Issue - meetings

Major Tree Works Contract

Meeting: 19/04/2010 - Cabinet (Item 170)

170 Award of the Major Tree Works Contract pdf icon PDF 102 KB

(Environment Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-096-2009/10).

Additional documents:

Decision:

            That, being the company who achieved the highest score on the overall Price and Quality Criteria in the Tender evaluation for this contract, the award of the five-year Major Tree Works Contract from August 2010 to Gristwood and Toms (Tree Contractors) Ltd be agreed.

Minutes:

The Environment Portfolio Holder presented a report regarding the outcome of the procurement process for the Major Tree Works Contract.

 

The Portfolio Holder reported that the Tenders for the Major Tree Works Contract were returned in February 2010, and had been evaluated using the Quality and Price criteria previously agreed by the Cabinet on 7 September 2009. The company Gristwood and Toms (Tree Contractors) Ltd had scored the most points and therefore it was recommended that they be awarded the contract which would run for 5 years with the option of a 2 year extension. The contract would commence on 1 August 2010, and was a schedule of rates (SOR) based contract. The Leader of Council added that the company had an office within the District and employed local residents.

 

Decision:

 

            That, being the company who achieved the highest score on the Price : Quality Criteria in the Tender evaluation for this contract, the award of the five-year Major Tree Works Contract from August 2010 to Gristwood and Toms (Tree Contractors) Ltd be agreed.

 

Reasons for Decision:

 

The company was proved to be the most economically advantageous under the Quality and Price basis previously agreed by the Cabinet.

 

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

 

To award the contract to another company, however this would not fulfil the requirements of Contract Standing Orders or the agreed procurement process.


Meeting: 07/09/2009 - Cabinet (Item 51)

51 Procurement Process for Major Tree Works Contract pdf icon PDF 26 KB

(Environment Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-028-2000/10).

Additional documents:

Decision:

That, as set out in the report, the timetable, procedure and evaluation criteria for the procurement of the major tree works contract to begin in August 2010 be agreed.

Minutes:

The Environment Portfolio Holder presented a report upon the procurement process for the Major Tree Works contract, which covered those trees within the District that were in the ownership of the Council or those trees managed by the Council on behalf of other public bodies.

 

The Portfolio Holder reported that the present contract for major tree works was due to end in July 2010 and the procurement exercise was underway. The new contract would be of 5 years duration with an option to extend for a further 2 years, and had an estimated value of approximately £250,000 per year. The Cabinet was requested to agree the proposed timetable for the procurement process, starting with expressions of interest in August 2009 and ending with a report to Cabinet in April 2010 recommending the preferred contractor, and the core quality evaluation criteria to be applied with the tenders being evaluated on a price/quality split of 60-40.

 

Decision:

 

That, as set out in the report, the timetable, procedure and evaluation criteria for the procurement of the major tree works contract to begin in August 2010 be agreed.

 

Reasons for Decision:

 

To enable the procurement process to be undertaken in the time required and to ensure value for money continued to be obtained for the service.

 

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

 

To continue the present contract. The present contractor had given very good service and value and had previously had the contract extended following consideration by the Cabinet.  However, it was now felt that the market should be tested to ensure the most cost effective contract terms for the Council.

 

To bring the service back in house. However this service had been outsourced for a number of years and it would be cost prohibitive to create suitably qualified and equipped teams to undertake this work.