10. Consider purchase Building Inspec Vehicle r / 0
, CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
,s„
690 COULTER DRIVE• P.O. BOX 147• CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900• FAX(612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
' TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager •WPtIk
' DATE: June 21, 1990
SUBJ: Consider Purchase of a Building Inspection Vehicle
This office anticipated including this item as a part of the CSO
' bid documents (Item No. 3) . The paragraph which had been included
in the earlier item read as follows:
"Approximately 3 to 4 years ago we received excellent bids on
a new front end loader. I recall that Councilman Horn was so
impressed with the bids that .he stated "let's buy two". To
this day, I am not sure if he was serious or not. However,
' purchasing two pick-ups at 'this time makes sense. The Council
has asked staff not to seek bids on the administrative vehicle
which was included in the 1990 budget. Both the 1985 Mercury
' Lynx and the 1986 escort (both used as inspection vehicles)
are in bad shape. These vehicles simply were not designed for
the type of driving our inspectors put them through.
' Replacement of both of these vehicles will be looked at as a
part of the 1991 budgetary process. Reallocating dollars
budgeted for an administrative vehicle will build relief for
next years budget while providing an additional vehicle for
' employees such as Sharmin/Jo Ann/Todd Hoffman/Jerry
Ruegemer/etc. "
' The intent of the above paragraph was to reach a conclusion that
the Council should con0ider purchasing two of the pickups at
$13,517. This recommendation recognizes the approximate $2,000 to
$3,000 savings over bids which had been earlier considered.
' Unfortunately, state statute does not allow the Council to do such,
i.e. the formal bid process must be followed if the bid exceeds
$15,000. A city cannot separate bids solely for the purpose of
avoiding the publication/formal bidding process.
Attached please find a mgmorandum from the Public Safety Director
' outlining the reasons the City should be considering another
vehicle. I would recommend that the Council authorize staff to
again seek quotations.
1
E1 �`
I -oar
CITY OF
1--- .
i . ,..,, :.
,. .„..P
# '.1"- CHANIIII, SSEN
. .„...,„ ..„,...._
1 ...
_._,_ ,,„, ,_ ..,.
_ ...
,k ,..,;,, ,,
_ . ._
;c--.1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
s
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
IIMEMORANDUM
TO: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
IFRCM: Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director
DATE: April 18, 1990
IISUBJ: Building Inspection Vehicle
IIThe purpose of this memo is to provide a status report on the vehicle situation
pertaining to the Building Inspection Department.
IIBACKGROUND:
We have five building inspectors and three relatively new inspection vehicles.
1 Two of the inspectors, however, are still operating the older building inspec-
tion vehicles.
I While the newer vehicles are serving their purpose well, the older vehicles are
causing problems. The Mercury Lynx is now on its second engine, and the Ford
Escort is experiencing mechanical problems as well. These two vehicles are not
heavy duty enough so as to withstand the constant type of driving our inspection
Ivehicles are used for (i.e. rough terrain in construction sites, etc.).
ANALYSIS:
IRather than continuing to put money into these vehicles, I believe the City
should consider at least replacing one of these cars now, with an eye on the
I future for replacing the other. It is important to remember that these are not
vehicles that are used for ordinary transportation; rather, these vehicles are
in constant use, driving in situations that are difficult. The inspectors are
frequently driving through construction sites that are snowy, rocky, hilly,
I bumpy, and the frequency of their stop-and-go driving would be difficult on any
vehicle, but particularly vehicles as light weight as the Lynx and Escort.
IIREO(WENDATION
The four wheel drive vehicles that we have purchased for our inspectors have
I proven to be particularly well suited for their use. Not only have they gotten
the inspectors where they need to go, but they have been available for use by
our staff during snow emergencies, etc. , when needed. Rather than to continue
to put money into vehicles that are not as well suited for such use as the Bla-
II zers are, it seems very logical that we provide vehicles to our inspectors that
will be able to stand up to the task.
110IP— II
1
DIRECTOR' S COMMENTS:
1
I fully concur with Scott 's assessments of the vehicle
situation for the Building Inspection Department. We continue
to experience mechanical problems with the two small vehicles
presently assigned to the Building Inspection Department. I
had discussed this problem with Harold Brose, our Fleet Services
Manager, who also concurs with our assessment and the need for
a new vehicle.
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1