Loading...
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 2018/03/08 PacketPUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2018 – 6:00 P.M. SAVANNAH CONFERENCE ROOM - MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGENDA I. ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER Stanford Tack, Chairman Michelle Moreno Melanie Rummel II.APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 21, 2018 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES III.REVIEW OF WAUKEGAN ROAD SIDEWALK RESURFACING; MIDDLEFORK TO RTE. 176 – BOB KIELY IV. GAS LIGHT CONVERSION PROJECT UPDATE / REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF DIRECTIONAL BORE MACHINE BID – DAN MARTIN V. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF F.Y. ’19 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT BIDS – MICHAEL THOMAS VI.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF F.Y. ’19 ASPHALT STREET RESURFACING LIST – BOB ELLS VII. FOLLOW-UP OF WATER PLANT INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS – DAN MARTIN VIII. OTHER IX. PUBLIC COMMENT X. NEXT MEETING – TBD XI. ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2018 – 6:30 P.M. MUNICIPAL SERVICES – TRAINING ROOM MINUTES I. ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER Alderman Moreno called the meeting to order at 6:29 P.M. Aldermen Michelle Moreno and Melanie Rummel were in attendance. Chairman Randy Tack was not in attendance. Staff in attendance included Michael Thomas, Director of Public Works; Bob Ells, Superintendent of Engineering; Dan Martin, Superintendent of Engineering; Brian Pogachnik, Sanitation Supervisor; Michael Strong, Assistant to the City Manager and Jim Lockefeer, Management Analyst. Also in attendance was Jim Dudek, ComEd External Affairs Manager; Rommel Noguera, Director of External Affairs; Paul Hamann, Resident of 511 Beverly Place; Patricia Riess, Resident of 625 Beverly Place and Dorothy Thumler, Resident of 551 Beverly Place. II. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 24, 2018 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Alderman Moreno moved to approve the January 24, 2018 Public Works Committee meeting minutes. Alderman Rummel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. III. COMED / BEVERLY UPDATE – JIM DUDEK, COM-ED Jim Dudek, ComEd External Affairs Manager, thanked the Committee for inviting him to the meeting. He explained that he last spoke to the Committee in December, 2017 in regards to the privately owned electrical facilities that relate to the Beverly Place issue. He explained that he has been working with Assistant to the City Manager, Mike Strong on the issue. Mr. Dudek then introduced his manager, Rommel Noguera, Director of External Affairs. He explained that Mr. Noguera has been very involved and engaged with senior ComEd leadership on this issue. Mr. Noguera explained that in September of 2017, ComEd worked with the City to develop alternatives that residents could pursue, at a cost, to have their privately owned facilities converted underground. He explained those alternatives related to and were within ComEd’s current and existing policies. He explained that as the conversation evolved internally at ComEd, senior leadership knew that something had to be done to the existing regulation and policies. He explained it is an older standing tariff that has not been revisited in a long time. He explained that ComEd needed to look at this issue beyond Lake Forest and include all other private residences that may be affected by the current policies and regulations. He explained that this approach has made the issue much more complex. He explained that he is the lead on this initiative. He explained that there have been numerous challenges in working on the issue. One challenge was determining and locating privately owned electrical facilities. He explained that through the ComEd pole inspection program, data has been collected on many private electric utility poles. He explained that ComEd does have approximately 25,000 customer owned utility poles throughout their territory. He explained that ComEd is still trying to determine what percentage of customer owned utilities these poles reflect. Ultimately, ComEd is trying to determine costs. He explained that his team is analyzing the issue and needs to develop costs for their proposals and alternative proposals that they will be presenting to the ICC. He explained one of the proposals being developed is having ComEd take over all of the customer owned facilities. He explained that this would come at a cost to ComEd and those costs still need to be analyzed in order to be included in the ICC proposal. He explained that if this proposal was to be accepted by the ICC, all of ComEd’s customers would absorb and pay for the costs of taking over the customer owned utilities. He explained that ComEd is only concerned with residential properties, not the non- residential properties. He explained that another proposal ComEd is developing is with new non-standard tariffs. He explained these tariffs would allow ComEd to maintain and repair customer owned facilities at a cost to the customer who owns the facilities. He explained that under current ComEd policies and regulations, they do not have a mechanism that allows them to maintain and repair customer owned facilities. He explained that in order to work on resolving this issue, ComEd needs to bring numerous proposals and options to the ICC. He explained that in total, five alternatives have been developed. The alternatives still need to be vetted and approved by ComEd senior leadership prior to being proposed to the ICC. Alderman Rummel inquired about the costs in resolving the issue and how they are spread out amongst ComEd customers. Mr. Noguera explained that every ComEd customer would pay and absorb the costs if ComEd were to take over every privately owned customer facilities. He explained that because of this ComEd has developed the additional alternatives and proposals in case the ICC is not in favor of that specific proposal. He explained the majority of customers do not have customer owned facilities and therefore the ICC may see that having those unaffected customers absorb the costs of ComEd taking over the customer owned facilities as being unfair. Alderman Rummel inquired about the second proposal and if under that option only the affected customers who own facilities would be required to pay a rate or additional fees. Mr. Noguera explained that essentially that would be the case under the second proposal, however the specifics are still being developed. Mr. Noguera explained that the remaining three proposals are all variations of the second proposal. He explained that cost analyze still needs to be developed for all of the proposals. Mr. Noguera thanked the City for working with ComEd on the issue. He explained that ComEd really would like to resolve the issue in the right way. He explained that ComEd has been working on this issue for a number of months but because of its complexity, ComEd still needs more time to develop their proposals prior to bringing them to the ICC. He explained that they are looking for approximately 90 days to develop their proposals. He explained that he would look to keep the City updated on a regular basis on progress made. Assistant to the City Manager Mike Strong asked Mr. Noguera if he could speak to the process of establishing a new tariff and if the 90 days included the proposals being brought to and reviewed by the ICC. Mr. Noguera explained that the 90 days is just for ComEd to complete their analysis. He explained that he could not speak to the regulatory process as he has no prior work experience in ComEd’s regulatory division. He explained that once ComEd gets closer to presenting the proposals to the ICC he can provide details on what the process and timeline is from their regulatory division. Alderman Rummel explained that at the last Public Works Committee meeting the Committee and residents were told that a solution was going to be found in 60 days. She explained that it needs to be communicated to those same residents that ComEd has requested another 90 days to complete their analysis and also the number of days it may take to go through the ICC regulatory process. She explained that a concern is if another big storm affects one of the customer owned facilities in Lake Forest prior to this issue being resolved. She explained that another letter will needed to be sent to the affected residents. Alderman Moreno inquired about the best path in communicating with the residents. Assistant to the City Manager Mike Strong explained that prior communication has been shared via mailings and emails. He explained that the prior letter Alderman Rummel was speaking to was very effective. Alderman Rummel asked if resident testimony would help ComEd in regards to their issues with customer owned facilities, when ComEd presents their proposals to the ICC. Mr. Noguera explained that at this point, ComEd was comfortable with the proposed options that they were currently developing. However, as ComEd progresses in their proposals and feels as though resident testimony would be beneficial, he will reach out to City staff. Alderman Rummel explained that she believes the affected residents would provide some persuasive testimony about their safety concerns. Assistant to the City Manager Mike Strong explained that he would work with Mr. Dudek on developing correspondence to the affected residents that would explain and outline the request for an additional 90 days for ComEd to complete their analysis. He explained that the list of contractors who work on residential customer owned facilities will also be shared through this mailing again. Mr. Dudek explained that the correspondence could also discuss the importance of proactive maintenance to trees and branches near customer owned facilities. Alderman Moreno inquired if the ICC meetings are open to the public. Mr. Noguera explained that he was unsure but would check with their regulatory department and would contact the City to share that information. Alderman Moreno inquired if there were any members of the public who would like to comment on the topic. Resident Patricia Riess of 625 Beverly Place commented on the issue of customer owned facilities and how she believes it is a public safety issue. Resident Paul Hamann, commented on the timing of when the ComEd standard of customer owned facilities was developed and ComEd line maintenance practices. The Committee thanked ComEd and the members of the public for their comments. IV. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF WATER PLANT INTAKE CLEANING PROPOSAL – DAN MARTIN Superintendent Martin explained that at the January 24, 2018 Public Works Committee meeting, the Committee voted to approve the waiving of the bid process for the two intake pipes at the Water Plant. He explained that this was because there is one sole vendor that uses a patented process to effectively and efficiently clean both intakes. The Committee directed staff to bring the official proposal to the Public Works Committee in February and ask for their recommendation to City Council to approve of the proposal. He explained that the proposal has been obtained and is included in tonight’s meeting packet. Staff has received a proposal from Northern Divers for $185,000. As part of their proposal, Northern Divers has also agreed to hold their $185,000 cost if the City was to contract with them again within the next five years. He explained that the amount can also potentially be reduced if the City pursues Northern Divers jointly with additional North Shore area water plants. He explained that $185,000 has been budgeted in the FY18 CIP. Alderman Rummel inquired if the City Attorney would review the proposal and contract. Superintendent Martin explained that the proposal would be further developed into a contract and reviewed by the City Attorney for the March 19, 2018 City Council Meeting. The contract would include all of the City’s required general conditions. Superintendent Martin explained that if the Committee moves forward in proceeding with Northern Divers to the City Council, a City Council write-up would be developed for the March 19, 2018 meeting. If approved by City Council, Northern Divers would begin the cleaning process in mid-April prior to the heavy summer pumping season. Alderman Rummel motioned to recommend to City Council to proceed with Northern Divers for the cleaning of the two water plant intake pipes for $185,000. Alderman Moreno seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. V. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CURRENT EXPENSE TO DISPOSE OF CURBSIDE RECYCLING MATERIAL – MICHAEL THOMAS Director of Public Works Michael Thomas provided an overview and a history of City recycling efforts. He explained that curbside recycling in Lake Forest began in 1991 and up until 2008 all collected materials were separated by the Sanitation Section at the curb. He explained that the City constructed a recycle transfer ramp at the Compost Center during the summer of 2008 utilizing funds from a DCEO state grant. He explained that the ramp allows for a hauler to come into the City’s Compost Center and haul the mixed materials to their plant where they will be separated. He explained that in the fall of 2008, the City Sanitation Section began utilizing the transfer ramp. The City also began collecting single stream recycling, expanded recycling curbside collection to include cardboard, and entered into an agreement with Resource Management to transfer and process the City’s single stream recycling. He explained that either a 65 or 35 gallon cart was provided to residents in the fall of 2011 and 2012. At this time recycling curbside collection expanded to include paperback books, wrapping paper, magazines, and junk mail. Director Thomas explained that the Sanitation Section records and monitors numerous data that has been compiled all the way back to 2000. He explained that the data allows staff to track the cost per ton of disposing of refuse and the cost per ton to process recycling materials. Director Thomas explained that the City is currently facing a challenge as the cost to transfer and process single stream recycling is now exceeding the cost to dispose of the materials as refuse. He explained that China receives a majority of the single stream recycling for processing. In July of 2017 the Chinese government announced that it would ban the imports of mixed plastic, paper, and many other scrap materials. He explained that the ban took effect in January of 2018 and is aimed at cracking down to what China refers to as “large amounts of dirty wastes or even hazardous wastes” mixed with recycling. He explained that this is an issue that recycling collectors and processors are now dealing with nationwide. Director Thomas reviewed a line graph that showed a yearly history from the year 2000 – 2017. The graph showed yearly averages of the City cost per ton to dispose of refuse and the cost per ton for recycle transferring and processing. He explained that in the past the City was generating revenue through its single stream recycling program. He explained that in more recent years, single stream recycling has become a City expense. Director Thomas then reviewed a similar line graph that reviewed the past 12 months. He explained that the cost to transfer and process recycling has been trending upwards and is now exceeding the cost to dispose of it as refuse. He explained that the City currently pays $39.50/ton to dispose of refuse and is expected to pay an estimated $47/ton during the month of February to transfer and process recycling. Director Thomas then reviewed a table of single stream recycling processors. He explained that the City’s current provider, Resource Management, has been very effective in meeting the City’s needs. He explained while it may seem like there may be many recycling processors, many do not meet the City’s need as a single stream processor. He also explained that some of the firms on the table only process their own materials that they collect. He explained that staff is researching the processing costs for Waste Management if the City was to use them as a processor for single stream recycling. Director Thomas explained that he spoken to the past City of Lake Forest Mayor Jim Cowhey who is still active in the refuse and recycling industry. He explained that China’s decision has effected the entire nation as the cost to process recycling is rising. He explained that these prices change on a monthly basis and therefore he does not know what the City will be charged in the future. Alderman Rummel inquired about the market and how China was utilizing the materials. Director Thomas explained that China has had a very strict tolerance on processed recycling loads being uncontaminated by non-recyclables (.5%). He explained that China is strict because they will sell their processed materials as raw materials to manufactures. Director Thomas explained that City staff has a very good working relationship with Resource Management. They are very responsive and will come to the City on short notice if additional hauling is needed. He explained that their cost to process recyclables also contains the cost to haul the City’s materials. Alderman Rummel inquired about hauling costs and if the City could utilize a cheaper trucking firm to bring down the cost. Director Thomas explained that the price to haul materials is put out to bid by Resource Management. He explained that he believed that they select the lowest reputable bidder. Alderman Rummel inquired if the City is sorting the recyclable materials. Director Thomas explained that the City is not. Director Thomas explained that staff’s recommendation is to continue to transfer and process material with Resource Management. He explained that staff will continue to monitor and research alternative processors. He explained that another idea staff has discussed is raising the $8 a month resident sanitation fee an additional $2 a month to help offset the cost to process recycling. He explained that the current funds generated by the fee is utilized by the City’s capital fund and not by the Sanitation Section’s operating budget. Alderman Rummel inquired about what is going to be done budgetary wise. Director Thomas explained that costs are calculated in January for the next fiscal year’s budget. Superintendent Martin explained that some adjustments have been made in the Public Works budget to try to account for this additional expense. Director Thomas explained that a discretionary request for additional dollars for recycle processing was also in part approved by City Manager Kiely and the City’s Finance Department. Alderman Moreno explained that the trend line for recycling is going up and that increasing the City sanitation fee to $8 to $10 may not be enough. She explained that she believes that the City will need to use the Sanitation data to be somewhat predictive for budgetary purposes. Director Thomas explained that staff will look to have a discussion with the City Manager and Finance Department about potentially increasing the sanitation fee. Director Thomas explained that it was very difficult to explain to residents, back when the fee was implemented, that the sanitation fee was going to the capital fund and not strictly to Sanitation. Alderman Rummel inquired about the fee being directed to an enterprise fund. Director Thomas explained that could be a possibility. Resident Paul Hamann commented on recycling and reducing the City’s recycling program to one or two materials. The Committee thanked Mr. Hamann for his comment. Alderman Moreno asked if this topic should be shared with City Council. Director Thomas explained that the presentation can be shared with City Council. Alderman Moreno explained that the topic could also be a non-action item on a future City Council agenda. VI. PROJECT & OPERATIONAL UPDATES GAS LIGHT CONVERSION PROJECT Superintendent Martin explained that the Committee last discussed the gas light conversion project at the January 24, 2018 Public Works Committee meeting. He explained that City staff is moving forward with requesting bids for a used directional bore machine. The used machine would be utilized for the entire conversion project. He explained that the bid opening will take place on March 1, 2018. He explained that the Street Supervisor has been researching machine specifications to ensure that the City purchases that right machine for the conversion project. He explained that the bid was sent to 70 Vermeer dealers. Superintendent Martin explained that staff is also working on revising the project timing map and will bring that to the next Public Works Committee meeting. He explained that some of the annually proposed areas had different amounts of gas lights to be converted in a given fiscal year. He explained that this was because some of the gas lights in certain areas are far less condensed and more spread out. The lights that are more spread out are going to cost more to convert due to the costs of more material. Alderman Moreno inquired about using remaining funds in a given fiscal year to begin the next fiscal year’s proposed conversion area. Superintendent Martin explained that staff would look to utilize any remaining funds in a given year and dedicate those to beginning the next year’s proposed area. HIGHWOOD WATER PLANT ASSISTANCE Director Thomas explained that the entire City Council received an email from City Manager Kiely in regards to Highwood’s water plant. Director Thomas explained that he and City Manager Kiely, have had ongoing conversations with the City Manager of Highwood in regards to their water plant and the City potentially selling water to Highwood. Highwood has explained that they have an older water plant and that they are not looking to invest in any capital projects at their water plant. He explained that Highwood may be looking to get out of owning and operating their own water plant. He explained that when Lake Forest staff last met with Highwood staff, Highwood discussed a recent personnel issue and requested Lake Forest’s support. It was explained that Highwood’s water plant had two fulltime operators. One of the operators has just been released. Because of this, Highwood asked if a Lake Forest licensed water plant operator could assist their operations at their plant. The City of Lake Forest has developed an agreement with Highwood whereby the City of Lake Forest would agree to operate the Highwood water plant two days a week. Highwood’s remaining fulltime operator would then operate the plant five days a week. Per the agreement, Highwood would pay the City of Lake Forest’s plant operator overtime rate in addition to a 7% fee. Director Thomas explained that over the past week, City of Lake Forest water plant operators have been going to the Highwood plant to train at their plant. He explained that the Highwood plant has older technology but operating is very straightforward. He explained that each day the Highwood water plant is operated to fill its own water tower. After their water tower is filled, the plant operations stop until the next day. He explained that the City of Lake Forest is strictly operating the plant and will not be investing any money into their plant infrastructure. He explained that he and City Manager Kiely will continue to have discussions with the City Manager of Highwood about potentially constructing a transmission main to Highwood to supply them with treated water from Lake Forest. If Highwood does not move forward with the transmission main proposal, the City will stop providing Highwood water plant operation support in May of 2018 and they will need to hire their own fulltime operator. Director Thomas explained that he believes Highwood is very interested in investing in a transmission main and purchasing City water. Alderman Moreno explained that the overtime rate with an additional 7% sounds like a fair rate. She explained that she wants to make sure that the rate we are charging Highwood is enough. She also explained that any agreement with Highwood has to be very clear that the agreement is only for labor. The City of Lake Forest will not be liable for any of Highwood’s plant infrastructure. Alderman Rummel explained that she reviewed the agreement and it seemed to consist of all the necessary statements that Alderman Moreno explained. Director Thomas explained that the drafted agreement was created and reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office. FALL, 2017 WESTERN AVE. WORK (LAUREL TO FRANKLIN) T.I.F. REIMBURSEMENT Director Thomas explained that in October of 2017, Western Ave from Laurel to Franklin was closed for storm sewer work and street resurfacing. He explained at this time and prior to the road resurfacing occurring, the City’s Superintendent of Parks and Forestry and the Forestry Supervisor inspected both sides of the road and identified an issue. The issue was with the material that was used to backfill the parkways on both sides of the street. The material consisted of clay, stone, and old pipe. In addition, there were also no street lights planned for the east side of Western Avenue. He explained that City staff put together a team effort to purchase and install street light infrastructure and street lights. He explained that the team also worked to remove the junk backfill material in both the islands and parkways so that the material could be replaced with material that could sustain parkway plants and trees. It was very important to complete all of this prior to the resurfacing being completed. If this work was to be completed after the resurfacing of the road, the road would likely need to be resurfaced again due to the heavy machinery needed to remove and replace the junk backfill material. He explained that included in tonight’s meeting packet are the expenses that were incurred for the work. He explained Public Works and Parks & Forestry did an excellent job in completing the necessary work in the very short timeframe. He explained the engineered soil was very important to have in order to properly plant the parkways. He explained that the list of expenses totals approximately $51,000 with an additional $10,000 of plant material to be purchased this spring. He explained that the Finance Department explained that these expenditures would need to be brought to City Council for Council approval in order to utilize T.I.F. funds or that the Public Works Department would need to utilize dollars in their current FY18 operating budget. Director Thomas explained that with the end of FY18 approaching it would be difficult to find remaining dollars in the Public Works operating budget to use to cover these expenses. He explained that he may bring a proposal to City Council to request T .I.F. funds to cover the expenses incurred. He explained that he has spoken to City Manager Kiely in regards to this City Council proposal and City Manager Kiely was in agreement that it should be brought to City Council. He explained that after some additional review by City staff, he may ultimately seek City Council’s approval to move T.I.F funds to Public Works to cover the expenses incurred. Alderman Rummel inquired about the agreement with Focus Development and if they would incur any of the expenses related to the work in October. Director Thomas explained that all of the expenses were incurred by the City’s Public Works Department. Focus Development was responsible for the storm sewer infrastructure, curbs, sidewalks, and pavement. He explained that a very large issue was that if Focus Development was to finish paving the street and then the City was to go back and complete the work that was completed in October, the street would be significantly damaged and need to be paved again. Alderman Rummel inquired about how and why the junk material was utilized in the first place. Director Thomas explained that he believed that there were multiple plans and agreements being reviewed and revised by Focus Development and the City. He explained that when the City’s Engineering section reviews plans they review storm sewer infrastructure and street pavement design. Street lights are not automatically required and were not on the plan set. He explained that he wasn’t entirely sure why the use of junk material was approved. Superintendent of Engineering Bob Ells explained that for standard construction the backfill typically utilized is clay. He explained in addition to that clay, six to eight inches of top soil is then used. The City of Lake Forest chooses to use a more engineered soil that is more mixed. He explained that this soil helps trees to grow better. He explained that Focus did bring in the standard clay however the clay they brought in was of a very low quality mixed with parts of clay pipes, a good amount of stone, and a few railroad ties. Superintendent Ells explained that if that parkway was going to be just grass then the material that was brought in might be ok. He explained though that trees would not grow in that material. Alderman Moreno and Alderman Rummel inquired about having Focus Development pay for the expenses incurred by the City. Superintendent Ells explained that he did not believe the related expenses were a part of the City requirements and agreement with Focus. Director Thomas agreed with Superintendent Ells. Alderman Moreno explained that a mandate needs to be developed that any standard construction is required to meet the City standards for backfill material and street lights so that this does not happen again. Director Thomas explained that this was a lesson learned by City staff and that a closer review for these items will be taken moving forward. Alderman Rummel explained that if a substandard clay backfill was used by Focus, they should still have to pay part of the City expenses that were incurred. Director Thomas explained that he believed Focus would push back and say that they utilized materials that were in approved City plans. Director Thomas explained that with all of the negations, revisions, and back and forth between Focus and the City, the street lights and backfill requirements were over looked. Alderman Rummel explained that she agreed with Alderman Moreno in that a standard needs to be developed going forward so that these items are a construction requirement. Alderman Moreno explained that the standard needs to be a part of the City’s Community Development Department. Alderman Rummel inquired about the Hospital drainage issues and if the use of clay in their construction is related. Director Thomas explained that the hospital drainage issue is related to the IDOT and UP culverts on the east and west side of route 41. He explained that City staff has been working with IDOT on clearing debris and is now looking to work with the UP. He explained that addressing those issues should help to alleviate flooding in that area. SNOW O.T. & SALT USAGE UPDATE Director Thomas reviewed a current to-date chart of the 2017-2018 snow season that showed the number of snow events, total inches of snow, total overtime dollars spent on snow operations, and the amount of tons of salt used. The chart compared these totals to the past five City snow seasons. He explained that City staff just received an additional 500 tons of salt. He explained that the City will again look to work with Lake County to bid out and resupply salt in the upcoming months for next year’s snow season. Alderman Rummel explained that the City of Chicago utilizes beet juice in their snow operations and inquired if the City could look to also utilize beet juice. Director Thomas explained that a concern in utilizing beet juice is that the City’s snow fleet apparatuses and equipment would need to change to accommodate the use of beet juice. He explained that salt water is being utilized right now to activate the salt that is being used on City streets. He explained that when it is very cold out, the use of calcium chloride is needed to activate the salt. He explained that the City experimented with beet juice approximately 15 years ago. He explained that the City can look into utilizing beet juice again and develop what the costs would be. He explained that staff could research how other similar towns have successfully utilized beet juice. Superintendent Martin explained that the Supervisor of the Streets Section and other snow commanders have been monitoring the use of beet juice through the many trainings that they attend. He explained that when the City tried utilizing beet juice, it was icing up and making the roadways more slippery in the areas it was tested in. He explained that a pilot program for the next snow season could be implemented, however beet juice is costly to implement. Ald erman Rummel recommended that Public Works continue to monitor and explore the use of beet juice in City snow operations. Alderman Moreno inquired if the snow update was also shared with the rest of the City Council. Public Works Management Analyst Jim Lockefeer explained that the update was sent to the rest of the City Council. VII. OTHER Assistant to the City Manager Mike Strong explained and provided an update in regards to securing easements in the Winwood area. He explained that this stemmed from the SSA proposal to provide the neighborhood with sanitary sewer. He explained that two easements had been executed by the homeowners however they had not yet been accepted by the City. He explained that those two easements will appear on a City Council agenda for acceptance so that they are secured if a future project develops. Alderman Moreno inquired if there were any conditional arrangements in the easement agreements. Assistant to the City Manager Mike Strong explained that the agreements were standard. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no additional public comment. IX. NEXT MEETING Director Thomas suggested the next meeting be scheduled for March 8, 2018 at 6:30 P.M. X. ADJOURNMENT Alderman Rummel moved to adjourn the meeting of the Public Works Committee at 8:23 P.M. Alderman Moreno seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Jim Lockefeer Jr. Management Analyst REVIEW OF WAUKEGAN ROAD SIDEWALK RESURFACING; MIDDLEFORK TO RTE. 176 Memorandum To: Robert R. Kiely Jr., City Manager From: Robert W. Ells, Superintendent of Engineering Date: March 6, 2018 Subject: WAUKEGAN ROAD SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT Engineering has completed pre-design cost estimates for the removal/replacement of the existing variable-width asphalt sidewalk along the west side of State Route 43 (Waukegan Road) State Route 176 to from Deerpath. As requested, the estimate was separated into two segments – Rt. 176 to Middlefork and Middlefork to Deerpath. Staff also estimated costs for two paving options - asphalt and concrete; based on guidance received, all of the estimated costs below are for a five foot wide sidewalk. Location New 5’ wide asphalt sidewalk Construction/Engineering (Total) New 5’ wide concrete sidewalk Construction/Engineering (Total) Rt. 176 to Middlefork (8300’/1.57 miles) $314,426/$39,880 ($358,426) $512,724/$39,880 ($556,724) Middlefork to Deerpath (4000’/.76 miles) $197,426/$16,000 ($215,426) $285,516/$16,000 ($303,516) Rt. 176 to Deerpath (12,300’/2.33 miles) $511,852/$55,880 ($573,852) $798,240/$55,880 ($860,240) IDOT requires that complete engineering design plans be submitted for review/approval prior to issuing a permit for work in the State right -of- way. Also, because of IDOT requirements, The City of Lake Forest must be the permit holder for this work. Please note the above costs do not include the permit fees and bonds which will be assessed by IDOT once the review process is complete. The table below gives an approximate duration for each phase of the proposed project. Duration Milestone 2 Months Surveying/Engineering Design/Permit Submittal 4 Months State Permit Review 1 Month Bidding/Contract Award 1 Month Construction GAGE LN W E STMO RELAND RD CARROLL RD WINWOOD DR SYMP H O NYST REGENCY LN CAHILL LNPEMB R IDG E D R AYNSLEYJENSEN DROLMSTEDFARLIN HWY 41WAUKEGAN RD (RTE 43)KNOLLWOODBARCLAYCIRKIRKHILL CARROLL KNOLLWO O D R D LNWA U K E GA N R D ( R T E 4 3 ) LNKNOLL MIDDLEFORK DR DRCTMCGLINNINCTKENNICOTT DR EMMONSCTA V EWOODROCKLAND RD (RTE 176)KNOLLW O O D RDCIRRD KESWICK LN CHALMERS CTPROPOSED SIDEWALK µ REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING SIDEWALK November 28, 2017 Revised March 6, 2018 Mr. Robert Ells City of Lake Forest 800 N. Field Drive Lake Forest, IL 60045 Re: City of Lake Forest Professional Engineering Services Proposal Design Services – Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) Sidewalk (IL Rte 176 to Middlefork Drive) GHA Proposal No.: 2017.T252 Dear Mr. Ells: Thank you for requesting this proposal from Gewalt Hamilton Associates (GHA) to perform design engineering services for proposed sidewalk improvements to replace an existing asphalt sidewalk along the west side of Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) between IL Rte 176 and Middlefork Drive, within the City of Lake Forest. The City has requested that GHA provide a scope of services necessary to provide engineering plans, construction documents, and permitting submittals for the improvements to this existing sidewalk system along the west side of Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43). We understand the scope of the proposed improvement has been clarified to be limited the removal of the existing pavement and installation of a 5’ wide HMA sidewalk. I. Project Understanding The City of Lake Forest is proposing the design of the sidewalk along the west side of Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) between IL Rte 176 and Middlefork Drive and secure the necessary approvals from the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) for work within their right-of-way. II. Scope of Services The following tasks are anticipated: Task A – Project Management, Coordination & Data Collection The following tasks are anticipated during this phase of the project. 1. Coordination with the City of Lake Forest: GHA will provide regular communication with the City, including copies of all transmittals and regular updates on project milestones and schedule. 2. Coordination with IDOT: GHA will coordinate all submittals with IDOT Permits in order to obtain approvals for securing a permit from IDOT for constructing the proposed sidewalk improvement within the State right-of-way. 3. Coordination with LCSMC: GHA will coordinate with the Lake County Stormwater Management Commission (LCSMC) and City staff to discuss any permitting requirements for the project. We anticipate based on the nature and scope of this project that the project should fall under Countywide Permit #1 and will not require an individual watershed development permit. 4. Coordination with Utilities: GHA will coordinate with local utility companies through the JULIE Design Stage process. Limits of the project will be provided to the utility companies and requests for atlas Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) Sidewalk (IL Rte 176 to Middlefork Drive) Professional Engineering Services - Proposal No. 2017.T252 Revised March 6, 2018 Page 2 information will be made. Upon receipt of the utility information, the utility company data will be added to the existing drawings. 5. Wetlands: It is anticipated that there are no wetlands/Waters of the US (WOUS) present within the project limits and wetland impacts are not anticipated. If it is determined that wetlands are present and a wetland delineation report is required with associated permitting, an additional service will be requested. 6. Representatives from GHA will attend up to two (2) progress meetings with City staff. Task B – Topographic Survey, ROW Survey, & Base Plan Preparation GHA shall prepare an existing conditions, utility, and boundary survey within the project limits noted above and prepare base plan sheets. The detailed existing conditions survey work will include the following: 1. Detailed schedule of the survey control with X, Y, and Z coordinates. All measurements shall be projected in Illinois State Plane Coordinates, East Zone, North American Datum of 1983 (1986 adjustment) and North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). 2. Locate existing tree and brush lines in the right-of-way (ROW). Trees over 6” in diameter or greater will be individually located (tagging and identification are not included). 3. Locate all topographic features within the project limits. This data will include curbs (including type of curb), pavements, driveways, sidewalks, visible property monuments, right-of-way line monuments and all visible utilities. Each driveway will be surveyed with elevations provided to 10’ past the sidewalk or right-of-way wherever possible. 4. Elevations will be obtained at all surveyed points. Elevations will be obtained at each manhole, catch basin, and valve vault rim. At intersections, the flow line elevations for all curb returns, grade breaks, and locations 25’, 50’, and 100’ distant will also be obtained. 5. The type, size and material of underground storm, sanitary, and watermain structures will be included in the survey based on information provided by the City, including: a. Numbering of all structures; b. Diameter, material, orientation, and depth of all sewers or watermains in the structures; c. Notation as to connecting structure(s); d. Locations of all b-boxes. 6. GHA will complete a boundary survey and establish the roadway right-of-way and centerline based on recovered monumentation and research of available plats and property records. It is anticipated that there will not be a need for easement or right-of-way acquisition. If it is determined easements or right-of- way is needed, additional service will be requested for the preparation of easement/right-of-way documents. Task C – Plan and Special Provision Preparation 1. Plans will include the following: Title Sheet, General Notes, Summary of Quantities, Typical Cross Sections, Erosion Control Sheets, Plan and Profile Sheets, Drainage and Utility Sheets, Pavement Marking and Signage Sheets and Details for Construction. Roadway cross-sections taken at 50-foot intervals and at all driveways (proposed and existing) adjacent to the road will also be included. The plans will be prepared in a format accepted by IDOT. Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) Sidewalk (IL Rte 176 to Middlefork Drive) Professional Engineering Services - Proposal No. 2017.T252 Revised March 6, 2018 Page 3 2. GHA will prepare a detailed engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost based upon the completed final engineering plans. 3. GHA will prepare bidding document for a local letting. IV. Project Schedule and Engineering Staff We are prepared to commence work as soon as we are given authorization to proceed. Dan Strahan, P.E., CFM will serve as the Project Manager. Mr. Kevin Belgrave will oversee preparation and submittal of the engineering plans, special provisions and opinion of probable construction cost. Additional professional and technical staff will provide support as needed. It is understood that the City would like to construct the improvements in the 2018 construction season. GHA will commence the project to achieve this goal and it is understood that GHA is subject to jurisdictional review and acquisition of easements that is beyond the control of GHA. V. Compensation for Services For the services noted above, GHA proposes lump sum fees by phase as described below: Service Lump Sum Fee Task A – Project Management, Coordination & Data Collection $5,400.00 Task B – Topographic Survey, ROW Survey, & Base Plan Preparation $10,980.00 Task C – Plan and Special Provision Preparation $23,000.00 Reimbursable Expenses $500.00 Total Lump Sum Fee + Reimbursables $39,880.00 For any additional services beyond those outlined in Section II: Scope of Services, the Client shall pay GHA on a time and material basis in accordance with the approved Professional Services Agreement between GHA and the City of Lake Forest effective May 1, 2016, as indicated below. Please note that these rates represent a discount of approximately 10% off of our standard rates. Principal Engineer $158/hr. Staff Engineer $106/hr. Senior Engineer $134/hr. Senior Engineering Technician $106/hr. Senior Environmental Consultant $134/hr. Environmental Consultant $106/hr. Professional Engineer $116/hr. Engineering Technician II $92/hr. Registered Land Surveyor $112/hr. Engineering Technician I $68/hr. GIS Professional $112/hr. Clerical $56/hr. If required, any reimbursable expenses, including items such as printing, messenger service, mileage etc., will be billed direct to the Client without markup. Mileage is billed at $0.50/mile. Statements of GHA charges made against a project are submitted to clients every four weeks and will detail services performed. This permits the client to review the status of the work in progress and the charges made. VI. General Conditions The general conditions of the contract shall be as delineated in the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Lake Forest and GHA. Waukegan Road (IL Rte 43) Sidewalk (IL Rte 176 to Middlefork Drive) Professional Engineering Services - Proposal No. 2017.T252 Revised March 6, 2018 Page 4 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. If our proposal is acceptable, please sign below indicating your acceptance of this Agreement in its entirety. Sincerely, Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. Daniel J. Strahan, P.E., CFM Associate/Senior Engineer ACCEPTED BY: City of Lake Forest Robert Ells Superintendent of Engineering Date GAS LIGHT CONVERSION PROJECT UPDATE / REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF DIRECTIONAL BORE MACHINE BID Public Works Committee Gas Light Conversions March 8, 2018 Tonight’s Updates Regarding… •Project Map / Timeline / Conversion Process •Project Funding / Conversion Costs / Payback Period •Review of Used Directional Boring Machine Bids & Recommendation to City Council Project Map, Timeline, Conversion Process *Additional dollars for FY19 materials will be sought via remaining FY18 PW projects and programs Project Funding ,Conversion Costs, Payback Period •$70,000 allocated in FY19 CIP for conversion of gaslights •Full conversion is estimated at $695,725 •10 years, $70,000 per year for full conversion •General pay back period is estimated at 13.3 years •$695,725 / $52,105.23 (8-year City natural gas usage average -estimated increase in electric) = 13.3 years •The majority of FY19 funds allocated to purchase a directional boring machine •New –$102,809 •Rental –$420,000 ($7,000 per month 6 months/$42,000 10 year program) •Used –$60,000 (bid process) Staff Recommendation of Directional Boring Machine Bids •Bids were sent to 70 Vermeer dealers nationwide •Bids include operating and maintenance training •City received two bids •$65,000 Vermeer Illinois •$60,000 Vermeer Midsouth -Arkansas (newer model & less operating hours) •Staff recommends purchasing the machine via the low bid received •If PW Committee approves recommendation, bid approval will be considered at the March 19, 2018 City Council agenda REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF F.Y. ’19 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST Thursday, March 1, 2018 - 2:00 p.m. Savannah Conference Room BID TABULATION VENDOR YEAR MFG MODEL BID MINUS TRADE-IN #122 MINUS TRADE-IN #126 MINUS TRADE-IN #18009 TOTAL BID Flag Chevrolet 2018 Chevrolet CK25943 $ 42,446 $ 3,000 $ 4,000 $ 6,000 $ 29,446 Ray Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK25943 $ 42,680 $ 1,800 $ 4,000 $ 5,000 $ 31,880 Palmen GMC 2018 GMC TK259431 $ 41,858 $ 1,000 $ 3,000 $ 5,500 $ 32,358 Miles Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK25943 $ 43,997 $ 400 $ 1,800 $ 2,500 $ 39,297 VENDOR YEAR MFG MODEL BID MINUS TRADE-IN #906 TOTAL BID Palmen GMC 2018 GMC TK15753 $ 30,350 $ 5,500 $ 24,850 Flag Cherolet 2018 GMC TK15753 $ 30,208 $ 4,000 $ 26,208 Ray Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK15753 $ 30,312 $ 2,000 $ 28,312 Miles Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK15753 $ 35,375 $ 1,800 $ 33,575 VENDOR YEAR MFG MODEL BID MINUS TRADE-IN #431 & 448 TOTAL BID JX Peterbilt (NJPA)2019 Peterbilt 438 $ 98,445 $ 14,500 $ 83,945 Lindco (NJPA)2018 Ampli-Roll Hooklift $ 147,496 $ - $ 147,496 GRAND TOTAL: $ 245,941 $ 14,500 $ 231,441 VENDOR YEAR MFG MODEL BID MINUS TRADE-IN #90 TOTAL BID Ray Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK15753 $ 34,295 $ 1,800 $ 32,495 Flag Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK15753 $ 36,037 $ 2,000 $ 34,037 Miles Cherolet 2018 Chevrolet CK15753 $ 35,743 $ 1,500 $ 34,243 PARKS CHEVROLET/GMC 2500 HD 4WD CREW CAB WORK TRUCK - BUDGET: $30,000 W&S CHEVROLET/GMC 1500 4WD DOUBLE CAB WORK TRUCK - BUDGET: $35,000 POLICE CHEVROLET 1500 4WD CREW CAB SPECIAL SERVICE TRUCK - BUDGET: $37,000 STREETS 5 - YARD HOOKLIFT DUMP & PLOW TRUCK - BUDGET: $233,000 REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF F.Y. ’19 ASPHALT STREET RESURFACING LIST STREET FROM TO WALNUT ROAD SHERIDAN ROAD DEERPATH SOUTHGATE MARKET SQUARE FOREST AVENUE MCGLINNIN COURT MIDDLEFORK DRIVE NORTH END ASH LAWN DRIVE MONTICELLO CIRCLE MEADOWOOD DRIVE SUMMERFIELD DRIVE ROUTE 43 WEST END WHITMORE COURT SUMMERFIELD DRIVE NORTH END CAHILL LANE KENNICOTT DRIVE MIDDLEFORK DRIVE FARLIN COURT KENNICOTT DRIVE SOUTH END AYNSLEY AVENUE MIDDLEFORK DRIVE KENNICOTT DRIVE MIDDLEFORK DRIVE ROUTE 43 JENSEN DRIVE ACORN TRAIL MIDDLEFORK DRIVE WHITMORE COURT 2019 RESURFACING LIST FOLLOW-UP OF WATER PLANT INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST CONTRACT FOR Water Plant 24" and 42" Raw Water Intake Cleaning Project Full Name of Contractor: Northern Divers USA ("Contractor") Principal Office Address: 10404 Fox Bluff Lane. Soring Grove, IL 60081 Local Office Address: Same as above Contact Person: Frank Frosoione. President Telechone Number: 847-293-8465 TO: The City of Lake Forest ("Owner") ATTN: John C. Gulledge, Chief Water Plant Operator/Supervisor 800 North Field Drive Lake Forest, Illinois 60045 Contractor warrants and represents that Contractor has carefully examined the Work Site described below and /ts environs and has reviewed and understood alt documents included, referred to, or mentioned in this bound set of documents, including Addenda Nos. _ [if none, write 'NOW'], which are securely stapled to the end of this Contract. Contractor shall inform themselves thoroughly as to all the difficulties that may be encountered in the complete execution of all the Work under the attached Contract, Attachment C - Intake Reference Drawings. Questions Regarding legal and procedural documents shall be directed to John Gulledge, Chief Water Plant Operator, in writing or by FAX at 847-735-1630. I. WORK PROPOSAL A. Contract and Work. If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide, perform, and complete, in the manner specified and described, and upon the terms and conditions set forth, in this Contract and Owner's written notification of acceptance in the form included in this bound set of documents, all of the following, all of which is herein referred to as the "Work": 1. Labor, Eauioment. Materials and Supplies. Provide, perform, and complete, in the manner specified and described in this Contract, all necessary work, labor, services, transportation, equipment, materials, supplies, information, data, and other means and items necessary for the following work throughout The City of Lake Forest ("Work Site"): Water Plant, 24" and 42" Raw Water Intake Cleaning Project specified in Attachment B- Description of Work. ("Work"); 2. Permits. Procure and furnish all permits, licenses, and other governmental approvals and authorizations necessary in connection therewith; 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT 3. Bonds and Insurance. Procure and furnish all bonds and all insurance certificates and copies of policies of insurance specified in this Contract; 4. Taxes. Pay all applicable federal, state, and local taxes; 5. Suspension of Work. The Superintendent of Public works shall have the authority to suspend the Work, wholly or in part, for such periods as the Superintendent of Public Works may deem necessary, due to unsuitable weather, or such other conditions as are considered unfavorable for the prosecution of the Work, that jeopardize the safety of the public, or failure on the part of the Contractor to carry out the provisions of the Contract or to supply materials meeting the requirements of the Description of Work. The Contractor shall not suspend operations without the Superintendent of Public Works' permission. 6. Miscellaneous. Do all other things required of Contractor by this Contract; and 7. Quality. Provide, perform, and complete all of the foregoing in a proper and workmanlike manner, consistent with highest standards of professional and construction practices, in full compliance with, and as required by or pursuant, to this Contract, and with the greatest economy, efficiency, and expedition consistent therewith, with only new, undamaged, and first quality equipment, materials, and supplies. Performance Standards. If this Contract is accepted. Contractor proposes, and agrees, that all Work shall be fully provided, performed, and completed in accordance with the written specification, and drawings. The specifications attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this Contract. Responsibllttv for Damaee or Loss. If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall be responsible and liable for, and shall promptly and without charge to Owner repair or replace, damage done to, and any loss or injury suffered by, Owner, the Work, the Work Site, or other property or persons as a result of the Work. D. Insoection/Testlna/Relectton. Owner shall have the right to inspect all or any part of the Work and to reject all or any part of the Work that is, in Owner's judgment, defective or damaged or that in any way fails to conform strictly to the requirements of this Contract and Owner, without limiting its other rights or remedies, may require correction or replacement at Contractor's cost, perform or have performed all Work necessary to complete or correct all or any part of the Work that is defective, damaged, or nonconforming and charge Contractor with any excess cost incurred thereby, or cancel all or any part of any order or this Contract. Work so rejected may be returned or held at Contractor's expense and risk. B. c. II. CONTRACT PRICE BID If this Contract is accepted. Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall take in full payment for all Work and other matters set forth under Section 1 above, including overhead and profit; taxes, contributions, and premiums; and compensation to all subcontractors and suppliers, the compensation set forth below. Page 2 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT A. Schedule of Prices. For providing, performing, and completing all Work, in Attachment A - Bid Form shall be the guaranteed maximum price. B. Basis for Determining Prices. It is expressly understood and agreed that: 1. All prices stated in the Schedule of Prices are firm and shall not be subject to escalation or change; 2. Owner is not subject to state or local sales, use, and excise taxes, that no such taxes are included in the Schedule of Prices, and that all claim or right to claim any additional compensation by reason of the payment of any such tax is hereby waived and released; and 3. All other applicable federal, state, and local taxes of every kind and nature applicable to the Work are included in the Schedule of Prices. C. Time of Payment. The Contractor shall submit weekly certified payrolls to the Chief Water Plant Operator within ten (10) days of the end of each pay period. No progress payment shall be made unless said submittals are current. It is expressly understood and agreed that at) payments shall be made in accordance with the following schedule: Pay requests for work completed, will be paid by the City within 30 days of the City receiving the pay request. A 10% retainage will be held until the City has determined that all work has been completed as specified. All payments may be subject to deduction or setoff by reason of any failure of Contractor to perform under this Contract. Each payment shall include Contractor's certification of the value of, and partial or final waivers of lien covering, all Work for which payment is then requested and Contractor's certification that all prior payments have been properly applied to the payment or reimbursement of the costs with respect to which they were paid. III.CONTRACT TIME BID If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shali commence the Work within an agreed upon time between the Owner and the Contractor following Owner's acceptance of this Contract provided Contractor shall have furnished to Owner all bonds and all insurance certificates and policies of insurance specified in this Contract (the "Commencement Date"). If this Contract is Page 3 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT accepted. Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall perform the Work diligently and continuously and shall complete the Work not later than May 1. 2018. IV. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE A. Bonds & Letter of Credit. If this Contract is accepted. Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall provide a Performance Bond or a Irrevocable Letter of Credit and a Labor and Material Payment Bond, on forms provided by, or otherwise acceptable to, Owner, from a surety company acceptable to Owner, each in the penal sum of the Contract Price, within 10 days following Owner's acceptance of this Contract. B. Insurance. If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall provide certificates and policies of insurance evidencing the minimum insurance coverages and limits set forth below within 10 days following Owner's acceptance of this Contract. Such policies shall be in form, and from companies, acceptable to Owner. The insurance coverages and limits set forth below shall be deemed to be minimum coverages and limits and shall not be construed in any way as a limitation on Contractor's duty to carry adequate insurance or on Contractor's liability for losses or damages under this Contract. The minimum Insurance coverages and limits that shall be maintained at all times while providing, performing, or completing the Work are as follows: 1. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Limits shall not be less than: Worker's Compensation. Statutory Employer's Liability. $500,000 ea. acddent-injury $500,000 ea. emptoyee-disease $500,000 disease-policy Such insurance shaft evidence that coverage applies to the State of Illinois. 2. Comorehensive Motor Vehicle Liability Limits for vehicles owned, non-owned or rented shall not be less than: $2,000,000 Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined Single Limit 3. Comorehenswe General Liability Limits shall not be less than: $2,000,000 Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined Single Limit. Coverage is to be written on an "occurrence" basis. Coverage to include: Premises Operations Page 4 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT c. D. Broad Form Property Damage Endorsement Bodily Injury and Property Damage Blanket Contractual Liability Products/Completed Operations Independent Contractors Personal Injury (with Employment Exclusion deleted) Broad Form Property Damage Endorsement "X," "C," and "U" exclusions shall be deleted Contractua! Liability Contractual Liability coverage shall specifically include the indemnification set forth below. 4. Umbrella Liability Limits shall not be less than: $2,000,000 Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined Single Limit. This Policy shall apply in excess of the limits stated in 1,2,and 3 above. Indemnification. If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall indemnify, save harmless, and defend Owner against all damages, liability, claims, losses, and expenses (including attorneys'fee) thatmay arise, or be alleged to have arisen, out of or in connection with Contractor's performance of, or failure to perform, the Work or any part thereof, or any failure to meet the representations and warranties set forth in Section 6 of this Contract. Penalties. If this Contract is accepted, Contractor proposes, and agrees, that Contractor shall be solely liable for any fines or chrtl penalties that are imposed by any governmental or quasi- governmental agency or body that may arise, or be aiieged to have arisen, out of or in connection with Contractor's performance of, or failure to perform, the Work or any part thereof. V. FIRM PROPOSAL All prfces and other terms stated in this Contract are firm and shall not be subject to withdrawal, escalation, or change provided Owner accepts this Contract within 90 days after the date this sealed Contract is opened. VI. BIDDER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES In order to induce Owner to accept this Contract, Contractor hereby represents and warrants as follows: A. The Work. The Work, and all of its components, shall be of merchantable quality; shall be free from any latent or patent defects and flaws in workmanship, materials, and design; shall strictly conform to the requirements of this Contract, including, without limitation, the performance standards set forth in Subsection 1B of this Contract; and shall be fit, sufficient, and suitable for the purposes Page 5 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT expressed in, or reasonably inferred from, this Contract and the warranties expressed herein shall be in addition to any other warranties expressed or implied by law, which are hereby reserved unto Owner. B. Compliance with Laws. The Work, and all of its components, shall be provided, performed, and completed in compliance with, and Contractor agrees to be bound by, all applicable federal, state, and local laws, orders, rules, and regulations, as they may be modified or amended from time to time, including without limitation the Prevailing Wage Act, 820 ILCS 130/0.01 et seg. (in furtherance of which, a copy of Owner's ordinance ascertaining the prevailing rate of wages, in effect as of the date of this Contract, has been attached as an Appendix to this Contract; if the Illinois Department of Labor revises the prevailing rate of hourly wages to be paid, the revised rate shall apply to this Contract); any other prevailing wage laws; any statutes requiring preference to laborers of specified classes; the iiiinois Steei Products Procurement Act, 30 ILCS 565/1 etsgfl.; any statutes prohibiting discrimination because of, or requiring affirmative action based on, race, creed, color, national origin, age, sex, or other prohibited classification; and any statutes regarding safety or the performance of the Work. C. Not Barred. Contractor is not barred by law from contracting with Owner or with any other unit of state or local government as a result of a violation of either Section 33E-3 or Section 33E-4 of Article 33 of the Criminal Code of 1961,720 ILCS 5/33E-1 et sea. Contractor is not acting, directly or indirectly, for or on behalfof any person, group, entity or nation named by the United States Treasury Department as a Specially Designated National and Blocked Person, or for or on behalf of any person, group, entity or nation designated in Presidential Executive Order 13224 as a person who commits, threatens to commit, or supports terrorism, and Contractor is not engaged in this transaction directly or indirectly on behalf of, or facilitating this transaction directly or indirectly on behalf of, any such person, group, entity or nation. D. Qualified. Contractor has the requisite experience, ability, capital, facilities, plant, organization, and staff to enable Bidder to perform the Work successfully and promptly and to commence and complete the Work within the Contract Price and Contract Time Proposals set forth above. VII. OWNER'S REMEDIES If It should appear at any time prior to Final PaymentthatContractor has failed or refused to prosecute, or has delayed in the prosecution of, the Work with diligence at a rate that assures completion of the Work in full compliance with the requirements of this Contract, or has attempted to assign this Contract or Contractor's rights under this Contract, either in whole or in part, or has falsely made any representation or warranty in this Contract, or has otherwise failed, refused, or delayed to perform or satisfy any other requirement of this Contract or has failed to pay its debts as they come due ("Event of Default"), and has failed to cure any such Event of Default within five business days after Contractor's receipt of written notice of such Event of Default, then Owner shall have the right, at its election and without prejudice to any other remedies provided by law or equity, to pursue any one or more of the following remedies: A. Owner may require Contractor, within such reasonable time as may be fixed by Owner, to complete or correct all or any part of the Work that is defective, damaged, flawed, unsuitable, nonconforming, or incomplete; to remove from the Work Site any such Work; to accelerate all or any part of the Page 6 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT Work; and to take any or all other action necessary to bring Contractor and the Work into strict compliance with this Contract. B. Owner may perform or have performed all Work necessary for the accomplishment of the results stated in Paragraph 1 above and withhold or recover from Contractor all the cost and expense, including attorneys' fees and administrative costs, incurred by Owner in connection therewith. C. Owner may terminate this Contract. D. Owner may withhold from any Progress Payment or Final Payment, whether or not previously approved, or may recover from Contractor, any and all costs, including attorneys' fees and administrative expenses, incurred by Owner as the result of any Event of Default or as a result of actions taken by Owner in response to any Event of Default. E. Owner may recover any damages suffered by Owner. VIII. Acknowledeements In submitting this Contract, Contractor acknowledges and agrees that: A. Reliance. Owner is relying on all warranties, representations, and statements made by Contractor in this Contract. B. Reservation of Rights. Owner reserves the right to reject any and all bids, reserves the right to reject the low price bid, and reserves such other rights as are set forth in the Instructions to Bidders. C. Acceptance, frthis Contract is accepted. Contractor shall be bound by each and every term, condition, or provision contained in this Contract and in Owner's written notification of acceptance in the form included in this bound set of documents. D Remedies Each of the rights and remedies reserved to Owner in this Contract shall be cumulative and additional to any other or further remedies provided in law or equity or in this Contract. E Time. Time is of the essence of this Contract and, except where stated otherwise, references in this Contract to days shall be construed to refer to calendar days. F. No Waiver. No examination, inspection, investigation, test, measurement, review, determination, decision, certificate, or approval by Owner, whether before or after Owner's acceptance of this Contract; nor any Information or data supplied by Owner, whether before or after Owner's acceptance of this Contract; nor any order by Owner for the payment of money; nor any payment for, or use, possession, or acceptance of, the whole or any part of the Work by Owner; nor any extension of time granted by Owner; nor any delay by Owner in exercising any right under this Contract; nor any other act or omission of Owner shall constitute or be deemed to be an acceptance of any defective, damaged, or nonconforming Work, nor operate to waive or otherwise diminish the effect of any representation or warranty made by Contractor; or of any requirement or provision of this Contract; or of any remedy, power, or right of Owner. Page 7 of 8 2018 LAKE FOREST WATER PLANT 24" & 42" RAW WATER INTAKE CLEANING PROJECT G. Severabilitv. The provisions of this Contract shall be interpreted when possible to sustain their legality and enforceability as a whole. Intheeventany provision of this Contract shall beheld invalid, illegal, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, in whole or in part, neither the validity of the remaining part of such provision, nor the validity of any other provisions of this Contract shall be in any way affected thereby. H. Amendments. No modification, addition, deletion, revision, alteration, or other change to this Contract shall be effective unless and until such change is reduced to writing and executed and delivered by Owner and Contractor. I. Assignment. Neither this Contract, nor any interest herein, shall be assigned or subcontracted, in whole or in part, by Contractor except upon the prior written consent of Owner. J. Governing Law. This Contract and the rights of the parties under this Contract shall be interpreted according to the internal laws, but not the conflict of law rules, of the State of Illinois. DATED this day of _, 2018. CONTRACTOR Signature: Company: Northern Divers USA Printed Name: Frank Frosol&ne Position/Title: President THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST Signature: Printed Name: Robert R Kielv, jr. Position/Title: City Manager Page 8 of 8 Attachment A 2018 Water Plant Intake Cleaning PROPOSAL FORM Attachment A - Proposal FORM CLEANING OF 42" AND 24" RAW WATER INTAKES AND UNDERWATER VIDEO INSPECTION Underwater Operations: All system entries will be conducted in accordance with applicable OSHA regulations pertaining to Diving and Confined Space; including 1910.401 thru 1910.441. Specialty equipment may include but not limited to; appropriate OSHA climbing and personal fall protection. Project intent is to provide labor and equipment to remove all Internal debris and expose the bottom of both intake lines and intake well for the Lake Forest Water Plant according to the description in Attachment B. Included in this project are video inspections after cleaning. Enclosed in Attachment C are drawings and sketches for reference. Lump Sum Cost for Intake Pipeline and Intake Well Cleaning, Dive Inspection and Report: $ 185,000 Deliverables shall include two copies of DVD video with narrative report. Please submit references for related projects in the Chicago, IL area. If you need any more information please feel free to contact John Gulledge at 847-810-4650 or aHMedBi@citvaflakeforest.com Attachment B 2018 Water Plant Intake Cleaning DESCRIPTION OF WORK T 11 E CITY OF LAKE FOREST Attachment B - DESCRIPTION OF WORK LAKE FOREST WATER TREATMENT PLANT 24" and 42" Raw Water Intake Cleaning Project DESCRIPTION OF WORK: 1. Remove debris that has settled inside the Lake Forest Water Plant Intake Pipelines and Intake well. 2. Intake Description a. The Water Treatment Plant (WTP) has 2 intake lines that are connected to the Intake Well at the WTP. b. The 24" intake pipeline was constructed in the 1930's and is a sand cast iron pipe. The pipe extends into the lake approximately 2975' and has three inlets that are in a straight line with the pipe (see 24" inlet drawing). Inside the pipe is a 3 Inch chemical feed line and anchor chain that was installed in 1995. The chemical feed line was designed to lie on the bottom of the intake pipe, however it was observed during the video inspection of the 42" intake that In some areas the chain detached from the pipe and the Chemical Feed line has floated up to the top of the pipe. c. The 42" intake pipeline was constructed In 1974 and is a pre-stressed concrete pipe. The pipe extends into the lake 3900' and there is a "crow's foot at the end. The "crow's foot extends to the north and south and each segment is 50' long and 36 inches in diameter. The ends are inverted steal cones (see 42" inlet drawing). The chemical feed line is installed in the same way as the 24" intake chemical feed line. The chemical feed line travels to the inlets and rises up to the top of the pipe. 3. Water Plant needs to remain operational and able to meet distribution demands throughout the process with minimal shut down times should they be required. Plant shut down will require 48 hours' notice unless it is an emergency. Due to the nature of the WTP's filtration system it is our intention to keep one Intake operational while the other is being cleaned. The 24" intake should be cleaned first since the condition of the 42" intake is already known. Then after determining that sufficient flow to meet demand can be obtained with the 24" intake, the 42" intake can be taken out of service. If the plant demand exceeds the capacity of the 24" intake a daily contingency plan will need to be worked out giving priority to the safety of our consumers. 4. Zebra Mussel C12 feed lines should be confirmed to be in good condition and unbroken. 5. Contractor is responsible for obtaining any and all permits required for their proposed method of cleaning. Copies of signed permits proving that all permitting requirements have been met must be provided and verified prior to the start of work. 6. Contractor is responsible for all phases of work. 800 NORTH HELD DRIVE . 1AKE TOStST 1LUN01S 6004S . TEL 847^34J600 . WWW.ClTYOFlAKEFOREST.COM Attachment C 2018 Water Plant Intake Cleaning Reference Drawings and Sketches --.-?HKL._._ ZEBRA MUSSEL CONTROL WATER INTAKE FACILITIES LAKE FOREST, ILUNOIS RGURE 4 LAKE MICHIGAN DRAFT ZEBRA MUSSEL CONTROL WATER INTAKES INLET DRUMS LAKE FOREST, ILUNOIS RGURE 3 INTAKE INLET 3900'± OF 42"0 RCP INTAKE UNE 2975'± OF 24"0 C.l. INTAKE UNE LAKE MICHIGAN INTAKE WELL LAKE FOREST WATER FILTRATION PLANTDRAFT >:"i'S%%':-^.!-^?v:yM?..' M I":-k^c<f^SS .-naw:7Cu-i%'irf i i i L.=^-^^p'^g<~'^Jl^:i^^SL^^-'A'y.J%.AJE£a^.*y^JX^t^--^ ... ..'~~~v<^.-~-.'t-'-ss $.. -.,w.(Tp, OF -5} ;\^:\-\; "'4'-L5^ LsA^Eff^ OF ^^IS^'';' . TA-^ ^'Tn ^ ; /'.>("' ' \ - F8SmWAl'i3'iW.-SE:::.'<l \ \ SefM.. MT.~i''5.S.^t.<-^. '.. i': -.-'--.--! i J/W-;£- r-S+-{'--}-:-I---.scsSSieesawa^a-vjtL^cA tt (S.-E si, ..;"K- iS^Sc ^~^5t '/^^^..^^-'^..^^.-..^^SiSSscS^f^s^iS&siS^^'..^^'^^^^^ ..u^--..-DRAFT vy ".-^ PE23- t-r/ ^SS5 rW*-!.C" S) --, .-!:'s [,'';."n£i'tOC7A-L - 2"''? 'TEE DiFFLSEn (^-- vi'OIUlER REyC'.V.sLEi-.'.'A^i 3'af" ~ C~^CiE. WIS ;S';r:3<>(.^-....-;(S CShE~ir.)V-' WICt! S1E8. '.&JKS Futi-SE «imK-S/4' SVHMBSS.-.Ui; BS-TS (i't«>. '<\S^!igaSi2£S^S^;r"ffA^-a..£^=:"frV-.- --^->^'s^.'s?--'.r~'.'"T".^-^' > ^1 -^'^?"> -.,iS/fAK-'.S!~'3. \i-t/-^ !";'re<nFicM.)-,\]-f-i-l ', f-^l'... '~-A~ .;'-wy^-^ .y^-vfp.y-v-.^CK '^s^sw^...-;tCT;0;:. ^CriGS^.S ^ -^TAIL^T. i'ia.a: ~-!r* TES ."i{.Ty^-»(&:%'ER ?f-£-/6V.. ^L£) .......-^ L'-^Aii - SKerr38 d\^.-^--fssseti.^im'-i'i- {^, ',t\-asSuUSL-'n^d^: _.i tj I./>^^.../ .<f^^-^*». , __!__; .li'y~'r''^TT'"k- ^^^.: , ,-^CX)ljS^"c :^~* -SS^L..^'-0S'sSt's^'r.j^'ss? TEEF?if;niC:i A-K'.it:^»SEE EBTAtl^aST. ..».f!';^)S%ywv'-v--i'^-TO u-F?i£l.f'"wci"r.'^K^-.-f-'.£^=»xaffyyt^, ^,, ^Rx^11^ \_/-"^'"--~'^ ^'^J\_ _-.^~-.»y/1;;.^VAT^ Tt " ' !1^. /.£-'f^ 2 A TEE &.F^S£R?iSj^<eR TSSiOVSBU?1 TO'im'Ar'l!sSS£ »£rAtL TKRS .^^T.'f \',\IW S~"yCT^E- .".'.5'nc.' .'^&"':'..:;%.-f£-r-->'-. £:.;S....-...iT'W; F wr^ i;-r~jGSK,'?iiw- 7SS: ^C-^'L '.P^ ^t2;;CONTROLLi.KOIS'^'..'." s ^'^2J"9 ICTA,^ STR'.-;TL;°3. LA30%ATC^~! SOCt- ;.Cr.LSRI'.'E CC,?TA.;M£S ^OOw; PL^.'iS i; 3E^;-{ :^Sl^,.-^'.; .'ft-9'.,/ ' '^" ^r'' ' "~V%7"';7&A-'.-/&DRAFT 8 I! II i| ? I ^ ^ '% 1................1......1 ................ I......] lt ^s r?\ -\ I 1^ 1^ lo. T1 Is 1^ I ^ ^ 4...4.-, ^ I ttew 3±S4%i t1.^r44-&-^ .^.e^yg^...Alt ..±-±--\ -{---|---i-- ---t-t-""T- .1..............I............ .!.--,. .4--i--.l_......4--....i.--.J..-,....'"t'-'^^-_--l^ L^ff^ilMffy^f i I*" ' tj ' ^ i |'| ] o ! . l | I I j I !" i W}-Q -i-" yns/> i^> I--- --,. ^^ El 4.4....4 r© .._....;. ..!.....I HQ^ I ^ -Ai-4--- i/.^ .........|..........-..4.........-...!.-....4--4- ^5W^ .44^4~t+--4'--^M^^^- I i H \ I I [ [ ~ ~\ .44^N444JJ -J........-..4.-.-.-.,- --"."!.- " -c^- ^.ASO.. L '(^1 .w~ -.-i-U-.....! ,_^^4'4--L+ ^^...M^d- .4.../4w^y- --.}-}j... ^..4f^.^.....s^^....^. .Qyr^ d-te.I w l---t"""::t~-~" lyitfttf vW^ ffafftd... -H-i ...........I.-.. I i-¥F-CF^n^F ................t.......... ^-I^M---^^^^^^^^^^^^^ t-.^4---^^/-4,,... -+-- _J:LL: -J...........,4.-...........]-..........-|.........-4~"^^... ...^&ZIT.. I ! -i I II IDRAFT