Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. MANAGERS REPORT 1/21/03Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS PROJECT ENGINEER JANUARY 16, 2003 CENTRAL ROAD LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE 2 AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES Construction Contract Back~round In a joint project between the Village of Mount Prospect and the Village of Arlington Heights, Phase 1 of the Central Road Lighting Improvements was completed in 2002. As part of that project, street lights were installed along Central Road between Arlington Heights Road and Northwest Highway. The Illinois Department of Transportation funded 70% of the project with the Village of Mount Prospect and the Village of Arlington Heights contributing 20% and 10%, respectively. Phase 2 continues street lights along Central Road from Northwest Highway to Emerson Street. Main Street from Central Road to Northwest Highway, Wille Street from Central Road to Northwest Highway, and the area surrounding the intersection of Prospect Avenue and Evergreen Avenue will also see new street lights as part of this project. Funding will primarily come from a $400,000 grant received from the Illinois First Program. Village funds will also be used to pay for a port/on of this project. The work is expected to begin in March and be completed in June 2003. Bids Results At 10:00 a.m. on January 7th, sealed bids were publicly opened and read aloud for the~Central Road Lighting Improvements - Phase 2, A Notice to Bidders was published in a local newspaper and seven local contractors were sent invitations to bid on the project. Three contractors submitted bids. A low bid of $298,700.00 was received from Lyons Electric Company of Lyons, Illinois and a high bid of $512,223.00 from H&H Electric Company. The Engineer's estimate for the project was $318,395.00. Ali bidders submitted bid bonds in th~ amount of 5% of their total bids as required by the contract documents. All bids were checked for their accuracy. No errors were found. All bidders correctly signed their bids and bid bonds. Below is a summary of the bids. Bidders Lyons Electric Company J.F. Edwards Const~vction Company Iq&H Electric Company Engineer's Estimate Total Bid $298,700.00 $318,623.00 $512,223.00 $318,395.00 iscussion The low bidder, Lyons Electric Company (formally Pinner Electric), was the contractor for the 1998 Village Street Light Project. They have performed extensive street light work for numerous municipalities in the Chicago area. They also are involved in traffic signal maintenance. Lyons Electric is currently contracted with Randhurst to maintain the traffic signals sun'ounding the shopping center. Their workmanship is acceptable. Construction Engineerin~ Services Ciorba Group, Inc, was requested by the Village to submit a proposal to provide inspection services throughout this Phase 2 project. Ciorba Group provided both design and inspection services for the Phase 1 project and also designed Phase 2. They are currently the Village's consultant on the Algonquin / Busse / Dempster Lighting Improvement Project and have also provided engineering services on other projects in the Village. Ciorba Group's quote to provide inspection services for this project is $27,330.00. Based on the size and scope of these lighting improvements, this quote for inspection services is comparable to previous lighting projects. Therefore, Staff feels the quote is acceptable. Recommendation it is Staff's recommendation that the low bidder, Lyons Electric Company, be awarded the construction contract for the CentraI Road Lighting Improvements - Phase 2 in the amount not to exceed $298,700.00. It is also Staff's recommendation that Ciorba Group, Inc. be awarded a contract for construction engineering services in the amount not to exceed $27,330.00. Funding for this project is available on page 299 (Corridor Improvements), page 300 (Streetscape) and page 302 (Street Light Improvements) in the 2003 budget. Please include this itern on the January 21 ~t Village Board Meeting Agenda. Matthew P. Lawrie concur with the above recommendation. Dir~~ Glen Andler Attachrnents: Project Area Map cc: Village Clerk Velma Lowe x:\filcs\engineer\projects\streetlights\¢entral\nwhwy-main\re¢ommend.do¢ II I Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MICHAEL E. IANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER POLICE CHIEF FIRE CHIEF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR JANUARY 2, 2003 1. POLICE REQUEST TO PURCHASE TEN FORD INTERCEPTOR PATROL SQUAD CARS, ONE FORD EXPEDITION COMMAND CAR, ONE FORD F- l 50 CREW CAB PICK-UP TRUCK AND ONE CHEVROLET IMPALA DETECTIVE CAR. 2. FIRE REQUEST TO PURCHASE THREE CHEVROLET IMPALA STAFF CARS AND ONE FORD EXCURSION MOBILE COMMAND VEHICLE. 3. PUBLIC WORKS REQUEST TO WAIVE THE BID PROCESS FOR THE PURCHASE OF EXTENDED SERVICE WARRANTIES FOR THE FORD INTERCEPTOR SQUAD CARS POLICE REQUEST TO PURCHASE TEN 2003 FORD INTERCEPTOR MARKED PATROL SQUAD CARS Background Information on the Marked Police Patrol Squad Car Fleet In 2000 the police department purchased nine (9) Ford Interceptor marked patrol squad cars as replacements for the discontinued Chevrolet Caprice squad cars. In 2001 the department purchased ten (I0) additional Ford Interceptors to complete the department's transition to an all Ford fleet of marked patrol squad cars. The nine Fords purchased in 2000 were replaced earlier this year. The ten Fords purchased in 2001 are due for replacement in 2003. The Ford Interceptors have proven to be well suited to police patrol operations. An evaluation of the Interceptor's acceleration, braking, turning and maneuvering capabilities indicates it meets all of the department's emergency and pursuit driving requirements. The patrol officers endorse the vehicle and have found that it performs at an equal or better level than the previously used Chevrolet Caprice patrol cars. Also, since the Interceptor is a large vehicle, the in-car computer, mobile video recorder and police radios can be easily installed in the front seat area while there is amply room to safely and effectively transport prisoners in the back seat area. Finally, the Public Works mechanics are I satisfied with the Interceptor's durability and reliability, with the warranty and repair services provided by Ford dealers and with Ford's responsiveness to recommendations for vehicle improvements in subsequent model years. Recondition or Replace Prior to recommending the purchase of new vehicles staff evaluates the relative merits of reconditioning two-year old squad cars rather than replacing them. An attached memorandum from the Fleet Maintenance Superintendent explains why replacement is recommended in 2003. Alternative Squad Car Last year, after a twelve-year hiatus, the Daimler Chrysler Corporation announced it would be marketing a police pursuit vehicle package in 2002. The vehicle promoted is the Dodge Intrepid, a front-wheel drive, Impala size, unibody construction four-door sedan. Although this vehicle did not appear to meet our patrol squad car requirements, we nevertheless obtained a prototype this year for testing and evaluation. While the vehicle performed well, it did not match the size and performance advantages of the Ford Interceptor for patrol use. It also did not perform to a level as a staff/detective car that would justify making the Public Works mechanics become familiar with the maintenance requirements of three different car manufacturers; Ford, Chevrolet and Chrysler. Recommendation Based on the factors presented in this memorandum, staff is recommending the purchase often (10) Ford Interceptors for use as marked police patrol squad cars. The Ford Interceptor, in a police pursuit vehicle package, is available from Landmark Ford in Springfield under a State of Illinois bid award at a cost of $21,902 per vehicle. We are requesting the Village Board authorize the purchase often (I0) Ford Interceptor police pursuit vehicles from Landmark Ford at a total cost not to exceed $219,390 (10 vehicles & 2 service manuals) under the pricing of the State of Illinois contract for police vehicles. The State of Illinois contract was awarded through a competitive bid process, and we are eligible to make purchases under the contract provisions. Funds are available for this expenditure in account #6707709-660123,.which is listed on page #302 of the 2003 Annual Budget. POLICE REQUEST TO PURCHASE ONE 2003 FORD EXPEDITION COMMAND VEHICLE AND ONE 2003 FORD F-150 CREW CAB PICK-UP TRUCK Background Information on the Community Service Officer Chevrolet Tahoe Utility Vehicles The department purchased two (2) Chevrolet Tahoe Utility Vehicles in 1997 for community service officer use. These vehicles were purchased originally for the following reasons: to evaluate the Tahoe for possible use as marked patrol squad car; to maintain a towing/four-wheel drive capability in the police fleet; and to maintain a vehicle large enough to transport found property/bicycles/animals. These two vehicles, squads P-13 and P-16, are due for replacement in 2003. Attached spreadsheets display the life cycle cost analyses for P- 13 and P- 16. They indicate the optimum economic replacement points for P-13 and P-16 were calculated at year three, while the modified replacement points for P-13 and P-16 were calculated at years four and five respectively. 2 Based on an assessment of the performance of the Tahoes the department now believes the community service officers' vehicle requirements would be better serVed by the assignment of a marked squad car and a crew cab type pick-up truck. By reconfiguring the police fleet in this way the department could also upgrade the shift commander's car to a command type vehicle within the funds allocated for vehicle replacement in 2003. It would be department's intention to assign one of the ten new Ford Interceptor squad cars (or one of the one-year old squad cars on a hand-me-down basis) to the community service officers. The community service officers could meet most of their daily work requirements using this marked squad car. The funds available for the replacement of the two Chevrolet Tahoes then could be used to purchase a Ford F-150 crew cab pick up truck and a Ford Expedition Utility Vehicle. The department would purchase the four-wheel drive crew cab pick-up truck (with a cap) to facilitate the animal control/towing/transporting job requirements of the community service officers. Experience indicates it would be better to transport animals outside the passenger area of the vehicle, and the crew cab configuration provides a back seat for the seating of stranded motorists and for persons involved in accidents. The department would offset the assignment of a marked squad car to the community service officers by purchasing a Ford Expedition Utility Vehicle to serve as an incident command vehicle for use by the shift commanders. The role of the shift commander's car has evolved over the last several years. It no longer primarily needs to be a police pursuit vehicle. The shift commanders rarely are engaged in activities requiring that level of squad car performance. Rather, the role of the commander's car has become more of an incident command vehicle, equipped with many of the items of emergency equipment not typically stored in the squad cars. This would include items such as less lethal munitions, rapid deployment equipment, tactical response armor and shields, disaster response items, command post set-up gear, extra communications equipment and WMD personal protective equipment. This gear either does not fit in the squad cars or is needed only in limited quantities in special circumstances. Recommendation Both the Ford Expedition Utility Vehicle and the Ford F-150 Crew Cab Pick-Up Truck are available under State of Illinois bid awards. The Ford Expedition Utility Vehicle is available from Landmark Ford at a cost of $26,622. The Ford F-150 Crew Cab Pick-Up Truck is available from Bob Riddings Ford at a cost of $22,500. Funds are available for these expenditures in account # 6707709-660123, which is listed on page #302 of the 2003 Annual Budget. The department is requesting the Village Board authorize the police department to purchase one Ford Expedition at a cost not to exceed $26,622 and one Ford F-150 Crew Cab Pick-Up Truck at a cost not to exceed $22,500 under the pricing of the State of Illinois contract for police vehicles. The State of Illinois contract was awarded through a competitive bid process, and we are eligible to make purchases under the contract provisions. 3 POLICE REQUEST TO PURCHASE ONE 2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA UNMARKED DETECTIVE CAR Background Information on the Unmarked Detectives Cars The department replaces one of its fleet of three (3) unmarked staffand six (6) unmarked detective squad cars every year, if needed. Since 1998, the department has purchased smaller, front-wheel drive vehicles for staff and detective use. These vehicles are less expensive than full size squad cars yet meet the department's needs. Currently five of the department's staff/detective cars are these smaller vehicles. The remaining four vehicles are older Chevrolet Caprice sedans. The department is recommending the replacement of one of these vehicles, detective squad 1-23, a 1993 Caprice, in 2003. Life Cycle Cost Analysis The staffand detective cars are on a nine-year replacement cycle. No vehicle is recommended for replacement unless an independent assessment of the vehicle's condition, durability, and service history by public works personnel indicates replacement is warranted. Using these criteria, detective car 1-23, a 1993 Chevrolet Caprice with more than 56,000 miles, has been recommended for replacement in 2003. An attached spreadsheet displays the life cycle cost analysis for 1-23. It indicates the optimum economic replacement point for 1-23 was calculated at year five, while the modified replacement point was calculated at year nine. Recommendation The Chevrolet Impala sedan, in a police package, is available from Miles Chevrolet in Illinois under the State of Illinois bid award at a cost of $17,940. Funds are available for this expenditure in account # 6707709-660123, which is listed on page #302 of the 2003 Annual Budget. The department is requesting the Village Board authorize the police department to purchase one Chevrolet Impala at a cost not to exceed $17,940 under the pricing of the State of Illinois contract for police vehicles. The State of Illinois contract was awarded through a competitive bid process, and we are eligible to make purchases under the contract provisions. FIRE REQUEST TO PURCHASE THREE 2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA STAFF CARS AND ONE 2003 FORD EXCURSION MOBILE COMMAND VEHICLE TO REPLACE FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES 500, 501,502 AND 503 Background Fire Department vehicles 500, 501,502 and 503 are scheduled for replacement in 2003. Units 500, 501, and 502 are staff cars. Unit 503 currently serves in a dual capacity as a staff car and as a back-up mobile command vehicle. Currently, all four of these vehicles are 1995 Chevrolet Caprice sedans. Each vehicle has over 85,000 miles and their condition and service histories indicate replacement is warranted. In 2002, the department replaced a Chevrolet Caprice with a Chevrolet Impala that has proven to meets our needs and therefore, the department now is requesting the Village Board authorize the purchase of three additional (3) Chevrolet Impalas. I recommend replacing vehicle 503 with a Ford Excursion. Since the mid-sized Impala will not work well as a mobile command post and the there is a need for a 4-wheel drive vehicle for winter weather, fire staff evaluated sport utility type vehicles (SUV's) for this specialized use. The Ford Excursion offered important options that were not available from a Chevrolet SUV and the Excursion was offered under pricing obtained by the Northwest Municipal Conference/Suburban Purchasing Cooperative through a competitive bid process. Budget Authorization Funding for the replacement vehicles is provided in the 2003 Budget in the Capital Improvement Section on page 302, account number 6707709-660120. The budgeted amount for the four (4) vehicles is $120,000. General Bid Information The Illinois Department of Central Management Services has awarded the State Contract for the 2003 Chevrolet Impala sedan to Miles Chevrolet in Decatur, Illinois. The Northwest Municipal Conference/Suburban Purchasing Cooperative has awarded the 2003 Ford Excursion contract to Currie Motors in Frankfort, Illinois. Recommendation I recommend the purchase of three 2003 Chevrolet Impala sedans from Miles Chevrolet for an amount not to exceed $57,120.00 ($19,040.00 each) and the pumhase of one 2003 Ford Excursion from Currie Motors for an amount not to exceed $32,903.00. 5 UBLIC WORKS REQUEST TO PURCHASE EXTENDED WARRANTIES FOR THE NINE FORD INTERCEPTOR MARKED POLICE PATROL SQUAD CARS The standard warranty on the new squad cars expires at 3 years or 36,000 miles. The Public Works vehicle maintenance staff is recommending the purchase of extended warranties on the ten new Ford Interceptors because most of the patrol squad cars require new transmissions shortly after the expiration of the standard warranty period at a cost of approximately $1,600 apiece. The current State of Illinois bid award includes an extended warranty option (5 years or 75,000 miles with no deductible - power train only) at a cost of $1,795 per vehicle. Elmhurst Lincoln Mercury is offering the same extended warranty at a cost of $1,695 per vehicle. Elmhurst Lincoln Mercury has been servicing the Police Department's Ford squad cars since 1996. The Public Works vehicle maintenance staff is satisfied with the quality of the repairs done by Elmhurst Lincoln Mercury as well as with the quick turnaround time of the cars taken there for service. Recommendation The Public Works department is requesting a waiver of bids for the purchase of extended warranties on the ten Ford Interceptor marked police patrol squad cars to be purchased from the 2003 budget. The department also is requesting the Village Board authorize the purchase of the extended warranties from Elmhurst Lincoln Mercury in Elmhurst, Illinois at a cost of $1,695 per vehicle with a total cost not to exceed $16,950. Funds are available for this purchase in account #6707709-660123, which is listed on page #294 of the 2003 Annual Budget. Richard Edd~gton Chief of Police Fire Chief Public Works Director Attachments C~ Deputy Police Chief Condon Deputy Police Chief Richardson Deputy Fire Chief Malcolm Deputy Director of Public Works Sean Dorsey Public Works Vehicle Maintenance Superintendent Jim Guenther 6 el!l~ .~ed 1soo ddddddddd~ al!lA1 Jad 1soo Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS GLEN R, ANDLER FROM: VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT SUPERINTENDENT DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 2002 SUBJECT: REFURBISH POLICE PURSUIT CARS VERSUS PURCHASING NEW In an effort to extend the service lives of our 1996 model year Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars, the Village contracted with Sheheen Chevrolet of Lansing, Michigan to recondition these cars in 1998 and 1999. Sheheen's services included a comprehensive diagnostic examination of each vehicle as well as the replacement of each of the vehicles' suspension system, steering system, and body mountings. The work done by Sheheen was satisfactory and the refurbished Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars performed well until the 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars replaced them. The refurbishing of the 1996 Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars was a success, but did not prove to be cost effective. The reconditioned cars had a significantly higher maintenance cost in the final two years of service and the resale value dropped significantly. The 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars performed well during their two years of duty with the Police Department. In fact, the maintenance cost of the 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars was significantly less than that of the 1996 Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars when new. The 2001 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars were purchased to replace the balance of the refurbished 1996 Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars. Attached are spread sheets covering the refurbished costs of two 1996 Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit cars. Table A denotes actual costs incurred for P-8 and P-9 over the course of four (4) years. These costs are compared to actual costs for P-11; a vehicle that was replaced after two (2) years service as a police cruiser. Table B presents estimated costs for refurbishing existing 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars and then re-used as a police squad for an additional two (2) years. These costs are contrasted with the estimated costs of purchasing a new car every two years. Table C depicts the actual cost of a I996 Chevrolet Caprice police pursuit car used for two (2) years as a patrol car and then three (3) years as a pool car. This cash flow is contrasted with the projected cost of a 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit car used for two (2) years as a patrol car and then three (3) years as a pool car. age 2 of 2 Refurbish Police Pursuit Cars Versus Purchasing New November 25, 2002 Careful review of these scenarios indicates that it costs approximately $3,000 - $4,000 more to operate the police fleet with refurbished squads than it does to operate with new vehicles. Another factor is the fact that, in 1997, we started using the used patrol cars to replace the majority of the Vitlage pool car fleet instead of purchasing new pool vehicles. In budget year 2002, of the seven (7) 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit vehicles that were replaced, five (5) were used to replace Village pool cars, one (1) was used to replace a Police CSO car, and one (1) was used to replace the Police Department drone. In budget year 2003, we will again be using seven (7) used police patrol cars to replace five (5) Village pool cars and two (2) Police Department pool cars. We will continue to track the 1996 Chevrolet Caprice and the Ford Crown Victoria police pursuit cars now in the Village pool car fleet. In my opinion, at the present time it is in the best interest of the Village to purchase new police pursuit cars every two years. I recommend using these new vehicles as patrol cars two years and then using them in the pool fleet for an extended three-year period. Attachments C: Deputy Director Sean Dorsey X:\FILES\VEHiCLE\Police Cars\2002 New VS Refurbish.doc ~ o Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER DAVE STRAHL IT DIRECTOR JANUARY 7, 2003 RECOMMENDATION FOR PROPOSED GEMS UPGRADE GEMS (Government e-Management Solutions), formerly SCI (Systems Consultants, Inc.), is the Village's financial software vendor. GEMS has recommended that the Village purchase a software upgrade. This upgrade includes two separate components. The first is an interface modification that allows users to connect to GEMS through a standard browser interface (Internet Explorer). The second is an operating system upgrade to allow GEMS to run on Windows 2000 Server. Although the interface upgrade was originally announced in mid-2002 as optional, it should be considered essential since GEMS plans to discontinue support of our current client version by the end of 2003. Since Microsoft will discontinue support for Windows NT by January 1, 2004, the operating system upgrade is crucial as well. The benefits of upgrading are as follows: · Future maintenance for the software on client PCs would be minimal since clients would access GEMS through Internet Explorer. · GEMS has indicated that users would experience performance enhancements. · Continued technical support could be maintained from GEMS. · Continued technical support for the operating system could be obtained from Microsoft if necessary. · Upgrading the operating system to Windows 2000 is consistent with the Village's goal of moving toward a single server platform. In 2003 two Novell servers and two NT servers are scheduled for migration to Windows 2000. Costs for the upgrade include license fees and installation. It is beneficial to have GEMS perform the operating system upgrade so they will support it. The costs are listed in the chart on the next page. ecommendation for Proposed GEMS Upgrade January 7, 2003 Page 2 Upgrade Costs Item Price Account Number Browser license fees (70 users) 20,000 Unisys client runtime license fees (70 Users) 40,250 Credit for license fees for current version (25,243) Installation - version upgrade 3,500 installation - operating system upgrade 5,000 GEMS Total $43,507 5107701-650039 Windows 2000 Server license (from CDW) CDW Total $625 0011 '104-540945 Grand Total $44,132 The upgrade is essential for the Village to maintain support for the financial system. I recommend that we purchase the upgrade from GEMS at a cost not to exceed $43,507 to be paid from account number 5107701-650039, GEMS Conversion. I also recommend that we purchase a Windows 2000 Server license at a cost of $625 from account number 0011104-540945, Computer Software. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. c: Deputy Finance Director Carol Widmer ~ Middleton IT Director I:~SCI\GEMS Upgrade. DOC Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUB J: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS JANUARY '15, 2003 NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PHASE 2 STORM SEWER SURVEY CONTRA~T~XT~N'SibN Background On October 16, 2001, the Village Board awarded a contract to Stanley Consultants, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois in the amount of $126,790 to help staff comply with the Clean Water Act's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase 2 requirements. Work included in the scope of this contract included existing ordinance reviews, best management practices recommendations, permit application assistance, and a storm sewer survey and mapping project. Presently, the ordinance reviews, best management practices development, and permit application tasks are substantially complete and staff intends to present findings to the Village Board at a February Committee of the Whole meeting. You may also recall that staff envisioned prosecuting a portion of this project over the course of multiple fiscal years. Both the initial October 11 staff recommendation memo and the 2001-2005 Capital Improvements Plan reference such a timeline. Specifically, staff proposes to complete storm sewer surveying and mapping work incrementally in subsequent fiscal years as funds allow. Stanley started field data collection in October 2001 and completed approximately 30 street centerline miles of storm sewer survey work. In February 2002, they were awarded a contract extension and were able to survey and map an additional 7 miles of storm sewer at a cost of $23,000. Staff now estimates that approximately 53 miles of separate storm sewers remain to be surveyed and mapped. The attached map depicts Stanley's progress to date. It is significant to note that a large portion of the Village is not included in this project. The oldest parts of the Village, generally those around the geographic center, are served by combined sewer systems. Combined sewer systems are not being surveyed as part of this project. Proposal Pursuant to staff request, Stanley has submitted a proposal to extend their existing contract and continue storm sewer survey and mapping work. Specifically, Stanley proposes to survey and map additional storm sewer at the rate of $3,600 per mile for a cost not to exceed $75,000. They propose to commence this work immediately and complete all fieldwork before the tree canopy is reestablished in the spring. age 2 of 2 NPDES Phase 2 Storm Sewer Survey Contract Extension January 15, 2003 Discussion Stanley proposes to continue survey and mapping work at a rate that is approximately $300 per mile higher than the work performed in 2002. Inflation aside, Stanley has requested consideration of a rate increase due to the uncertainty (and expense) inherent to mapping an unmapped buried utility system. They have specifically cited the occasions during the 2002 project in which it was necessary to revisit covered territory after the first iteration of mapping in order to collect missing structures and nodes buried beneath pavement, parkways, and backyards. Staff acknowledges that this work was, in fact, time-consuming and, at some volume, beyond the scope of the Stanley contract. We also concur that similar scenarios are likely in the 2003 project. Stanley has performed extremely well during the initial phases of this project. Their personnel have proven to be technically proficient, courteous to residents, highly motivated, and very productive. In addition, they have refined an innovative and effective methodology for generating computer maps of unmapped networks using only spatial coordinates and limited attribute data. Recommendation t recommend accepting the proposal from Stanley Consultants, Incorporated of Chicago, Illinois to continue storm sewer survey and mapping work in conjunction with the Village's NPDES Phase 2 compliance efforts and extend their existing contract for a cost not to exceed $75,000. Funds for this proposed expenditure are available in account number 5907704-540582 ($75,000) on page 301 of the current budget. Sean P. Dorsey Iconcur. Director of Public Works SPD/spd C:\STORM\STANLEY EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION.doc III NPDES Phase II Storm Sewer Survey --Progress Map-- As of January 2003 Areas Completed (Approx. 37 miles) Areas to be Surveyed (Approx. 53 miles) Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM: DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JANUARY 15, 2003 SUB J: CRUMLEY/MELAS PARK DETENTION BASIN IMPROVEMENTS FINAL BALANCING CHANGE ORDER Background On November 6, 2002 the Village Board awarded a contract in the amount of $112,620 to the Dominic Fiordirosa Construction Company of East Dundee, Illinois (Fiordirosa) to construct certain improvements at the Crumley and Melas Park detention basins. These repairs included earth excavation, storm sewer cleaning, storm sewer replacement (underdrain replacement), miscellaneous concrete repairs, and installation of an articulated concrete block revetment system to stem basin floor erosion adjacent to inflow structures. Problem Statement At a pm-construction meeting with the contractor held November 15, 2002, Fiordirosa observed that the plans did not match the bid quantities sheet in the contract specifications. Specifically, the bid item quantity for the articulated concrete block revetment system was approximately 332 square yards lower than necessary to construct the improvements as depicted on the final approved set of project plans. The Village's design engineering consultant, Peter F. Olesen and Associates, Inc. of Mount Prospect (Olesen), admitted that they had failed to modify revetment system bid item quantities following final plan revisions. As a result, all bid documents let to contractors contained erroneous quantities for this item. The cost of this gaffe, at Fiordirosa's bid item price, is $29,880. In addition, during construction, staff also discovered that bid item quantities for catch basin cleaning, sewer cleaning, and landscape restoration were also underestimated by the design engineer. The net cost of these errors is $9,409. Consequently, there is a need to amend (increase) the contract award to Fiordirosa via a change order by an amount not-to-exceed $39,289. Table 1 below summarizes: Table 1 Current Contract Award Final Balancing Change Order Revised Contract Award $112,620 39,289 $151,909 age 2 of 2 Crumley/Melas Park Detention Basin Improvements / Final Balancing Change Order January 15, 2003 Discussion In an effort to control costs, staff terminated the business relationship with Olesen and rejected their $10,000 proposal to provide construction engineering and inspection services on this project. Instead, staff elected to monitor the project utilizing in-house personnel. Every effort was made to leverage the idea that close supervision and prudent field modifications might bring the project in closer to the award amount. Unfortunately, the cost of procuring and installing the articulated concrete block revetment systems comprised approximately 86% of the total contract award. As such, it was not feasible to realize enough cost reductions through field changes to substantially lower the overall cost without diminishing project objectives. Finally, Fiordirosa has agreed to honor and extend their bid item price for the additional quantity of revetment systems. It is the opinion of staff that this agreement provides good value to the Village. Fiordirosa's unit price for revetment systems is approximately 39% lower than the unit cost to install a larger quantity of the same system in the bed of Weller Creek as part of the recent Weller Creek Streambank Stabilization / Phase 2 project. Recommendation It is my recommendation that the Village Board approve an increase the contract award to the Dominic Fiordirosa Construction Company for the Crumley/Melas Park Detention Pond Improvements Project in an amount not to exceed $39,289. Funds for this proposed expenditure are available in existing Flood Control Construction Fund. The 2002 budgeted amount for this project was $200,000. Therefore, sufficient funds exist to cover this change order. Sean P. Dorsey I concur. Glen R. Andler ./ Director of Public Works C:\STORM\CRUMMY_MEL FINAL BALANCING CHANGE ORDER RECOMMENDATION,doc O: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONlS ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER JANUARY 16, 2003 CONTRACTOR'S CONSTRUCTION AMENDMENT #2 - PARKING As you may recall the Village Board approved a staff recommendation that each phase of the Village Hail project: senior center demolition, parking deck construction, and village hall construction, be coordinated by establishing separate amendments to the main contractor's construction contract. This method will allow all related costs for each phase to be managed as a stand-alone project and simplify the management of the phases. The previous amendment #1 was approved by the Village Board for the demolition of the senior center. That phase has now been completed and the final invoices have been processed which amounted to $119,598 compared to the originally approved cost of $123,138; a savings of $3540. Amendment #2 will cover the construction of the parking deck. At the December 23, 2002 Special Village Board meeting the Village Board approved the construction cost of $6,210,267 and authorized W.B. Olson to construct the parking deck. This proposed amendment will revise the general construction contract between W.B. Olson and the Village to reflect the previously approved expenditure of December 23 by the Village Board. I would recommend Village Board approval for Amendment #2 to the construction contract between W.B. Olson and the Village of Mount Prospect in an amount not to exceed $6,210,267 for the construction of the parking deck at 50 S. Emerson. If you have any questions, please contact me. David Strahl H:'~GEN~Village Hall~Amendment 2 Parking Deck ConStruction Services WB OIson.doc Amendment No. to Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager Pursuant to Paragraph 2.2 of the Agreement, dated August 7th 2001 between (o~o Vii[age of Mt. ProsDect and (Cot~ttuction Managet)~_~_OJ~l~lfl. for (~ep~oi~ct), Mt. Pros0ect Village Hall & Parking the Owner and Construction Manager establish a Guaranteed Maximum Price and Contract Time for the Work as set forth below. ARTICLE I GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE The Constmction Manager's Guaranteed Maximum Price for the Work defined as Phase 2 construction of a 384 soace oarking garage.a future ohase to include the Village Hall will be added by Amendment at a future date, including the estimated Cost of the Work as defined in Article 6 and the Construction Manager's Fee as defined in Article 5, is Six Million Two Hundred Te0 Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Seven Dollars (s6.210.267.00'L This Price is for the performance of the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents listed and attached to tb2s Amendment and marked Exhibits A through F, as follows: Exhibit A Drawings, Specifications, addenda and General, Supplementary' and other Conditions of the Contract on wkich the Guaranteed Maximum Price is based, DLK olan sheets G1.0. Gq .1. T1. Ci-C8. GA1.1-GA5.4. GS001-GS40~. MGI.0. MGI.I. GE0.1-GE3.1. GPI.I-GP2.2. GFPI.I-GFP2.1 & Proiect Manual dated 11/22/02. end Addendum #1 dated 12/9/02. r~o Exhibit Proiect Estimate. * ....... :A_. and clarifications dated 1/9/03.,,~,~,.-~'--a-. v,'-v~',,,b-'--~ C ........ ARTICLE II CONTRACT TIME The date of Substantial Completion established by tbJs Amendment is: OWNER BY: DATE ATTEST CONSTRUCTION MANAG~-----~ DATE ~ ATTEST ~~ © 1991 - THE AMERICAN' INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006-5292. AIA DOCUMENT AIA121/CMC AND AGC DOCUMENT 565 - OWNER-CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AGREEMENT - 1991 EDITION - AIA® - AGC - O 1991 - THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, 1957 E STREET, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C., 20006-S209, ~MARNING: Unlicensed photocopyin8 violates U.S. copyrisht laws and is subject to lesal prosecution, This document was electronically produced with permission of the AIA and can be reproduced in accordance with your license without violation until the date of expiration as noted below. User Document: a121cmc.ala -- 1/14/2003. AIA License Number 1115002~ which expires on 1/31/2003. Electronic Format AI21/CMc-1991 w.B. o,.s.o?r, xNc. The Construction People ' PROJECT ESTIMATE JOB: Mount Prospect Parking Garage A&E: DLK/Desman [ DESCRIPTION TOTAL 1110/03 S.F.: 145,425 Cars: 384 $/SF 1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1.1 FINAL CLEANING 1.2 WINTER CONDITIONS (blankets,htrs) A. 1.3 GROUND WATER PUMPING A. 2.0 EXCAVATION 2.4 LANDSCAPING ~ 3.0 LIBRARY BLDG. PROTECT.& UTILITY COORD. A. 3.2 LIBRARY DRIVE REWORKING A. 3.3 CONCRETE 3.4 PRECAST CONCRETE 4.1 MASONRY 5.1 MISC. STEEL 5.2 FENCING 6.1 CARPENTRY 6.2 WOOD TRUSSES 7.3 WATERPROOFING 7.4 ROOFING & SM 7.5 CAULKING 8.0 HOLLOW MTL& HRDW 8.1 GLASS &ALUMINUM 9.1 DRYWALL 9.2 RESILIENT 9.3 PAINTING 10.1 SIGNAGE 14.0 ELEVATOR 15.1 PLUMBING 15.2 SITE PLUMBING 15.3 FIRE PROTECTION 15.4 HEATING &VENTILATING 16.1 ELECTRICAL 420,678 $2.89 9,500 $0.07 25,000 $0.17 15,000 $0.10 461,955 $3.18 None shown 25,O0O $0.17 10,000 $0.O7 790,000 $5.43 2,003,000 $13.77 517,700 $3.56 200,000 $1.38 19,144 $0.13 52,971 $0.36 2,6O9 $0.02 24,734 $0.17 38,200 $0.26 10,900 $0.07 16,365 $0.11 44,590 $0.31 8,861 $0.06 1,200 $0.01 117,150 $0.81 5,720 $0.04 78,980 $0.54 152,500 $1.05 68,OOO $O.47 216,500 $1.49 35,091 $0.24 287,416 $1.98 FEE PERMIT ALLOWANCE CGL INSURANCE BOND CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY Line items are for information only and are not guaranteed SUB-TOTAL 4.00% 0.50% 0.00% 5.00% TOTAL 5,658,764 226,351 By Owner 29,426 Deleted 295,727 6,210,267 $ 16,173 $38.91 $42.70 perstall OLSON, INC. Construoglon 1/10/03 PROJECT CLARIFICATIONS JOB: Mount Prospect Parking Garage A&E: DLK/Desman .Qualifications 1) Estimate is based on DLK plan sheets G1.0,GI.I,T1, C1-C8, GAl.1 - GA5;4, GS001 - GS403, MG1.0,MGI.I,GE0.1 - GE3.1, GPI.I-GP2.2,GFP1.1 - GFP2.1 & the Project Manual dated 11/22/02. Addendum #1 dated 12/9/02. 2) Water and electricity to be provided by owner at no charge Precast concrete products will have a standard gray concrete mix except for the spandrels and columns on the north elevation which will have a 50% white 50% grey cement mix. 4) Construction contingency revised from 2% to 5% as mutually agreed. 5) W.B. Olson direct labor will be bill in accordance with current billing rates. Exclusions 1) 2) 3) Underground obstruction removal (i.e. rocks, old foundations & other debds. To be performed on a time & material basis. Unsuitable soil removal and replacement & hazardous matedal removal. Relocation of transformer 4) Concrete retaining wall & steel railing from Library to garage at west side and Library loading dock. 5) Excess facility charges including energy consumption charges. 7) 8) Relocation of existing utility services, if required, which are located in the way of new construction. Removal of buried tank. Water repellent work (deleted in Addendum #1) 9) 10) 11) 12) Items required by code but not shown on the drawings are not included. Items contained in the specifications but not shown on the drawings are not included. Landscaping work (garage landscaping to be part of Village Hall phase) Performance bond (bond requirement deleted by Owner)