FURTHER TO AUTHORITY MEETING #6/14 To be held on Friday, July 25, 2014

Transcription

1 FURTHER TO AUTHORITY MEETING #6/14 To be held on Friday, July 25, 2014 FURTHER TO: Pages AUTH7. SECTION I - ITEMS FOR AUTHORITY ACTION LISTED ON AGENDA AS REPORT TO FOLLOW AUTH7.6 KEATING CHANNEL DREDGING 48 LISTED ON AGENDA AS REPORT TO FOLLOW AUTH7.7 VOIP, UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS SOLUTIONS Request for Proposal (RFP) PMO

2 TO: FROM: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #6/14, July 25, 2014 Nick Saccone, Director, Restoration Services Item AUTH7.6 RE: KEATING CHANNEL DREDGING KEY ISSUE Continuation of annual maintenance dredging of Keating Channel, City of Toronto. RECOMMENDATION WHEREAS there is a critical need with respect to interruptions to dredging of the Keating Channel resulting from damage to the Keating bridge and Cherry Street; AND WHEREAS there is no meeting of the Authority in August; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) be authorized to approve contracts with the support of senior staff of the City of Toronto and Toronto Port Authority (TPA) to remove sediment as expeditiously as possible, subject to funding being available from existing funds on hand and the provision of additional funds if required from City of Toronto, TPA and other sources; AND FURTHER THAT the CEO report back on the approval/solution at a future meeting of the Authority, including the resolution of funding. BACKGROUND In July 2013, the lifting mechanism on the Keating Channel Bridge at Cherry Street failed. This is the second time since 2010 that the bridge is unable to open for an extended period of time. With the bridge stuck in the down position, dredging activities in the Keating Channel have halted. Approximately 30,000 to 35,000 cubic metres of sediment is dredged from the Keating Channel on an annual basis and is paid for by TPA, City of Toronto and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Dredging is undertaken to ensure safe navigation in the Keating Channel and Inner Harbour, and to reduce flood risk in the Lower Don area, including the Port Lands. Annual costs for dredging are shared as follows: TPA $160,000 a year and City/TRCA $320,000 a year. 48

3 Given the current failure of the lift bridge and the recent previous failure, approximately 80,000 cubic metres of additional sediment has accumulated in the Keating Channel. The majority of which is located in the eastern portion of the Keating Channel. Using the DELFT3D hydraulic model, it has been determined that this level of sediment accumulation has increased the risk due to flooding into the Port Lands from a 1% chance of occurrence any given year (1:100 year return flood) to a 4% chance of occurrence any given year (1:25 year return flood). Of particular concern is the shallow depth of water (1-2m deep) in the eastern portion of the Keating Channel. If dredging is not undertaken in 2014, the risk due to ice jam flood will be significantly higher during the winter Given this degree of flood risk, TRCA strongly recommends that at a minimum, 16,000 cubic metres of focused dredging (at the east end of the Keating Channel) be undertaken in 2014 and preferably the full 35,000 cubic metres. There is currently $100,000 of carry-over funding from 2013 that can be added to the overall annual budget of $480,000 for TRCA and the City of Toronto are exploring parallel approaches to address dredging and related Keating bridge repair options, respectively: 1) TRCA is exploring dredging options with the bridge in the down position. This involves the release of tender in July to obtain bids using two separate approaches: a) traditional mechanical dredging of the Keating Channel to awaiting trucks that will either travel to an awaiting barge at Essroc Quay or travel directly to Tommy Thompson Park (TTP) or other location. Given the trucks and need for double handling, this is anticipated to be costly; or b) hydraulic dredging of the Keating Channel with a floating slurry pipe to Essroc Quay where the slurry will be dewatered and loaded onto an awaiting barge. This technology has not been used on the Keating Channel previously, needs to be pilot tested for the materials and conditions in Keating Channel, and involves some additional costs for the dewatering. 2) City of Toronto is exploring bridge repair options that would enable clamshell dredging in The current assumption is hydraulic dredging may be possible in 2014, more likely to be employed in This involves repairs that will address the lifting mechanism at current estimates up to $150,000, and carefully lifting and lowering the bridge to allow for TPA dredge and barge to operate, starting in fall The City is assessing the risks related to each repair. A final decision regarding the dredging will be made by TPA, TRCA and the City of Toronto on the preferred approach once the tenders have been received by TRCA, and the City decision regarding bridge repairs has been made. FINANCIAL DETAILS Funds to undertake the Keating Channel Dredging Project are 100% recoverable from the City of Toronto and TPA in Account Report prepared by: Michelle Guy, s: mguy@trca.on.ca For Information contact: James Dickie, s: jdickie@trca.on.ca Date: July 15,

4 TO: Chair and Members of the Authority Meeting #6/14, July 25, 2014 Item AUTH7.7 FROM: Catherine MacEwen, Director, Human Resources, Marketing and Communications RE: VOIP, UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS SOLUTIONS Request for Proposal (RFP) PMO14-06 KEY ISSUE Award of contract for goods and services required for the migration of existing Head Office telephony system to voice over internet protocol (VOIP) solution with future unified communications functionality. RECOMMENDATION THAT Contract #PMO14-06 for VOIP, Unified Communications Solutions be awarded to Bell Canada at a total cost not to exceed $483,841.66, plus HST, it being the highest ranked proposal resulting from evaluation criteria set out in the Request for Proposal (RFP); THAT Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff be authorized to approve additional expenditures to a maximum of 25% of the contract cost as a contingency allowance if deemed necessary; THAT should staff be unable to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement with the above-mentioned proponent, staff be authorized to enter into contract negotiations with another bidder; AND FURTHER THAT authorized officials be directed to take the necessary action to implement the contract including the signing and execution of documents. BACKGROUND TRCA's Head Office is currently using an aging Nortel telephone system which is reaching its "end of life" with regards to vendor support and maintenance. TRCA's existing telephone system also has a number of satellite office locations integrated together for voic and call centre activities. However, there are a large number of employees in other satellite office locations, conservation areas, and education field centres that are not integrated and utilize stand alone aging telephone equipment. 50

5 To overcome the challenges of the existing telephony system TRCA will be upgrading to a new and modern VOIP system. The upgrade will also coincide with the consolidation of the Downsview and 5 Shoreham locations to 101 Exchange Avenue and have the ability to transfer to another long term Head Office location in the future. The new telephone system will provide costs savings, increased productivity, and allow for more effective integration and support of employees in more remote locations. Staff will be more mobile and have access to any and all corporate and public information required to do their jobs effectively. This system will also meet TRCA's business needs and technical requirements as the future unified communications and network environment will have the ability to 'expand' as required by large public venues or in the case of natural disasters such as flooding. In order to provide the goods and services required for the new VOIP telephone system and unified communications solution, TRCA will require the assistance of an integrative business communications firm to lead the design, construction, installation and provide technical support in order to meet TRCA's business and technology needs. The new system will include business internet protocol phones, contact centre solutions, conferencing capabilities, instant messaging, voic and potential hosted/cloud approach for future communications systems. RATIONALE A list of proponents was compiled based on their involvement with similar projects and expertise in the field of VOIP and unified communications solutions. Request for Proposal #PMO14-06 was sent to the following five vendors on May 30, 2014: Bell Canada; Unity Connected Solutions; BrantTel Networks; Activo; and Introtel. On July 3rd, 2014 the Procurement Opening Committee opened the proposals with the following results: BIDDERS Core VOIP System Additional Services (cabling, network, training) 51 TOTAL COST (Plus HST) Bell Canada $295, $188, $483, BrantTel Networks $352, $159, $512, Unity Connected $756, $158, $915, Solutions Activo No Bid Introtel No Bid Members of the selection committee, consisting of TRCA staff (Chris Gerstenkorn, Peter Wigham, and Lisa Moore), reviewed proposals based on a weighted scoring system consisting of 65% based on technical review of the proposal and the remaining 35% on the fee proposal. The criteria used to evaluate the submission and to select the recommended vendor included the following: understanding of the project from a business, services and location perspective; ability to comply with schedule, migration and project management; corporate qualifications, applicable experience and customer references;

6 telecom/network/unified communications technical understanding and expertise; and detailed cost breakdown. The results of the evaluation are as follows: BIDDERS RANKING (out of 100%) Bell Canada 81 Unity Connected Solutions 64 BrantTel Networks 63 Based on the complexity of the work, all three vendors were evaluated further through proposal clarifications, validation and reference checks. TRCA's current network services are provided by Bell Canada. Bell Canada is able to provide the best pricing for network services under their contract with the City of Toronto, which will reduce operating costs in the future. Although it is an additional service, the cabling component is critical to the implementation of the VOIP system. BrantTel and Bell Canada were the only vendors to provide pricing for this item, however, BrantTel did not include patch panels, communication racks and cable management systems as part of their cabling service. Finally, the Bell Canada proposed Mitel solution is a superior product to the Avaya solution proposed by BrantTel. The Mitel solution allows for better integration with Lotus Notes (TRCA's system) and offers excellent network monitoring with manufacturer support. At the conclusion of the evaluation, TRCA staff determined that the technical proposal and fee proposal valued at $483, submitted by Bell Canada offered the best service for value. FINANCIAL DETAILS The VOIP system will be financed through unallocated surplus funds or reserves. Report prepared by: Lisa Moore, s: lmoore@trca.on.ca For Information contact: Chris Gerstenkorn, extension s: cgerstenkorn@trca.on.ca Date: July 25,