![]() |
![]() |
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: July 23, 2001
Author/Local:D.Brynildsen/7313RTS No. 02237
CC File No. 1805
CS&B: August 2, 2001
TO:
Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets
FROM:
General Manager of Engineering Services, in consultation with the General Manager of Corporate Services
SUBJECT:
Graffiti Removal Contract Award
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT Council authorize the General Manager of Engineering Services to enter a contract with Point Grey Painters Inc. in the amount of $90,000 (plus applicable taxes) for the removal of graffiti from public property (streets) for six months with an option for a one year extension. 2001 funding to be provided as follows:
i) $45,000 from existing operating budgets; and
ii) $30,000 (plus applicable taxes) to be funded through contingency reserve.B. THAT staff report back in September on the award of contract services for public buildings following analysis of the implications on the existing graffiti removal processes in all Departments.
PURPOSE
This report recommends the award of contract services for the removal of graffiti from public property and completion of the review of the impacts of a contract for graffiti removal from public buildings.
BACKGROUND
On June 14, 2001, Council directed staff to "send out a Request for Proposals to the appropriate contractors, along with specifications for a six month contract for graffiti removal from public property, in order to determine costs; and further that this process be completed in one month." Initially City buildings, public property and Park property and facilities were to be considered. However, Park staff determined that they preferred a different contract model and it was agreed they would proceed independently. Staff sent out the Request for Proposals (RFP) for services and six proposals were opened on July 16, 2001. The following discussion reviews and evaluates the submissions.
DISCUSSION
Of the six proposals received, two were non compliant and could not meet the insurance requirements. The remaining responses were evaluated. Of these four proposals, one did not include a bid price for a six month service period, did not include all the works requested and was the highest priced submission, and so it was no longer considered. One firm submitted the requested proposal and two alternatives. A team consisting of the Director of Real Estate Services, the Manager of Material Services and the Assistant City Engineer, Streets, evaluated the proposals using a weighted scoring method. In addition to cost, consideration was given to firms' experience, methodologies and materials used, staff qualifications, available equipment and quality control.
The proposals included two prices: one for public property, and one for public buildings. Each proposal was evaluated three ways; for public property only, for public buildings only and combined public property and public buildings.
Although staff requested proposals for a six month period as per Council's Recommendation, proponents were also requested to submit one and three year proposals to see if costs could be saved with a longer term contract. However, in discussions with several of the proponents it was clear that the expectations on the amount of work on city streets was unclear and staff are recommending proceeding with a six month contract with a one year extension option. The results would be evaluated prior to reporting back to the Council on any extension.
Following tendering it was determined that all the departments managing buildings did not have adequate time to assess the time and cost implications of a contract relative to their current graffiti removal processes. It is recommended that this review take place in Augustand that staff report back in September on any contract award for removal of graffiti from public buildings.
Based on the review, it was determined that the City would receive best value by entering a contract for public property.
Public Property
The public property, comprised of the street system, contains numerous City owned and maintained amenities, utilities and equipment, such as poles, signs, benches, bus shelters, retaining walls, bridges, crew trailers, etc. These items are targets for graffiti. Graffiti is removed from these items by City staff from various work groups.
Traffic signs, electrical poles, signal boxes, construction equipment and crew trailers are cleaned of graffiti as part of the sign maintenance and regular work practices. The cleaning of graffiti from all these items is currently done in concert with other related maintenance. Although graffiti removal will be reduced in these areas, it does not appear that funding can be reduced as the other maintenance activities are still required.
Retaining walls, bridges, and other structures are maintained by the bridge crew, who clean graffiti as part of that maintenance task. The estimated annual cost for graffiti cleaning from low level structures is $18,000. The remaining 2001 budget can be used to partially fund the contract. High level removals would continue to be done by City forces as this graffiti can be difficult to access and potentially unsafe for untrained staff.
The remaining street furniture and amenities are cleaned by the two person Graffiti Busters crew at an estimated cost of $135,000 per year. The cleaning program for the street makes up about 80% ($111,000) of their workload. The remaining 20% of time is used to clean the Vancouver Parking Corporation (VPC) parking facilities at a cost of $24,000 annually to VPC. Moving to a contract for the public property would require the VPC to find an alternative provider for graffiti removal services and they have been advised of that possibility.
The current state of the streets with 80% of a two person Graffiti Busters crew and some additional resources from other maintenance groups has kept the City facilities in public areas moderately clean . However, as was reported previously, additional City resources at an estimated cost of $135,000 would need to be added to meet Council's recently approved graffiti response which is being required of providers of private amenities such as news-boxes and utility kiosks. The total cost of a City run program to meet the new standards was estimated at $250,000 as compared to the $180,000 (annualized) contractor price for graffiti removal from public property. The City will retain the Graffiti Busters van to use for community paint outs and public relations.
Staff recommend that the proposal by Point Grey Painters Inc. at a cost of $90,000 (plus applicable taxes) be accepted for the six month period. It is also recommended that the option for a one year extension be included in the award. Staff would report back on the success of the program and recommend future actions in approximately 5 months.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The contract cost for graffiti removal from public property (streets) is $90,000 ($75,000 in 2001, and $15,000 in 2002). To fund this work, operating budgets for bridge maintenance and graffiti removal, estimated at $45,000 of funding remaining in 2001, can be made available. The additional $30,000 for 2001 would need to be allocated from contingency reserve.
For 2002, funding for graffiti removal would be requested through the budget process.
PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
In order to achieve the budget savings from the existing graffiti removal program, two staff positions will be affected. It is proposed to reassign one staff within Traffic Operations. The other staff was a work accommodation and attempts will be made to find another light duty position for the individual. Engineering managers have spoken with the two staff members and a Union representative on this issue.
CONCLUSION
The graffiti problem in the city is worsening. Public property is being cleaned but not to a level to meet recently approved Council objectives. In order to meet the new demands, staff recommend hiring a contractor with extensive experience and expertise in graffiti removal to address the problem at a higher level than was done in the past. The proposal by Point Grey Painting Inc. will improve the City's response to graffiti and is expected to meet Council's objectives. An increase in the budget for the graffiti program will be required in the amount of $30,000.
The report back in September will deal with the award of a contract for graffiti removal from public buildings.
* * * * *
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(c) 1998 City of Vancouver