Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. Village Manager's Report 02/19/2013Mount 1 li Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: FORESTRY /GROUNDS SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2013 SUBJECT: BID RESULTS - SHADE TREE FURNISHING AND PLANTING - $205,790 BACKGROUND Bids were opened on January 28, 2013 for the provision and installation of parkway trees. Due to a miscommunication about contract terms, the Village Board rejected all bids that were received at the February 5, 2013 regular meeting. Subsequently the contract was rebid with a new bid opening on February 11, 2013. As in the past, bid prices were sought for 1 -1/2 ", 2 ", 2 -1/2" and larger trees. We also asked bidders to quote prices for "enhanced planting sites" - larger pits with amended backfill - which we may order on a small number of trees being planted in very poor soil. Bid prices are good through December, 2013. BID RESULTS Ten invitational bids were distributed, and a notice to bidders was published in a local newspaper. Ten bids were received. Bid results for the February 11, 2013 opening are attached. DISCUSSION At the February 11 bid opening, six of the original seven bidders resubmitted their original bids unchanged (KGI, Bill Huffman, Greco, Karlstedt, Weiler and Possibility Place). Only one, Kinnucan, submitted a revised bid; they substantially lowered their original prices but were still far higher than all other bidders. Additionally, three contractors who had not bid at the January 28 opening submitted bids (St. Aubin, Smith Brothers and Beary). At this time, we do not know the exact quantity, sizes and species we will need to order during the coming year. Again this year, there will be no Cost Share tree planting program. (Residents who want a 2 %2 diameter parkway tree planted will still be able to order a tree through the Village's program, but they will need to bear the full cost.) However, funds were appropriated in the 2013 budget for risk replacement trees, new construction plantings, Com Ed and accident replacements, reforestation and beautification plantings, and EAB replacements. Additionally, we have applied for a $30,000.00 Emerald Ash Borer reforestation grant. We hope to learn in March if we will receive those funds. If successful, we will plant approximately 371 1 %2 replacements for removed ash trees. We will need to pay for those plantings using Village funds, and then receive reimbursement afterwards. Note that although our specifications allow bidders to provide Page 2 of 2 Bid Results — Shade Tree Furnishing and Planting - $205,790 February 12, 2013 trees grown in northern Illinois or Wisconsin, the grant agreement will require that the grant plantings come from Illinois certified nurseries only. It should be noted that no one bidder submitted the low price on all sizes /species requested. Two bidders, Kinnucan and Possibility Place, were not low on any items. All but one of the remaining bidders have either worked successfully for us in the past, or submitted suitable references for previous municipal tree planting projects elsewhere. The sole exception, Smith Brothers Tree and Landscape, did not submit any municipal references. Smith also submitted only one of two required grower statements; thus I recommend that their bid be considered non - responsive. BID RECOMMENDATION I recommend splitting the contract award among Huffman Landscaping, Arthur Weiler, Inc., KGI Landscaping Company, Mike Greco Landscaping, Inc., Karlstedt Landscape, Beary Landscaping, and St. Aubin Nursery. With the possible exception of certain grant trees, each tree will be ordered from the lowest bidder for that particular size and species. Because of grant requirements, we may need in only a very few cases, to buy from the second lowest bidder. This would occur only when the trees provided by the lowest bidder are growing in Wisconsin rather than in Illinois. There is a total of $175,790 in various tree planting accounts in the 2013 budget. Additionally, if we receive the requested grant funds, we will request the appropriate budget amendment and increase the contract amount by $30,000 to $205,790. Total expenditures for all purchases will not exceed $205,790. " Sandy Clark I concur: SEAN P. DORSEY Director of Public Works H:\ FORESTRY\ WORD \2013\PLANT\MEMO -PLANT RECOMMEND 2013.DOC Bid Results - 2013 Bhatle Tree --hing aatl Planting - February 11, 2013 BMW 0 m -. � a Bid Result, - 2012 Sh— Tree Furnl,hing antl Planting - February 11, 2015 —.�� Bid Results -2013 Sh —Tree Furnishing a,d Planting - February 11, 2013 • ®-- -_ - - -- ' .111 ®— _�� —_� �� Bid Fesugs - 2013 Shatle Tree Furnishing antl Planting - February 11, 2013 Hyblid 1,,� Silk T— Lil,, 3.11 StIllilgSil—Lindl, D..gl ...... A—d— S.�t�A—H—Limd�. Bid R ... 1f -2013 Sh.d. Tree Famishing ..d Planting - February 11, 2013 Bid Results -3013 Shade Tree Furnishing and Planting - February 11, 3013 Substitutions /Notes A. Spring Only B. Prairie Horizon C. Price for 1.73' D. Apparent price on bid sheet is hard to decipher. E. Canada Red F, Swamp White Oak G. Emerald Lustre H. Fall Only mlweNo�aYs�a Prospect 1 1 "i Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM (R. TREE CITY USA TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: FORESTRY /GROUNDS SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2013 SUBJECT: BID RESULTS - PARKWAY TREE STUMP REMOVALS - $151,600 BACKGROUND Sealed bids for parkway tree stump removals were opened on January 28, 2013. Due to a miscommunication about contract terms, the Village Board, upon recommendation of staff, rejected those bids on February 5, 2013. The contract was then re -bid with a new bid opening on February 11, 2013. This contract requires grinding tree stumps to a 10" - 12" depth, removing the grindings, and restoring the area with topsoil and grass seed. This year, in order to expedite tree planting near existing stumps, we also asked for prices for an additional surcharge to grind deeply enough to accommodate the root ball of a new tree planting. We also included a provision which will allow us to extend the contract for a second and a third year at the same bid prices, if both the contractor and Village agree. BID RESULTS For the February 11, 2013 bid opening, seven bids were distributed and a notice was published in a local newspaper. Four bids were received. Bid results are attached. DISCUSSION At the February 11 bid opening, two of the original five bidders resubmitted their original bids unchanged (Powell and Kramer), two opted not to rebid (Winkler's and R.W Hendricksen), and one (Steve Piper and Sons) submitted a new bid with substantially lowered prices. Additionally one contractor who had not bid at the January 28 opening submitted a bid (Pedersen Company). At this time we do not know how many stumps will need removal. We typically have to remove approximately 400 -500 stumps per year, but with EAB losses we estimate that we may easily remove as many as 1000 stumps in 2013. In the bid specifications we estimated that 12,000 diameter inches of stumps would need removal, with 5000 inches in the 0 -24" size class range and 7000 inches in the 25" and larger size class. The specifications were written to allow us to assign stumps throughout the year, up to the amount budgeted. The low bidder, Steve Piper & Sons, Inc., has worked successfully for us in the past on our Parkway Stump Removal Contracts in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Page 2 of 2 Bid Results — Parkway Tree Stump Removals - $151,600 February 12, 2013 BID RECOMMENDATION There is $151,600 allocated for contractual stump removal in the 2013 budget. I recommend award of a possible three -year contract to the lowest qualified bidder, Steve Piper & Sons, Inc. Year one will be in an amount not to exceed $151,600. If year one is successful, and a contract extension is agreed to by the Village and the contractor, years two and three will be in whatever amount is appropriated in the 2014 and 2015 budgets. Sandy Clark ° o � LU m M N O fn d M �— X X F m ONH Q �( 0~ M r N cn U) N ry 0] a� °oo °OO ° o ° o ° o ° 0 a OLO� a 70 ° -0 a C) C) y = ONN C 0 00 ti ` L L O 64 &)- r N L w (f} 60 r w T GH L V O O LO I` O O O O Y c o fn N Iq U) 69 �} a a o ° o °o ° o ° o ° o ° a a 0 a) o 0 o m 0 0 0 0 LOti C 00 m c 00IRTN N U L6 0) Lo a) o ti 06 M ��64 W A �� o W r r O O U r r 0 0 3 L L co a � ° o ° o ° o ° o ° 0 C) 0 a a o ° m-a -0 0 0 C ti CI r C (0 (0 co a) r r M �� W EH 6964 M V W 6 c d i ti N 0 0 co m 6�9 69 14 0) 64 64 °o °o °o °o °o °o ma a c LO C B o N C N N O N N 64 06 X M (D 0) X 69 6 L LU d} (f} 64 W a) d � d- N ° o > _ - co � °Iq o Lo o �a a (f} ° o � LU m M N O fn d M �— X X F m ONH Q �( 0~ M r N cn U) N ry 0] a� Mount Prospect Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 2013 SUBJECT: ACCEPT STATE OF ILLINOIS BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) NEW TRUCKS, CAB AND CHASSIS ($149,500) Background In the current budget, there are funds available to replace two (2) single axle dump trucks: 2757 and 4509. These trucks are 1997 International 35,000 lb. GVWR dump trucks with snow and ice control equipment. Both trucks are used by the Public Works Department maintenance crews to haul miscellaneous materials, such as asphalt, black dirt, sand, stone, etc. to job sites throughout the Village. These trucks are also equipped with snowplows, underbody scrapers, and "tailgate" type salt spreaders for winter snow and ice control. Additionally, these trucks are also utilized during the fall leaf program. Replacement Policy These vehicles have been evaluated utilizing our detailed comprehensive replacement policy. This policy uses a point -based criterion, which rates the following four (4) major factors to a baseline when considering a unit for replacement: Age, mileage, repair & maintenance (R &M) cost, and condition of the body /mechanical components. A point total equaling or exceeding eleven (11) out of sixteen (16) indicates that the vehicle should be recommended for replacement. These vehicles scored a total of twelve (12) and fourteen (14) points indicating a high rating and should be placed on the highest priority to be replaced. The vehicle condition evaluation forms and summary reports have been attached as Exhibits A and B respectively. Additionally, I have included the life cycle cost analysis on Exhibit C, which breaks out our total ownership costs for each vehicle. Other Factors These current trucks have a double "C" channel frame construction and have rust between the two channels. This rust will eventually cause the frame to crack and lose the necessary strength needed to carry heavy loads. At the time when we purchased the trucks we had to have both "C" channels to meet the weight limits when the truck is loaded with salt during snow and ice control operations. The new proposed chassis will have a heavier single "C" channel frame construction eliminating the future rust problem between the channels. Additionally, the steel dump bodies are in very poor condition with rust holes throughout the bodies. Accept State of Illinois bid for the purchase of two (2) new trucks, cab and chassis ($149,500) February 11, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Replacement Recommendation It is my recommendation that two (2) replacement vehicles for 2757 and 4509 be purchased during the 2013 budget year. Bid Recommendation I am recommending the purchase of two (2) new 2014 International, 7400 SFA Series, 36,220 lb. GVWR cab and chassis from the State of Illinois Contract (PSD- 4016932) award winner Prairie /Archway International Trucks, Inc., of Springfield, Illinois. The State of Illinois Contract is publicly bid and satisfies the public bidding requirements of the Village of Mount Prospect Purchasing Policy. I therefore request the Village Board authorize the purchase of two (2) new 2014 International, 7400 Series truck cab and chassis at a cost not to exceed $149,500.00 ($74,750.00 per unit). Funds for this proposed purchase are currently available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund of the 2013 budget. The remaining funds will be used for needed equipment purchased through various vendors (front and underbody snow plows, pre -wet systems, dump bodies, lighting, and hydraulic components) to provide completely functional vehicles. The vehicles being replaced will be sold through the NWMC live auction or GovDeals.com Internet auction. ames R. Breitzman Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent JB Attachment C: Deputy Director of Public Works Jason Leib H:\ Administration\ BIDS\ RESULTS\ StatePurchase2TrucksCabChassis2013 -2757, 4509 (4).doc Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle /Equipment Condition Evaluation Form Unit # 2757 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Water Year: 1997- Purchased 1996 Make: International Model: 4900 Mileage: 70,700 Hours: 7,598 Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman System Diagnosis Estimated Repair Cost Engine Fair -Turbo noise $1,800.00 Transmission Good Differential Good Exhaust System Fair - Rusted $1,200.00 Cooling System Fair - Radiator rusted $1,400.00 Brakes Good Tires Good Steering Good Suspension Fair -Front springs $1,500.00 HVAC Good Electrical Good Body /Frame Poor -Dump Body needs replacing/Hood damaged 11,000.00 Interior Fair - Floorboard Rust $500.00 Other- Double C- Channel Total Estimated Repair Cost Fair -Rust jacking M $3,000.00 $20,400.00 Diagnosis Code Code Description Good Systems are functioning well and no major repairs are expected. Fair Some major repairs are needed, but unit can remain in service a little longer in current condition. Poor Major repairs are required as soon as possible to ensure unit safety and reliability. EXHIBIT A Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle /Equipment Evaluation Summary Report Unit # 2757 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Water Year: 1997- Purchased 1996 Make: International Model: 4900 Mileage: 70,700 Hours: 7,598 Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman Ratings: Unit age: 17 Base Policy Age: 17 Mileage/Hrs: 70,700/7,598 Base Policy Mileage /Hrs: 50,000/6,000 Maintenance Cost: Repair and Maintenance Cost: $ 43,500 _ Purchase Price: $ 80,000 Repair and Maintenance Percentage of Purchase Price: 54 % Condition Evaluation: (attach Vehicle Condition Evaluation Form) Estimated Repair Cost: $ 20,400 _ Current Book Value: $ 10,000 Repair Cost Percentage of Current Book Value: 204 % Total Ownership Cost Per Mile: (Lifetime Fuel + R &M + Purchase Price) $ 185,500 Less Salvage Value $ 10,000 Net Lifetime Costs $ 175,500 Divided by Mileage /Hours 70,700 Operating Cost Per Mile /Hour $ 2.48 Comments and other considerations: Points: 2 Points: 4 Points: 4 Points: 4 otal Points: 14 This vehicle has operated 7,598 hours during its lifetime which equals 250,734 engine miles. Superintendent's recommendation: This vehicle has well exceeded its life expectancy and major repairs will be needed if service life is extended any longer based on condition. Total Point Evaluation A point total equaling or exceeding eleven (11) indicates that the vehicle should be recommended for replacement. The point total is used to rank its replacement priority. The larger the number the higher the replacement priority will be. EXHIBIT B Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle /Equipment Condition Evaluation Form Unit # 4509 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Streets Year: 1997 - Purchased 1996 Make: International Model: 4900 Mileage: 54,750 Hours: 6,422 Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman System Diagnosis Estimated Repair Cost Engine Good Some major repairs are needed, but unit can remain in service a little longer in current condition. Transmission Good Differential Good Exhaust System Fair - Rusted $1,000.00 Cooling System Fair - Radiator rusted $1,200.00 Brakes Good Tires Fair -4 Rear tires $2,000.00 Steering Good Suspension Fair -Front Springs $1,500.00 HVAC Good Electrical Good Body/Frame Poor -Dump Body needs replacing or major repairs $8,000.00 Interior Fair - Floorboard Rust $500.00 Other- Front Snow Plow Total Estimated Repair Cost Poor -Worn Out $7,500.00 $21,700.00 Diagnosis Code Code Description Good Systems are functioning well and no major repairs are expected. Fair Some major repairs are needed, but unit can remain in service a little longer in current condition. Poor Major repairs are required as soon as possible to ensure unit safety and reliability. EXHIBIT A Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle /Equipment Evaluation Summary Report Unit # 4509 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Water Year: 1997- Purchased 1996 Make: International Model: 4900 Mileage: 54,750 Hours: 6,422 Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman Ratings: Unit age: 17 Base Policy Age: 17 Points: 2 Mileage/Hrs: 54,750/6,422 Base Policy Mileage /Hrs: 50,000/6,000 Points: 2 Maintenance Cost: Repair and Maintenance Cost: $ 50,000 _ Purchase Price: $ 80,000 Repair and Maintenance Percentage of Purchase Price: 63 % Points: 4 Condition Evaluation: (attach Vehicle Condition Evaluation Form) Estimated Repair Cost: $ 21,700 _ Current Book Value: $ 10,000 Repair Cost Percentage of Current Book Value: 217 % Points: 4 Total Ownership Cost Per Mile: (Lifetime Fuel + R &M + Purchase Price) $ 205,500 Less Salvage Value $ 10,000 Net Lifetime Costs $ 195,500 Divided by Mileage /Hours 54,750 Operating Cost Per Mile/Hour $ 3.57 otal Points: 12 Comments and other considerations: This vehicle has operated 6,422 hours during its lifetime which equals 211,926 engine miles. Superintendent's recommendation: This vehicle has well exceeded its life expectancy and major repairs will be needed if service life i s extended anv longer based on condition. Total Point Evaluation A point total equaling or exceeding eleven (11) indicates that the vehicle should be recommended for replacement. The point total is used to rank its replacement priority. The larger the number the higher the replacement priority will be. EXHIBIT B N Z, C Fi CL d O V o L � � 3 E C O Q. � W N O ` i as � � z � M y O N a ca � L V ..Ca 0 0 U a M > 0- mmm'� o 000 ° °o °o 0 ° o ° n ° o 1 0 r N (0 M v O I 0 N 'r � r � r I' a v �I as � � r r r ' ° O O O) W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ®® ° o ° o O o ° O ° o O ° o o ° o ® ° o x ° o 0 ° o 0 0 ° O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 N c0 d' N O •-- 00 EA c0 6 Iq EA N <fl Ei? 6> EA <fl EA Efl ISOO 0 N N CL CD 0 U 1 U) C - ) �o ca ti � o a� � m C U o = > o w 0 0 �o cv o : r— c� U) O U 0 0 0 0 LO 00 Tl L C O (6 O N � .>' E. ca F C Q U U ° o CL N >+ a C v o IL AW C a, O CL W O � � z � M � > O � N L V cn En 0 U a w 0 C: Co 0 LLZ m m m 16 O ° o o ° o ° n ° o ° o LO ° L ° 1 64 0 69 co 1' N 1` ► v 'I d ►1 � 1 C1 ► a ; ► J 1 � ► 1 ► 1 i ► 1 C ►' 0 o• 1 O 01 O � N O ° ° ° o o o ° o ° o ° o o ° o ° o ° o ° o ° o ° o ° o ° o ° ° o o O � 0 N O ti 0 N N r- c- r 69 69 69 6} 69 69 63 <fl Isoo W O N W 0 U Ron a� cu a� cm ca cu U) cn 0 a t L a) O ca O H ti M 0 LO ti LO 0 0 6 0 0 0 V> 0 0 0 0 U LM _ w Mount a Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: FORESTRY /GROUNDS SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2013 SUBJECT: BID RESULTS — STREETSCAPE CORRIDOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - $85,000 BACKGROUND Sealed bids for landscape maintenance of selected sites were opened on February 4, 2013. The work required by the specifications includes a wide range of maintenance activities including Spring Cleanup, Mulching, Weeding, Turf Herbicide /Fertilization/Aeration Treatments, Turf Mowing, and Shrub Pruning at all sites as needed. The majority of the sites are high - profile locations such as public buildings, green spaces in the downtown area, and the entire Union Pacific Railroad right of way. This contract will cover a 9 month period in 2013 and again in 2014 and 2015, assuming we are satisfied with the work performed during the previous year. The bid documents provide that the contract can be extended to year 2 (2014) and year 3 (2015) at the same bid prices if both parties agree. BID RESULTS Sixteen invitational bids were mailed and a notice published in the local newspaper. A mandatory pre -bid meeting to explain the scope of the contract was held on January 21, 2013; representatives from twelve firms attended. A total of six bids were received: Total cost per year to maintain Contractor 80 specified sites Mario Gambino & Sons Landscaping Inc. $81,630.00 Moore Landscapes, Inc. $84,104.98 Brickman $85,396.00 Twin Oaks $87,830.00 Fleck's Landscaping $90,131.00 Prestige Nursery $94,158.00 Page 2 of 2 Bid Results — Streetscape Corridor Landscape Maintenance - $85,000 February 12, 2013 DISCUSSION The low bidder, Mario Gambino & Sons Landscaping, Inc., did not meet the terms specified in the bid documents, and thus we cannot recommend them. We required a 10% Bid Bond or certified check, as well as four satisfied municipal references for a contract of like size and nature. Mario Gambino & Sons Landscaping Inc. provided only a company check, and none of their references were for municipal work of similar size and nature. Therefore I recommend that their bid be considered non - responsive. The second low bidder, Moore Landscapes, Inc., met all required terms specified in the bid documents. Also, the four municipal references they submitted were checked and all were favorable. We have also successfully used Moore in the past for maintenance of selected plantings in our downtown. BID RECOMMENDATION In the 2013 budget there are funds appropriated for year one of this contract. I recommend that the Village Board award a three year contract to the lowest qualified bidder, Moore Landscapes, Inc. Year one would be in an amount not to exceed $85,000.00. Years two and three would be in whatever amount is appropriated for this purpose in the 2014 and 2015 budgets. Sandy Clark I concur: H: \FORESTRY\GROUNDS \WORD \RFP OR BID\2013\MEMO -LMC 2013.DOCX Director of Public Works ? Mount Prospect Public Works Department LL INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM (R. rm crrr um TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: FORESTRY /GROUNDS SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2013 SUBJECT: BID RESULTS — PARKWAY RESTORATION - $65,000 BACKGROUND Sealed bids for parkway restoration were opened on February 4, 2013. This contract requires sodding of parkways due to various excavations and other disturbances in public rights -of -way and easement areas in the Village. Prices for sodding (including removal of backfill, rototilling, installing topsoil and sod, and one watering) and additional sod watering were sought. The specifications describe awarding the contract for calendar years 2013 through 2015, but we can choose to cancel the contract at any time if performance is not acceptable. BID RESULTS Twenty -one bids were distributed and a notice was published in a local newspaper. A mandatory pre -bid meeting was held on January 21, 2013 and representatives from fourteen companies attended. Six bids were received. Bid results are attached. DISCUSSION For this contract, quality control is very important. Most of the restoration is in front of residences; therefore, the quality of work will be scrutinized by our toughest critics. The nature of this contract requires a quick turn around, excellent responsiveness, and the need to remove and replace a specified amount of stone, sand or substandard subsoil in order to help assure long term health of turf and parkway trees. If the contractor handles the sod improperly or skimps on site preparation, the sod may appear fine upon first inspection but fail to thrive long -term. For these reasons, we ask the bidders to provide four satisfied municipal references for contracts of similar size and nature of our own and we thoroughly check the provided references. Unfortunately, the three lowest bidders did not provide adequate proof of successful past municipal experience with this type of work. We are recommending that their bids be considered non - responsive, for the following specific reasons: Mario Gambino & Sons Landscaping Inc. - Provided only one municipal sodding reference. Did not submit the required 10% bid bond (instead submitted a company check in the wrong amount). Additionally, they incorrectly completed the bid sheet, so their project total cannot be fairly compared against the other bidders' totals. H:\ Forestry\Grounds \Word\2013\Memo - Parkway Rest Bid - 2013.doc Page 2 of 2 • TNT Landscape Construction Inc. — Did not provide adequate municipal references. Most of their sodding work has apparently been done as a subcontractor on road construction projects. Though they provided only a few municipal contacts, we spent days calling towns that TNT said they had worked in; most were unfamiliar with the company. From those who knew them, for the most part the comments we received either gave us reason to doubt that TNT is large enough to handle a job the size of ours, or led us to believe they might not perform to our expectations. • Prestige Nursery — Submitted no references at all. The fourth lowest bidder, Karlstedt Landscape Inc, submitted four municipal references. Most importantly, Karlstedt has worked for us in the past on a number of landscaping projects with good results. Though they have not sodded for us, they have planted flower bulbs, shrubs, perennials and trees on a range of contracts over the last five years, with good success. We have found Karlstedt to be very responsive, they have achieved good plant survival and we believe they have adequate staff and equipment to successfully fulfill all the contract requirements. Additionally, their bid price of $9.25 per square yard of installed sod exactly equals what we were paying last year to American Landscaping Inc. (the contractor we have used for the last three years of this contract). BID RECOMMENDATION In the 2013 budget, a total of $65,000 has been budgeted for Parkway Restoration. I recommend award of a three year Parkway Restoration Contract to the lowest qualified bidder, Karlstedt Landscape Inc.. Year one would be in an amount not to exceed $65,000. Years two and three would be in the amount approved by the Village Board for this purpose in the 2014 and 2015 budgets. Sandy Clark I concur: Sean Dorsey, birector of Public Works H:\Forestry \Grounds \Word\2013\Memo - Parkway Rest Bid - 2013.doc � M V/ O N W C: cu O i cu W O LL ' fi n` • W Q. CU o cu m 0 F- C (6 t0 � cn 0 U W LU 0 cc N w a U) a ^L CU LL ( N +, � C O ) � W W r a)_ C N � 0 W U (n - a L v 0 o E � �U ( ' x ww CO c� co c wa� U N } a 60- C (6 Q O U N O c rn W I� U C N f0 � N -a U 7 U U 0 c " O Q 0 O a O +� N O 0 , 0 Yy O c6 U �- o 0 cu W U .Q -p (d m O 20 3 CD O N F- H o (6 + F-- Y U H o" U" F Q U 10 o o O o 0 0 L � L �' LO N r N N 64 ({} 00 O 00'0 00 O C C) O 00 O CD C) O CD CD C) 00 O 00 o CD C-) O 00 O 00 0 00 O 00 O 00 O In LO O O LO L: U) O LO O. o O. LO O LO O d LO LO 00 M' to 0 M LO O LO 0 O 0 00 r (0 (O 0 0 CO 0 (D ti' 00 00 (f} 6R 69 EH 6 69 69 6 (f} E9 FA 69 (Al N) K? O o 0 0 o O O o o O T Lq 00 CO 00 Ufl 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 r T r 6R ER OF 69 (f} (f? 69 6G. Cl O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0! 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O o 0 0 O O O O O O O O O tp LO O O LO tn` O 0 OD O O C) O O O (0 co O O I`- Imo', Ul) r- N L O 0' LO O LO L ~ (D T C (0 � (0 (0 (0 00 0 00 EA 6a 69 (f} 6)- 6�} 69 (A 64 69- 6q W 69- (f} 69 OO OO OO_ OO OO_ �M OIl-- �� �O U ? C! 00 o On O Ern O 00 1` T r 69 69 69 69 E!3 (A 69 (fl 69 (f} Ooo 000' 000 00 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l qm� - 0 0 0 0 0 000 000' o00 00 000 IX) LO O C) LO LO LO 00 M O 0 CD CD O (D M O O I� I- I- I- LO O LO d O rY m o �' � � � m (0 � m (A 69 69 6% 69 64 69 (A eA 69 (R 69- 64 (A (A 0 0 0 0_ ° o_ 0 0 0 0_ ° o_ o 0 0 0 ° o_ o 0)M ON N� U? CO NO 00 O 0 O 0 0 00 (O T r r (R 69 (F} 69 69 6> 6A. 6 69 Pus w 0l �� N O c rn W I� U C N f0 � N -a U 7 U U 0 c " O Q 0 O a O +� N O 0 , 0 Yy O c6 U �- o 0 cu W U .Q -p (d m O 20 3 N F- H U O d (6 + F-- Y U H U N ti U" F Q U 10 N O c rn W I� U C N f0 � N -a U 7 U U 0 c " O Q 0 O a O +� N O 0 , 0 Yy O c6 U �- o 0 cu W U .Q -p (d m O 20 3 Mount Prospect 6/ Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: VEHICLE/EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 2013 SUBJECT: ACCEPT STATE OF ILLINOIS BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) NEW FORD EXPLORER ($30,356.44) Background In the current budget, there are funds available to replace vehicle 2708. This vehicle is a 2005 Ford Explorer XLT, with four wheel drive. The replacement of 2708 has been deferred from the 2012 budget year, due to the overall economy and budget constraints. Recently, we extended the normal replacement life cycle by two years for the majority of the Village fleet. This vehicle is used by the Director of Public Works to provide transportation for official Village business. Replacement Policy This vehicle has been evaluated utilizing our detailed comprehensive replacement policy. This policy uses a point -based criterion, which rates the following four (4) major factors to a baseline when considering a unit for replacement: Age, mileage, repair & maintenance (R &M) cost, and condition of the body /mechanical components. A point total equaling or exceeding eleven (11) out of sixteen (16) indicates that the vehicle should be recommended for replacement. This vehicle scored a total of twelve (12) points indicating a high rating and should be placed on the highest priority to be replaced. The vehicle condition evaluation form and summary report have been attached as Exhibits A and B respectively. Additionally, I have included the life cycle cost analysis on Exhibit C, which breaks out our total ownership cost. Other Factors If the service life is extended the following repairs should be performed on the vehicle: ➢ Refurbish/paint rusted sheet metal and dents $1,200 ➢ Replace all brakes and tires $1,700 ➢ Repair driver's seat cushion 300 Total estimated repair cost: $3,200 Coincidentally, the Suburban Purchasing Cooperative (SPC) also let a public bid for a similar Ford Explorer. However, the total cost of the same purchase is $434.56 higher. Replacement Recommendation It is my recommendation that a replacement for 2708 be purchased during the 2013 budget year. Accept State of Illinois Bid for the Purchase of one (1) New Ford Explorer ($30,356.44) February 11, 2013 Page 2 of 2 Bid Recommendation I am recommending the Village Board authorize the purchase of one (1) new 2013 Ford Explorer XLT vehicle from the State of Illinois Contract (PSD- 4017336) award winner Wright Automotive, Inc., of Hillsboro, Illinois at a cost not to exceed $30,356.44. The State of Illinois Contract is publicly bid and satisfies the public bidding requirements of the Village of Mount Prospect Purchasing Policy. Funds for this proposed purchase are currently available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund of the 2013 budget. Public Works vehicle 2708 will be sold through the NWMC live auction or GovDeals.com Internet auction later this year. R. Breitzman Vehicle /Equipment Superintendent JB Attachments C: Deputy Director of Public Works Jason Leib H:\ Administration \BIDS\RESULTS\2708 State Purchase VB Memo- 2- 2013.docx Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle /Equipment Condition Evaluation Form Unit # 2708 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Admin. Year: 2005 Make: Ford Model: Explorer XLT, 4x4 Mileage: 97,000 Hours: NA Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman System Diagnosis Estimated Repair Cost Engine Good Some major repairs are needed, but unit can remain in service a little longer in current condition. Transmission Good Differential Good Exhaust System Good Cooling System Good Brakes Fair -Needs all within year $800.00 Tires Fair -Needs all within year $900.00 Steering Good Suspension Good HVAC Good Electrical Good Body /Frame Fair -Some minor rust /dents $1,200.00 Interior Fair - Drivers seat worn $300.00 Other- Total Estimated Repair Cost Good $3,200.00 Diagnosis Code Code Description Good Systems are functioning well and no major repairs are expected. Fair Some major repairs are needed, but unit can remain in service a little longer in current condition. Poor Major repairs are required as soon as possible to ensure unit safety and reliability. EXHIBIT A Village of Mount Prospect Vehicle/Equipment Evaluation Summary Report Unit # 2708 Assigned Dept. /Div. Public Works /Admin. Year: 2005 Make: Ford Model: Explorer XLT, 4x4 Mileage: 97,000 Date of Evaluation: 2/11/13 Performed By: Jim Breitzman Ratings Unit age: 8 Base Policy Age: 10 Mileage/Hrs: 97,000 Base Policy Mileage/Hrs: 85,000 Maintenance Cost: Repair and Maintenance Cost: $ 10,500 = Purchase Price: $ 28,500 Repair and Maintenance Percentage of Purchase Price: 37 % Condition Evaluation: (attach Vehicle Condition Evaluation Form) Estimated Repair Cost: $ 3,200 _ Current Book Value: $ 5,000 Repair Cost Percentage of Current Book Value: 64 % Total Ownership Cost Per Mile: (Lifetime Fuel + R &M + Purchase Price) $ 55,000 Less Salvage Value $ 5,000 Net Lifetime Costs $ 50,000 Divided by Mileage /Hours 97,000 Operating Cost Per Mile /Hour $ .52 Points: 1 Points: 3 Points: 4 Points: 4 otal Points: 12 Comments and other considerations: This vehicle is operated by the Director of Public Works. Superintendent's recommendation: This vehicle has met its life expectancy and several repairs will be needed if service life is e xtended any longer based on condition. Total Point Evaluation A point total equaling or exceeding eleven (11) indicates that the vehicle should be recommended for replacement. The point total is used to rank its replacement priority. The larger the number the higher the replacement priority will be. EXHIBIT B Q � H 0 CL a N >+ w O v � a � o o 0 3 E �o O N cr 4m W O a � O 2 z > M o •� O N U W U. 0 U) 0 U a L W O �LL > fB (6 fa F- I-- O O O o 0 O O O Lo O / LO CO O C LO cs 60- V), M • I N o � 1 d ' 1 ' 1 >1 U � 1 J I m } r r ! 1 1 ' 1 r r Q C) r 1 Lot LO O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � � V� 64 611, 64!� ;SOO O N Cl- N O U 0) M a� N N U) O O O 0 U H m C) = O X O W O O Lri 411 0 L a) 0 m 0 F 0 0 0 C LO LO