery of Trees Part 3-Tree Planting Sub Total HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Amount 2. Estimated Pro'ect Cost Summa Quotation No. Q-39-2015 HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate ( 11.24%) Total Net Project Cost $42,500.00 . 119,250.00 73,000.00 $234,750.00 30,518.00 $265,268.00 $234,750.00 30,518.00 $265,268.00 (26,386.00) .238,882.00 15 Report FIN 23-15 Subject: Tender/Contract Approval Council's Recess 2015 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ~ Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. ¥ Z{, 20/5 Chief Administrative Officer October 5, 2015 · Page 8 17 21 assembled who worked on the project, the current project status, budgeted costs versus actual costs, scheduling issues and resolutions, and design challenges, efficiencies. Provide client names, contacts and up~to-date contact phone numbers. The City may contact the references provided as part of its evaluation process. Understanding of Project= 15 Points The Proposal should include information that provides: a. Information that the Proponent understands the objectives and requirements of this project. · Proponents mu.st relate these objectives to past experience or expertise of the Proponent · and/or their team; and b. A summary of the .risks, problems or issue~ associated with the work and how they will be mitigated. · Work Plan atnd Deliverables = 20 Points The Proponent is to provide a written response which clearly and concisely details the following: a. An indication of when the Company can commence the work; b. A detailed work plan for tasks 1-4 indicating and detailing the method, tasks, deliverables; · c. A schedule that identifies work phases (by Gantt Chart or other similar illustration) including key dates for major deliverables (design development, working drawings, tender specifications, tendering, construction administration and post construCtion) in the proposed detailed work plan; d. Proposed staffing roles and the amount of time that they will be dedicated to this project; and e. State the assumptions regarding the roles and involvement of the City,staff. Project Team Overview= 10 Points It is important that the work be provided by a staff team that can demonstrate knowledge of, . and experience in providing similar services for projects of comparable nature, size and scope. In particular, the Proponent should provide an overview of the key personnel who would be primarily involved in the project and include the following: · a. Identify the prime firm submitting the Proposal and the sub-consultant firms that will be assembled to undertake th~ work. . _ b. The nam~, title, mailing address, phone number, fax number and e-mail of the Design Project Leader; c. Condensed resumes and professional credentials of each individual on the Project Team that highlights their education, training, and work history; d. The respective roles of the team members and their current office locations. Team members named in this RFP cannot be replaced without prior written approval from the City; Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 Consulting Services for Structural Repairs &. Associated Works,-Palmer Bridge Rehabilitation Page 2 of 5 23 e. Current and future project list that will be undertaken by members of the Proponent's team including their current workload (i.e., identify other competing priorities that are assigned to each member within this project timeline); and · f. Organizational chart that clearly defines the chain of command for each individual with the team. Quality of References-Total Poi~ts = 10 Points Relevance of projects similar in scope and value completed over the last five (5) years. Complete Appendix D -Reference Form · Reference: Appendix E -RFP Particulars -Item E -Pricing ,· Proponents should review and complete the Rate Bid Form at Appendix C. Pricing-Total Points= 20 Points Pricing will be scored based on a relative pricing formula using the Consulting Services for Structure Repairs & Associated Works (Part One) lump sum price set out in the Rate Bid Form: Each proponent will receive a perce11tage of the total possible points allocated to price for the parti.cular category it has bid on by dividing that proponent's price for that category into the lowest bid price in that category. For example; if a proponent bids $120.00 for a particular category and that is the lowest bid price in that ·category,. that proponent receives 1 00% of the possible points . for that category (120/120 = 1 00%). A proponent who bids $150.00 receives 80% of the possible points for that category (120/150 = 80%), and a proponent who bids $240.00 receives 50% of the possible points for that category (120/240 =50%), · Lowest lump sum price -----------------x Total available points= Score with second-lowest lump sum price Second-lowest lump sum price Lowest lump sum price -----------------x Total available points = Score with third-lowest lump sum price Third-lowest lump sum price . · · And so. on, for each proposal. Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 · Consulting Services for Structural Repairs & Associated Works-Palmer Bridge 2 4 Rehabilitation Page 3 of 5 A summary of the submitted pricing (excluding HST) and points awarded for the proposal is shown below, as well as in the attached spreadsheet: · Available Points Vendor Name Quoted Amount Points Awarded AECOM Canada Ltd. $155,100.00 100 93 AECOM Canada Ltd. has 'received the highest overall points. The total cost to provide this service is $155,100.00 plus HST. A budget of $285,000 was provided to Supply & Services for this procurement. . . ' The following documents were submitted with the proposal as a mandatory requirement, and ·have been evaluated and approved by the Employment & Compensation Specialist and the Manager, Budgets & Internal Audit: (a) The City's Health & Safety Policy Acknowledgement form currently dated and signed; (b) a copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary Report issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summary Report document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted); (c) A c()py of the current Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; . (d) Copies of Ontario Ministry of Labour, Health and Safety Awareness Training certificates for every worker and supervisor who will be working on this project; and (e) The City's certificate of insurance shall be completed by the b_idder's agent, broker or insurer; In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.04, the authority for the dollar limit as set out pelow excludes HST. · As such, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06 .12, where the compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering bestvalue to the City is acceptable or where the highest scoring proposal is recommended and the estimated total purcha~e price is: (c) Over $125,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to the approval of the Director, Treasurer, GAO and Council. Please include the following items in your report: 1. if Items (a) through. (d) noted above are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Heal.th & Safety or designate; 2. if Item (e) is acceptable to the Manager, Budgets & Internal Audit; 3. if the list of subcontractors is acceptable; 4. any past work experience with the low bidder AECOM including work location; 5. . witho~t past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; 6. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be ch~rged; 7. the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 Consulting Services for StructuraL Repairs & Associated Works -Palmer Bridge Rehabilitation Page 4 of 5 ·25 8. Treasurer's confirmation of funding; 9. related departmental approvals; and 1 0. related comments specific to the project. After receiving Councir's approval, an approved "on.:.fine" requisition will be required to proceed. . . . Do not disclose any information to ·enquiries during this time. The Proponent will be advised of the outcome in due course. An award notice will be placed on the City's website upon receipt of all-required approvals. ~ . . l~ +-~ require further information, please fee[ free to contact me or a member of Supply & Sef\nces. · i\ __ ,/1' ~ VAF/rr attachments (1) Request for Proposal No. RFP-4-2015 Consulting Services for Structural Repairs & . Associated Works-Palmer Bridge 2 6 Rehabilitation Page 5 of 5 Financial Implications ""-~-1: ~j~de~=Am.ou~t;~~ ~~.)-~ ---: -Tender No. T-14-201~·L•-·:.;<·,~-' [ A • • ~ Part A-Engineering -Maillte.(lance Work Asphalt and Concrete Repairs l Sidewalk Repairs ' Part B -Development Services - Maintenance Work :. .l Sub Total . . .. -l HST (13%) .: ' ' ~ '.. I • t ____ ,_ __ .. .,... .......... _...,. ......... __.-.. . -~·-· -.-............ -.... .;;_, _ .............. ,._,~ Total Gross Tender Amount 2. Estimated Project Cost Summary Tender No. T-14-2015 HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%) Total Net Project Cost 3. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Approved Current Budget Account Source of Funds 2320.2408.0002 2323.5981.0000 2613.2407.0000 Total Funds Property Taxes Federal Gas Tax Property Taxes !Project Cost under (over) approved funds by August 6, 2015 28 T-14-2015 Tender for Asphalt and Concrete Repairs Available Budget $50,000.00 100,000.00 25,000.00 $175.000.00. $35,416.00 86,292.00 . $8,258.00. $129,966.00 16,896.00 $146,862.00 $129,966.00 16,896.00 _, $146,862.00 (14,609.00) $132.253.00 Required $36;039.00 87,811.00 8,403.00 $132,253.00 $42,747.001 Page 2 of 3 30 (b) A copy of th, Jrrent Workplace Injury Summary . .JOrt issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summary Report document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted); (c) A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) Copies of Ontario Ministry of Labour, Health and Safety Awareness Training certificates for every worker and supervisor who wilf be working on this project; (e) The City's certificate of insurance or approved alternative form shall be completed by the Bidder's agent, broker or insurer; and (f) · A copy of the Waste Management Plan to be used for this project. A budget of $125,000.00 was provided to Supply & Services for this procurement. As such, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 06.12, where the compliant quotation or tender meeting ·specifications and offering best value to the City is acceptable or where the highest scoring pmposal is recommended and the estimated total purchase price is: (c) Over $125,000, the Manager may approve the award, subject to the approval of the Director, treasurer, CAO and Council. · Please include the following items in your report: 1. if Items (a) through (d) noted above are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety or designate; . 2. . if the Certificate of Insurance is acceptable to the Manager, Budgets & Internal Audit; 3. if the list of subcontractors is acceptable; 4. if the Waste Management Plan is acceptable; · 5. any past work experience with the low bidder Serve Construction including work location; 6. without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; · 7. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; 8. the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; 9. Treasurer's confirmation of funding; 10. related departmental approvals; and . 11 . related comments specific to the project. After receiving Council's approval, an approved "on-line" requisition will be required to proceed. Enquiries can be directed to the CITy's website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the public tender opening or to Supply & Services. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If you require further infonmation, please fee~ free to contact me or a member of Supply & Services. w (\. VAF/rr 'Jur Attachments 1 32 July 15, 2015 Tender No. T-14-2015 Asohalrano'C"'"'o"'n::;-;;c""re=t~e:-rR~e"'p"'a~Jr=s,-----~-'---------~-------- Page 2 purchase price is over $125,000.00, the Manager may approve the award, subject to consultation with the appropri~te Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council. . Furthermore, in accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 07.01, the Chief Administrative Officer is authorized to act on behalf of Council during Council recess in approving an aw~rd of a project, . and the Treasurer is authorized to approve financing of same. · · · Recommendation: 1. That Quotation No. Q-19-2015,.submitted by R.P.M. Tech Inc. for one new .latest model year non:-articulating, tracked sidewalk tractor with snow plow and sand/salt spreader in the amount of $149,433.00 (HST extra) be accepted; 2. That Quotation No. Q-19-2015 submitted by Joe Johnson Equipmentforone new latest model year a.rticulating multi-purpose sidewalk tractor with snow plow ahd sand/salt spreader be accepted in the amount of $111,717.00 (~ST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $300,750.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost· of $270,835.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That the Division Head, Finance&· Treasurer be authorized to-finance the tolal net project cost of $270,835.00 as follows; a) the sum of $154;607.00 to be funded from the Vehicle Replacement ~eserve; b) the sum of $104,605.00 to be funded from the Development Charges (DC) City's Share Reserve; and · c) the sum of $11,623.00 to be funded from Development Charges (DC) Reserve Fund- Operations Services; and . 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials-be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Financial Implications 1. Quotation Amount Quotation No. Q-19-2015 · Non-Articulating Tracked Sidewalk Tractor Articulating Multi-Purpose Sidewalk Tractor Subtotal HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Cost August 26, 2015 Quotation No. Q-19-2015 . $149,433.00 111,717.00 261 '150.00 33,949.50 $295.099.50 Page 2 of 4 35 The following documents areattacbed to. assistthe Evaluation Gomm1tteeto complete their .eval!.Jgf)ons: · · 1. Stage ll-Evaluation of Rated CritE.~ria; 2. EvaluB,tion Form (to be used by Eval.uc:;~Uon .CommitteE\); 3. Copies· of the qttdtatrons;_-ahd · 4. Copy :of Request for Qubtatkm Qocumeht Please direct enquir'ies to Svpply & Services, Respondents wrfl be advised Qf th~ o.utcome ln due cours.e. . .. . A bud_gei of .$'345,000 W?is pJovided to Supply & Servk;es for thi$-p.rocl.ireltient As :a total.awar'd, the value Js over-$:1.2:5,000. As such, in accordance with Purchasing PoUcy Item 06,,12, 'Vi(lie[$ the co.mpflant quotatron ·or tender ineetirig spe.cifioatlcms an·d offering best va[Qe to the City i.$· .aocep-t<ilble .or where th~ h1ghest scoring proposal is recommended and the-es!iinafed total. purchase price ls.-qver $125~000, the M~nager may approve the ~watd, ~L(Pj$d to th$ approval of the Direcbr1 Treasurer, CAO._and.CounciL . · · If !QU r-equire further tnfnrmatl:on, please contact. mE:! or .a memb.er pf Supply ~ Setvloes. -~ . . . . \ : ~ ff \ ' I . ' /1 \~. " (j' ·1 ',__ f !'f) ' ' . V. AF/' b · ·'*'~·. · s~ ll ·, Attaohmerits (9) Quotation N9. Q-'19-.2015. Supply & Delivery of Two Sidewalk Tr~ctprs Page_ 2 . 39 Pricing -Total Points.= 30 Points Pricing will be scored based on a relative pricing formula using the ·total price for each unit set out . in the Rate Bid Form. · Each wlll receive a percentage of the total possiple points allocated to price by dividing that· Responden~'s price into the lowest bid price. For example, if a. Respondent bids $120.00 for a. . particular category and that is ·the lowest bid price1 that Respondent receives 100% of the possible points (120/120:::: 100%). A Respondent Who bids $150.00 receives 80% ofthe possible po.ints (120/150 = 80%), and a Respondent who bids $240.00 receives 50% of the possible points . (120/240 =50%). . Lowest total price Second-lowest total price x Totf;3.l available points:::: Score for quotation wjth the second-lowest . total price . Lowe~t total price . x Total available points:::;: S<;:.ore for quotation with third-lowest total Tbird~towest total pr:ice price · And SO. on, for each quotation. ~ - In the event of a tie score, the selected Respondent.will be determinE:d in accorqance with the City's Purchasing Procedures. · .A summary of Stage II evaluation results for each u-nit is attached. Joe Johnson Equipment is thE? highest-scoring respondent for Item #1 (one new latest .model year multi-purpose sidewalk tractor with snow plow·and sand/salt spreader) in the amount of $i 11,717 plus HST. · R.P .. M, Tech Inc. is·the highest-scoring and only respondent for Item #2 (one new latest model year non-articulating, tracked sidewalk tractor with snow plow and sand/salt spreader) in. the . amount of $149,433 plus HST.'-The total cost to purchase both unrts is $261,150.plus HST. The cost of a snow blower attachment or·[nfrared asphalt heater for each unit is not included in these. amounts. In accordance with Purcnasing Policy !him 06.12, where tne compliant quotation or tender meeting specifications and offering best. value to the City is acceptable· or where the highest- scoring proposal is recommended and the estimated total purch~se pr:ice is over $1.25,000, the Manager may approve th.e award, subject to the approval of the Director, Treasurer, CAO and Council. · Do not disclose any information to enquiries during this time. Respondents will be advised. of the outcome in due course. · If you re~u·re further information, please feel free to contact myself or a member of Supply & Services · . . . . . VAF/sb_ } ~ Attachments; f./ Quotation No.·Q-19-2015 Page 2 of2 Supply & Delivery ofTw·o Sidewalk Tractors 41 3. That the Division Head, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of · $ 251,856.00 by a transfer from the Rate .Stabilization Reserve; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. -· Financial Implications 1. Estimated Pro·ect Cost' Summary Quotation No·. Q-38-2015 Contingency (20%) Sub Total-Costs HST (13%) · . Total Gross Project Costs HST Rebate (11 .24%) Total Net Project Costs 2. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Approved Capitaf Budget Account 5311.1509.6131 Total Funds Source of Funds Rate Stabilization. Reserve · Availa~le Budget· $550,000.00 $550,000.00 $206,250.00 41,250.00 . 247,5o·o.oo 32,175.00 279,675.00 . {27 ,819.00) $251,856.00 Required $251,856.00 $251,856.00 \Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $29s,144.oo 1 The a·pproved 2015 budget for the Tree Canopy_ Replacement Program is $1,000,000.00.However, this has been allocated between two components; tree removal ($550,000.00) and Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery and Planting of Trees ($450,000.00). As the estimated project cost is based upon an estimated removal cost per tree and an estimate of removing 375 trees in 2015 a contingency of 20% was provided to allow for a fluctuation in these two variables ... The' remaining funds will be used to complete the tree removal project in 2016. Discussion: The approved 2015 Capital Budget for Property Maintenance provided funding in the amount of ·$1 ,000,000.00 for the Tree Canopy Replacement Program. This amount was based on removing arid replacing approximately 1000 trees at a $1,000.00 per tree. A further breakdown for the tree removal portion only was estimated to be $550.00 per tree. To proceed with this quotation staff are recommending to proceed with removing 375 trees this year. A new quotation will be called in early 2016 to complete the project with any funds remaining. August 21, 2015 Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Page 2 of 3 43 3. __ That_quo!?~~9D _tJo . .Q:3~:.f.Q.l9 P~rt 3, Planting of Trees, in the amount of $73,000 (plus . ~ HSTJ; ~pmitte.d by M.\ RtB])ks La\)dscaping be accepted; · ! .. -. .. ..... '1 ; ~.--.:.~'"· .... -.:~. ·:.. ,-... -+ ·-~1 ~ . 4. ! _Th_attbt:Motal cost of $234,750 {plus HST) for Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 be approved; and \ 5. =rhat the -appropri·ate City of PickE;?ring officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto _ · Financial Implications 1. Quotation Amount Qudtation No. 0~39-2015 -. Part: 1 -Stump Removal Services ~ Pa~·Supply and-El~ltvet}i cif"TrE}-es"j Part 3 -Tree Planting Sub Total HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Amount 2. E~timated Project Cost Summary · Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Quotation No. Q-39-2015 HST (13%) Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%) Total Net Project Cost 3. Approved Source of Funds 2015 Approved Capital Budget Account 5311.1509.6131 Total-Funds Source of Funds Rate Stabilization Reserve I Project Cost under (over) approved funds by Available Budget $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $42,500.00 $11'9,250.00 $73,000.00 $234,750.00 $30,518.00 $265.268.00 $234,750.00 $30,518.00 $265,268.00 (26,386.00) $238,882.00 Required $238,882.00 $238,882.00 $761,118.oo 1 The balance of the Tree Canopy Replacement funds will be required for Q-38-2015 Tree Canopy- Tree Removal Services (As Required) which will be repo~ed on and awarded separately. August 6, 2015 Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Page 2 of 3 ·.: ·:·::_;.: ·:,: ·.R~~~q_Sr.I~~r~~-P~.t~_~g?~: .. ·= . ., ;:_··::'::.:.'·:··,'.: .-,:::-~-;':}t~~im~s. ;.-.>:_·.·:; Price-Part 3-Tree Planting 50 Total Points · 50 Stage IU-Pricing Evaluation. Stage· Ill will consist of a scoring of the pricing submitted. The evaluation of price will be . undertaken afterthe evaluation of mandatory requirements and any rated requirements has been completed. Each Respondent will receive a percentage of 50 of the total possible points for each Part; allocated to price for total price quoted-by dividing that Respondent's tot(l[ price quoted into the lowest total quoted price. For example, if a Respondent quotes a total price of $120.00 and that is the lowest total price; that Respondent receives 100% of the possible points (i20/120:::: 100%). A Respondent who quotes a total price of $150.00 receives 80% of the possible points (120/150:::: 80% ), and a Respondent with a total price of $240.00 receives 50% Qf the possible points . (120/240:::: 50%). . Lowest Total Price ~--------:----~---------~---x Total availa.blq points = Score vvith second Second-Lowest Total Price lowest total price L,owest Total Price --'---------------------x Total available points= Score with third Third-Lowest Total Price lowesttotal price· And so on, for each quotation. In the event of a .He score, the seiected Respondent will be determined in accordance with the City's Purchasing Procedures. · A summary of the Stage II evaluation results for each Part is attached. The results are as follows: part 1 -Stump Removal Services-M. Franks Landscaping is the highest-scoring Respondent, in the amount of $42,500.00 + HST. Part 2-Supply·& Delivery of Trees-Dutchmaster Nurseries Ltd; Is the highest-scoring Respondent, in the amount of $119,250.00 + HST. · ·. Part 3 -Planting of Trees -. M. Franks Landscaping is the highest-s~oring Respondent, in the amoun,t of $73,000.00 plus HST. · Quotation No. Q-39-2015 tree Canopy Replacement-Stump Removal; Supply, Delivery & Planting of Trees (As Required) Page 2.of 4 . In acco~dance with Appendix A, Deliverabies, the Company engaged for Part 1-Stump Removal c:md Part 3-Planting of Trees -(Mr. Franks Landscaping) will be required to provide the folloWing documents for evaluation: · · · . (a) a copy of the Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project, currently dated and signed; · · · (b) a copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary. Report issued by Workplace Safety. & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Cost and Freque~cy document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted}; (c) a copy of the current Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) a copy of the Super\rlsors certification by the International Society of Arboricu!ture (I SA) as part of the Certified Arborist Program (CAP); · · ; (e) Equipment descriptions, supporting the r~quirements for the removql, ~oading and transporting of stumps and related materials; · (f) Equipment descriptions, supporting the requirements for loading, transporting, unloading and planting of trees; · (g) "Ministry of Labour Health & Safety Awareness Training for SupeNisors and Workers that will be assigned to this project; . · (h) Outline of the Company's standard 'stumping crew, in order to satisfy the current requirements under the Occupational Health & Safety Act; and (i) Outline of tbe Company's standard planting crew, in order to satisfy the current .. requirements under the Occupational Health & Safety Act Please advise if you would Hke us to proceed with this _task. Abudget of $450,000 was provided to Supply & SeNices fo( this procl,lrement. The total cost for P;3rt 1, Part 2 and Part 3 is $234,750 plus HST. · Jn accordanGe with Purchasing Policy Item 06.12 (c), where the compliant quotation or tender mE:eting specffications·and offering best value to the City·is acceptable or where the highest seating prop:os1=ll is recommended and the estimated total purchase price is over $125,000, the Manager may approve the award, subjeqt to the approval of the Director; Treasurer, GAO and Council. Please include the following items in your Report to Council: _ f. if Items (a), (b); _(c) (f), (g) noted above are acceptable to the (Acting)·Qo-ordinator, Health & Safety; 2. if Items -(d) and (e) not~d .above are acceptable to the Manager, Capital Projects & Infrastructure 3. · if the Certificate of lnsuri:mce is acceptable to the Manager, Budgets & Internal Audit; 4. · any past .work experience with the M. Franks Landscaping. including work location; 5. without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable;, . 6. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; Quotation No. Q-39-2015 Tree Canopy Replacement..;.. Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery & Planting of Trees (As· Required) Page 3 of4 · · 7. the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; · 8. Treasurer's confirmation of funding; 9. related departmental approvals; and. 10. related comments .specific to the project. After Council approval, an approved "on-line" ·requisition will be required to procefld. Pleaqe direct all enquiries to Supply & SeNices. Respondents will be advised of the outcome when the contra.ct has.been awarded. If y ·u require further information, pl(3ase contact me or a member of Supply & Services. · J VAF/s AR ·. AttachmentfC! Quotation No. Q-39-2015. Tree Canopy Replacement-Stump Removal, Supply, Delivery & Planting of Trees cAs Required) Page 4 of4