Committee: EXECUTIVE Purpose:
For Decision
Date: 26
MARCH 2002
Title: AWARD
OF THE 2002-2008 BEACH CLEANING CONTRACT
PORTFOLIO HOLDER
- TOURISM AND LEISURE
SUMMARY
The Beach cleaning service comprises of the cleansing of
64 miles of coast including the 13 main seaside award tourist beaches. The Tidy
Britain Group’s Resort Survey, has graded the cleanliness of Island beaches at
100% since 1996.The existing contract has expired and Members are being asked
to award a new 6 year Beach Cleaning Contract which commences on 1 May 2002.
Members are reminded that the
Isle of Wight has successfully gained 13 Seaside Awards for 2002. This
achievement is partly due to the standard of cleaning currently provided on the
Island. In order for the Isle of Wight to maintain the awards it is important
that cleaning commences on 1 May 2002. For information Encams can inspect the
Island at any time throughout the season and should they find that the beaches
are below standard they will withdraw any award.
Upon award of this contract a
lead in period of five weeks is required so that new machinery and vehicles can
be purchased. This date will not give
the contractor sufficient time before the commencement of the services. Members are therefore being requested to
invoke Select Committee Procedure Rule 15 (i) in order to implement the
decision before the end of the call in period.
BACKGROUND
The recent Beach Esplanade Best Value Review indicated
that the beach cleaning services are
well thought of and Members are reminded that the current specification is in
accordance with the EPA Act and the criteria
for the seaside awards. The increases in the cost of the services are
due to changing legislation, inflation, minimum wage increase and a request for
the pricing of additional litter bin emptying which was recommended in the Best
Value Improvement Plan.
The present Beach Cleaning Contract has expired and
the tender for this service was advertised in November 2001. From eight
interested contractors, four were asked to submit a tender. However, only three
of those four chose to do so.
The prices submitted by A and B were very close but were both above the current budget
provision. They were then asked to revisit the contract and make suggestions
for a financial reduction to bring the contract within the allocated budget.
Recommendations for savings are detailed below:
Remove slipway/step cleaning from the contract and reduce
the emptying of wire baskets to one per day throughout the season. This will be
achieved by reducing the number of pick up trucks, labour and chemicals
employed.
Savings made by this are £9800.00. This does not resolve the
problem. The Council would still need to employ another contractor to undertake
the slipway cleaning.
The original tender for this contractor was £133,248.42. The amended price would be £123,448.42.
The budget for these services is £119,670.00. Should we
choose this option we would need to remove the slipway element, which would
reduce the cleaning by £12,000 giving a new budget of £107,670.
To reduce the machine clean frequency at Sandown, Shanklin and Ryde to every three days. Therefore, each location on average would only be machine cleaned twice a week. Each site would be litter picked instead. To reach this saving a tractor, beach raker and driver would be removed and the saving would be £20,781.00.
The original tender for this contractor was £133,248.42. The
amended price would be £112467.42.
Members are advised that this option may be detrimental to
the main resort beaches and have an affect on the Seaside Awards. The Tidy
Britain Group annual resort survey’s grading for beach cleanliness at Sandown
and Shanklin has been 100% since 1996 and 100% at Ryde since 1998. Should
cleaning be reduced in this way, it could affect these results. Recent Best Value
consultation with the public clearly indicated the importance of beach
cleanliness. Consideration also needs
to be given to problems that may occur due to machine break downs. In the past
a problem with the Machinery at Sandown/Shanklin has been resolved by utilising
the Ryde machine. With only one machine in operation this would not be
possible.
CONTRACTOR B Has given one option only:
To take one day cleaning a week out of the following sites:
Site Saving
Yaverland £1892.25
Ventnor £1100.02
St Helens £987.63
Totland £639.30
Colwell £486.19
Freshwater £486.19
To reduce the number of slipway cleans to 15 instead of 20,
saving £777.29
To reduce the emptying of wire baskets to once per day
throughout the season. Giving a saving of £2803.35.
Reduction in the contractual requirements by £1500.
The original tender price was £133,123.73. The amended price
is £121,832.
The reduction on beach cleaning is for the less high profile
beaches and would not be too detrimental. For information one of the issues
highlighted in the Best Valuation consultation was an increase to the wire
basket emptying which is why a decision was made to increase the service in the
new contract. Both contractors chose
this option as part of their savings. Reduction in slipway cleaning is not good
but can be overcome.
From the details both contractors have submitted I
think it is important that we chose the service which would give us the highest
standard and quality of cleaning.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
|
Contractors |
Compliance Score |
Submitted Price |
Budget Difference |
|
Contractor A |
83 |
£133,248.42 |
(£13,578.42) |
|
Contractor B |
84 |
£133,123.73 |
(£13,453.73) |
|
Contractor C |
50 |
£162,734.00 |
(£43,064.00) |
|
Contractor A Reduced Specification |
83 |
(1) £123,448.42 (2) £112,467.40 |
(£15,778.42) £7,202.60 |
|
Contractor B Reduced Specification |
84 |
£121,832.00 |
(£2,162.00) |
OPTIONS
1. To award the contract as
specified to Contractor A and provide the additional funding
2. To award the contract as
specified to Contractor B and provide the additional funding required
3
To award a reduced specification contract to Contractor A within current
budgets
4
To award a reduced specification contract to Contractor B within current
budgets
|
RECOMMENDATIONS Option 2 – to award the contract as specified to contractor B and
provide the additional funding required and under Select Committee procedure
rule (I) this decision to be exempt from the call-in procedure with the
agreement of the Chairman of the Council. |
Background Papers:
Tender Bids
and Documents
Contact Point: Tricia Stillman F 823368
|
A KAYE Head of Paid
Service |
M A JARMAN Portfolio
Holder – Tourism and Leisure |