The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/18/2014 Streetscape Corridor Landscape MaintenanceMount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: FORESTRY /GROUNDS SUPERINTENDENT DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2014 SUBJECT: BID RESULTS -- STREETSCAPE CORRIDOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE-4110,675 BACKGROUND Sealed bids for landscape maintenance of selected sites were opened on January 27, 2014. The work required by the specifications includes a wide range of maintenance activities including spring cleanup, mulching, weed control , 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, greenspaces in the downtown area, and the entire Union Pacific Railroad right of way. The personnel who work on this job need to interact frequently and professionally with the general public as well as business owners. With the diversified landscapes we have planted at many of these sites, the contractor's personnel must also possess a high degree of knowledge about plant identification and the maintenance needs of various plant species. This contract will cover a 9 month period in 2014 and again in 2015 and 2016, assuming we are satisfied with the work performed during the previous year. The bid documents provide that the contract can be extended to 2015 and 2016 at the same bid prices, if both the Village and the contractor agree. BID RESULTS Twenty 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 17, 2014; representatives from ten firms attended. A total of five bids and one "no bid" letter were received. Bid cost to maintain 73 sites we propose for inclusion in this year's contract follows: Contractor Total cost per y Gambino Landscaping KGI Landscaping Milieu Design Inc. Fleck's Landscaping Moore Landscapes, Inc. Grounds Keeper $68,820 $83,855 $110,675 $110,863 $205,737 "No Bid" letter Page 2 of 3 Bid Results — Streetscape Corridor Landscape Maintenance - $110,675 February 12, 2014 DISCUSSION As explained earlier, this contract is for skilled work at high - profile locations. Over the years the Village has made a significant financial investment in landscaping to improve the appearance of the downtown and other highly visible locations. Frequent, knowledgeable maintenance is imperative to maintain the health and appearance of these landscapes so they continue to reflect favorably on our community's image. We began the landscape maintenance contract some years ago, when the demands of maintaining our many new landscape installations began to outpace the ability of staff to care for them properly. The contract has grown in size and scope over time, as additional high- maintenance landscapes have been installed. One of the challenges of contracting out this work is finding a company large enough and skilled enough to commit an adequate number of well- trained staff to our contract for a long period of time. Unfortunately over the years, we have had three occasions where we awarded this contract to a new, lowest cost bidder who apparently underestimated the amount of work required to comply with our specifications. In all three cases the quality of work suffered substantially, and extensive staff time was required while we tried to obtain compliance with our specifications. On one of those occasions, we were able to take the contract away from the low bidder after a month or so, and the second lowest bidder was able to fulfill the remainder of the contract. In that instance, we were fortunate because very few well - qualified landscape contractors have the capability of taking on a job this large once the growing season is underway. On the other two occasions, we honored the contracts but expended an inordinate amount of staff time gaining compliance. In both instances, we did not work with that contractor the following year. For the January 27, 2014 bid opening, the apparent low bidder, Gambino Landscaping and Brick Paving, 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. Gambino did not provide a bid bond or certified 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. For similar reasons I am also recommending that the bid from the second low bidder, KGI Landscaping, be considered non - responsive. First, in my opinion the reference list KGI submitted does not reflect adequate experience for me to recommend them for a contract the size and nature of our current landscape maintenance contract. KGI's reference list included four organizations, one of which was the Village of Mount Prospect. Though KGI has planted parkway trees for us for a number of years, they have never done landscape maintenance for us, and I do not feel that completion of our tree planting projects is comparable work. In order to assure the proper depth and width of tree planting pits and to make on -site decisions about tree locations, we always send a staff certified arborist along with the contractor's tree planting crew. Thus, the level of knowledge about plants and even the ability to communicate with the public is less C:\ USERS \SDORSEY\APPDATA\ LOCAL\ MICROSOFT \WINDOWS \TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\CONTENT.OUTLOOK\NEJSK3XB\MEMO- LMC BID RECOMMEND2 2014.DOC Page 3 of 3 Bid Results— Streetscape Corridor Landscape Maintenance - $110,675 February 12, 2014 critical on the tree planting contracts because our staff member is present. With the landscape maintenance contract we cannot provide this level of direction; the contractor's crew must have the necessary knowledge to, for example, distinguish a perennial flower from a weed, and to know which shrub species can be sheared and which cannot. We did attempt to check the other three references that KGI submitted; two were municipalities and one a school district. The school district never returned our calls despite multiple attempts. Municipality number one was satisfied with KGI's work on a $60,000 contract which did include some landscape maintenance, but also included snow plowing and sod restoration. Municipality number two was satisfied with KGI's landscape maintenance work on several contracts, but those only ranged in size from $20,000 - $40,000. Additionally, from personal experience and some references, we know that KGI's equipment fleet is aging and at times unreliable. We also noted that KGI's equipment list did not show that they own any dump trucks, and these are required for mulching during the landscape maintenance contract. The lowest qualified bidder, Milieu Design, Inc., submitted the required bid bond, a substantial equipment list and a list of four references (from three municipalities and a school district). The contracts were for full- service landscape maintenance and turf mowing, and they ranged in size from $54,000 to $120,000. We contacted the references, and all were favorable. Three of the four references actually told us they recently renewed Milieu for multi -year contracts due to their initial performance. Director of Public Works BID RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the Village Board reject the bids received from Gambino Landscaping and KGI Landscaping as non - responsive. I also recommend award of a possible three year contract to the lowest qualified bidder, Milieu Design, Inc. Year one would be in an amount not to exceed $110,675. Sufficient funds for this proposed expenditure exist in the 2014 budget. Years two and three would be in whatever amount is appropriated for this purpose in the 2015 and 2016 budgets. I concur: / ..�' andy Clark SE AN°I'r. DORSEY C:\ USERS \SDORSEY\APPDATA\ LOCAL\ MICROSOFT \WINDOWS \TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\CONTENT.OUTLOOK\NEJSK3XB\MEMO- LMC BID RECOMMEND2 2014.DOC