HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020-12-03_COW_Agenda Package
Page 1 of 1 of Agenda Cover Page(s)
Committee of the Whole
AGENDA
Thursday, December 3, 2020
Chester Municipal Council Chambers
151 King Street, Chester, NS
1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA/ORDER OF BUSINESS
3. PUBLIC INPUT SESSION (8:45 A.M. – 9:00 A.M.)
4. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
4.1 Committee of the Whole – November 19, 2020
5. MATTERS ARISING
5.1 Tower Siting Policy (discussed at Council November 26, 2020 meeting) – Councillor
Veinotte.
a. Copy of excerpt from Land Use By-Law Section 4.19.1.
6. POLICY DEVELOPMENT/REVIEW
7. CORRESPONDENCE
8. NEW BUSINESS
8.1 Council District Grant Request:
a. New Ross Community Care Centre – District 6 - $1,000.
8.2 Request for Decision prepared November 27, 2020 – Corporate and Strategic
Management - Wastewater Service Study RFP.
9. IN CAMERA
9.1 Section 22(2)(e) of the Municipal Government Act – Contract Negotiations.
10 ADJOURNMENT
Due to COVID-19 measures, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is allowing
Municipalities to video or teleconference Council meetings. When meetings are conducted in
this manner during the pandemic, the draft minutes must be posted within 24 hours. Meetings
are livestreamed on the Municipality’s Facebook Page.
437
MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
Minutes of
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Via Facebook Live from 151 King Street, Chester, NS
On Thursday, November 19, 2020
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Warden Webber called the meeting to order at 8:52 a.m.
Present: District 1 – Councillor Veinotte District 2 – Deputy Warden Shatford
District 3 – Councillor Barkhouse District 4 – Warden Webber
District 5 – Councillor Assaff District 6 – Councillor Connors
District 7 – Councillor Church
Staff: Dan McDougall, CAO Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO
Pamela Myra, Municipal Clerk Jennifer Webber, Communications Officer
Solicitor: Samuel Lamey, Municipal Solicitor
Warden Webber noted that this week is Municipal Awareness Week and also indicated that on
November 18, 1879, 141 years ago, the first Council was elected in the Municipality of Chester –
and he recalled that Nathan Keddy was elected to Council to represent Chester Basin.
Council wished everyone a Happy Municipal Awareness Week.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND ORDER OF BUSINESS
Amendments:
Change in Order of Business – Convene “In Camera” prior to item 8.3.
Addition – Crosswalk – Councillor Barkhouse.
2020-493 MOVED by Councillor Assaff, SECONDED by Councillor Church the Agenda and
Order of Business be approved as amended. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
Committee of the Whole (continued) November 19, 2020 426
PUBLIC INPUT (15 Minutes)
There was no public input received.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
8.1 Committee of the Whole – November 5, 2020.
2020-494 MOVED by Councillor Barkhouse, SECONDED by Councillor Church the minutes of
the November 5, 2020 meeting of Committee of the Whole be approved as
circulated. CARRIED.
MATTERS ARISING
There were no matters arising for discussion.
POLICY DEVELOPMENT/REVIEW
There were no policy development matters for review.
CORRESPONDENCE
There were no items of correspondence for review.
NEW BUSINESS
8.1 Request for Direction prepared October 21, 2020 – Corporate and Strategic Management
– Community Recognition Program.
Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO, reviewed the information included in the Request for Direction
regarding a Community Recognition Program.
Following discussion, it was agreed that if Council would like to thank an individual, a letter or
certificate would be prepared and consideration of an article in the Municipal Insight newsletter.
8.2 Information Report prepared November 2, 2020 - Corporate and Strategic Management –
Economic Development Award of Investment Attraction Marketing Plan and Promotion
Material RFP.
Erin Lowe, Economic Development Officer reviewed the Information Report regarding the award
of the Investment Attraction Marketing Plan and Promotional Material. The project fell under
Committee of the Whole (continued) November 19, 2020 427
Low Value Procurement and the one application, received from CQNS, was approved by the
CAO.
8.4 Public Budget Engagement – Finance & Information Services.
This was deferred until following the Strategic Planning Session of Council.
8.5 Information Report prepared November 9, 2020 – Finance & Information Services –
COVID-19 Financial Impacts.
Malcolm Pitman, Director of Finance & Information Services reviewed the Information Report
prepared November 5, 2020 which outlined the additional operational expenses incurred due to
COVID-19. He noted that Deed Transfer Tax has seen an increase, rather than decrease, as had
been expected. He also noted that the Low Income Tax Exemptions will likely increase next year
following the impact of COVID-19 on income for 2020.
8.6 Request for Direction prepared November 9, 2020 - Economic Development – Economic
Development Staff Resources.
Erin Lowe, Economic Development Officer reviewed the Request for Decision prepared
November 9, 2020 – Economic Development Staff Resources, outlining the options provided.
Following a lengthy discussion, it was agreed to defer a decision until after an In Camera session
today.
8.7 Watercourse Setback Requirements – Councillor Veinotte.
Councillor Veinotte reviewed the information which raised the issue of the current Municipal
Land Use By-Law restricting development of properties that, in the example provided, had
previously been a developed property with a home and a business. Because the provincial
mapping showed a watercourse adjacent the property, there was concern it could not be
developed. Further to a visit to the property, it was determined that the provincial mapping was
incorrect, and staff was able to confirm that the property could be developed. Councillor
Veinotte voiced concern that this could be an issue for other landowners and noted that other
municipalities have the ability to vary the setback with mitigation in place for siltation.
It was agreed by Council that during previous public consultation, the public was in favour of
protecting water.
2020-495 MOVED by Councillor Barkhouse, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that the
Committee of the Whole recommend to Council that staff be directed to prepare a
report with options regarding watercourse setbacks in the Municipal Land Use By-
Committee of the Whole (continued) November 19, 2020 428
Law, keeping in mind the protection of watercourses in mind, but providing some
flexibility to deal with unique circumstances. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
A break was held from 9:58 a.m. to 10:11 a.m.
8.8 Request for Decision prepared November 2, 2020 – Infrastructure and Operations
Department – 2021/22 J-Class Paving Program.
Greg Jonah, Engineering Technologist reviewed the Request for Decision prepared November 2,
2020 regarding the 2021/22 J-Class Road Candidate List for Submission to the NS Department
of Transportation & Infrastructure Renewal.
2020-496 MOVED by Councillor Barkhouse, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that the
Committee of the Whole recommend to Council to approve the following J-Class
Roads for the 2021/22 J-Class Road Candidate List for Submission to the NS
Department of Transportation & Infrastructure Renewal as outlined in the
November 2, 2020 Request for Decision:
1. Pleasant Street, Chester (Central Street to King Street)
2. Union Street, Chester (King Street to the end)
3. Pig Loop Road, Chester (Duke Street to Trunk 3)
4. Adams Road, Western Shore (Trunk 3 to end)
5. Brunswick Street, Chester (Regent Street to Union Street)
6. Myra Road, Western Shore (Trunk 3 to end)
7. Stevens Road, East Chester (Trunk 3 to end)
8. Walker Road, Chester (Victoria Street to end of public right-of-way)
9. Smith Road, Chester (Trunk 3 to end of public right-of-way)
10. Valerie Avenue, Chester Basin (Lacey Mines Road to end)
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
8.9 Crosswalk – Councillor Barkhouse
Councillor Barkhouse described the need for a crosswalk to cross Valley Road parallel to North
Street near Valley Road and King Street. There is a bus stop there for students on the vacant lot.
It was agreed to direct staff to prepare a report with options and Deputy Warden Shatford
suggested that the types of crosswalks should be outlined and what type would be required at
that location.
IN CAMERA
9.1 Section 22(2)(e) of the Municipal Government Act – Contract Negotiations.
9.3 Section 22(2)(c) of the Municipal Government Act – Personnel.
Committee of the Whole (continued) November 19, 2020 429
2020-497 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Church the meeting
convene “In Camera” as per Sections 22(2)(e) Contract Negotiations and (c)
Personnel. ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
Following a meeting held “In Camera” the meeting convened in Regular Session
NEW BUSINESS (continued)
8.6 Request for Direction prepared November 9, 2020 - Economic Development – Economic
Development Staff Resources.
2020-498 MOVED by Councillor Barkhouse, SECONDED by Deputy Warden Shatford that the
Committee of the Whole recommend to Council to approve Option 2 – approve a
fulltime permanent Community Economic Development Officer position at the
Middle Managers/Coordinators Salary Band with Mobile Ambassador position
resulting in adjusted gap in service levels as identified in the table in the Request
for Direction prepared November 9, 2020 – Economic Development Staff Resources.
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
8.3 Request for Decision prepared October 28, 2020 – Infrastructure and Operations – Heavy
Equipment Services Procurement.
2020-499 MOVED by Councillor Church, SECONDED by Councillor Assaff that the Committee
of the Whole recommend to Council the award of the Heavy Equipment Services
Request for Quote MODC-T-2020-004 for a five year period to R. Schnare & Son
Septic & Excavation.
DISCUSSION
Councillor Veinotte suggested in future to consider shorter periods and breaking up
contracts into smaller pieces to make more contractors eligible. Councillor
Barkhouse agreed.
ALL IN FAVOUR. MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT
2020-500 MOVED by Deputy Warden Shatford, SECONDED by Councillor Church the
meeting adjourn. (11:11 a.m.)
___________________________ ___________________________
Allen Webber Pamela Myra
Warden Municipal Clerk
REQUEST FOR DIRECTION
Prepared By: Jonathan Meakin, Strategic
Initiatives Coordinator
Date November 27, 2020
Reviewed By: Tara Maguire, Deputy CAO Date November 27, 2020
Authorized By: Dan McDougall, CAO Date November 27, 2020
CURRENT SITUATION
Council identified the development of a Wastewater Strategy as a Strategic Priority that will
include multiple projects and initiatives to address a range of challenges and opportunities
facing the Municipality’s wastewater systems.
On June 30, 2020, staff and Council held a Wastewater Workshop that revisited several prior
discussions and resulted in Council identifying specific wastewater infrastructure needs. In May
2020, staff applied for and secured a Provincial Capital Assistance Program (PCAP) grant to fund
an extensive study that will result in a detailed, evidence-based framework that will provide
options for the capital projects for the Municipality’s wastewater systems.
Attached, is a draft of the proposed Wastewater Service Study Request for Proposals for
Council’s review.
RECOMMENDATION
For discussion and direction.
BACKGROUND
The topics discussed at the June 30, 2020 Wastewater Workshop included:
The Chester Basin (CB) and Otter Point (OP) wastewater treatment plants do not meet
environmental regulatory requirements for effluent, nor does the Village of Chester
(VoC) treatment plant during peak flow..
CB, OP, VoC, and New Ross (NR) systems are also at capacity which limits or prevents any
associated growth in service access to those systems.
More detailed technical data and service provision/demand data will support strategic
capital planning in addition to proactive operations and maintenance.
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
MEETING DATE: December 3, 2020
SUBMITTED BY: Corporate & Strategic Management
SUBJECT: Wastewater Service Study RFP
ORIGIN: Strategic Priorities – Wastewater Strategy
2 Request for Decision
Timely utilization of grants—FCM Municipal Asset Management Program (MAMP)
awarded in March 2020 and DMAH Provincial Capital Assistance Program (PCAP) results
that were pending at the time of the Wastewater Workshop, but which was awarded in
July 2020 – for Wastewater Strategy related actions. The PCAP grant provides an
opportunity for a comprehensive wastewater study that must include some engineering /
pre-design plans for wastewater systems prioritized for renewal/replacement.
The need for further assessment of existing in-house technical assessments of CB, OP,
VoC, and NR wastewater systems gathered over the last few years, as well as mapping of
current wastewater systems and their serviceable areas will provide a foundation of
existing data and work done for the PCAP-funded wastewater study.
The need to maximize the opportunity for grant-funded projects to result in outcomes
that best position the Municipality to be able to apply for any future major infrastructure
grants.
The need for the Municipality to better understand best options for location, technology,
and associated service areas to support growth and development, as well as regulatory
compliance, for all wastewater systems.
DISCUSSION
The proposed Wastewater Service Study will meet the following core objectives in order to
provide a foundation for a multi-year, multi-phased Wastewater Strategy:
An evaluation of existing technical and service levels data for Chester Basin, Western
Shore, Otter Point, Village of Chester, and New Ross wastewater collection and treatment
systems;
Detailed recommendations for renewals, upgrades, or new builds, including possible
decommissioning and consolidation of facilities, as appropriate, that will provide design
options for the five wastewater systems in the scope of this study to meet regulatory
requirements and accommodate possible expansion to serviceable areas;
Preliminary financial modelling of viable expansions to serviceable areas that could
accommodate growth over a 25 year period for connections to unserviced properties
and undeveloped lots, particularly as part of potential ‘service corridors’ to lead future
growth and development; and
Preliminary design and associated cost estimates for recommended renewals, upgrades,
new builds, and decommissions/consolidations for wastewater collection and treatment
infrastructure that will provide the Municipality with distinct projects to submit to future
capital infrastructure funding opportunities.
3 Request for Decision
Considerations:
The contract amount for the Request for Proposals is listed as $300,000, whereas the
PCAP grant amount awarded is $260,716 (50% of which is from Municipal Affairs &
Housing). This contract ceiling provides some further flexibility of scope and costing as
the evaluation committee considers proposed outcomes, timing, and costing of
submitted proposals.
It should be noted that the evaluation framework for proposals (as outlined on pages 7-8
of the draft RFP) gives significant weight to the Proponent’s timeline and costs, which will
encourage proposals that propose completing the Study within PCAP funding period.
In addition to the Study examining the viability of renewals, upgrades, or new builds, a
recent idea that warrants closer examination is the possibility of decommissioning CB
and consolidating service with WS, as well as of decommissioning OP and consolidating
service with VoC. The key point here is investigation of cost effectiveness of building a
new facility for CB and OP versus decommissioning and developing potential ‘service
corridors’ for future growth and development along those expanded service systems.
Key outcomes for the Wastewater Service Study are:
o options for possible expansion of service to currently unserviced properties and
undeveloped lots, particularly as part of potential ‘service corridors’ to lead future
growth and development
o preliminary design briefs that will serve as the basis for plans and specifications
for the final design and construction contracts for each distinct phase of
wastewater infrastructure recommendations, which will include proposed
construction plans outlining at a minimum the number and scope of phases of
construction contracts and their interrelationships and a proposed preliminary
construction schedule.
Policy
None.
Financial/Budgetary
Provincial Capital Assistance Program (PCAP) grant of $260,716 ($130,358 from DMAH) awarded
on July 27, 2020
Environmental
None.
4 Request for Decision
Strategic Plan
A comprehensive, long range Wastewater Strategy will assist the Municipality in advancing the
following of the Municipality’s six Strategic Goals:
#1 Maintain a high level of fiscal responsibility
#3 Ensure sufficient infrastructure is available to best serve our residents and businesses
#6 Promote conditions to foster economic prosperity
Work Program Implications
The Director, Infrastructure & Operations, will finalize and issue the Request for Proposals as
soon as possible for closing in early January.
Has Legal review been completed? ___ Yes ___ No _X__ N/A
OPTIONS
For discussion and direction.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
COMMUNICATIONS (INTERNAL/EXTERNAL)
None.
Page 1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
MODC-T-2020-###
WASTEWATER SERVICE STUDY
Date of Issue: December ##, 2020
Submission Deadline: 2:00 p.m. AST, December ##, 2020
Location: PO Box 369, 151 King Street, Chester, NS B0J 1J0
Attention: Pamela Myra, Municipal Clerk
Page 2
Municipality of the District of Chester
Wastewater Service Study
1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE
The Municipality of District of Chester (MODC) requires an engineering consultant to
support the development of a Wastewater Service Study for the Municipality.
Proposals must demonstrate how the Proponent will meet the following core objectives of
the Wastewater Service Study:
An evaluation of existing technical and service levels data for Chester Basin,
Western Shore, Otter Point, Village of Chester, and New Ross wastewater collection
and treatment systems;
Detailed recommendations for renewals, upgrades, or new builds, including possible
decommissioning and consolidation of facilities, as appropriate, that will provide
design options for the five wastewater systems in the scope of this study to meet
regulatory requirements and accommodate possible expansion to serviceable areas;
Preliminary financial modelling of viable expansions to serviceable areas that could
accommodate growth over a 25 year period for connections to unserviced properties
and undeveloped lots, particularly as part of potential ‘service corridors’ to lead
future growth and development; and
Preliminary design and associated cost estimates for recommended renewals,
upgrades, new builds, and decommissions/consolidations for wastewater collection
and treatment infrastructure that will provide the Municipality with distinct projects to
submit to future capital infrastructure funding opportunities.
In addition, given that the outcomes of this study will inform multiple components of MODC’s
Wastewater Strategy to be implemented over multiple years, the Wastewater Service Study
must also ensure the resulting recommendations, preliminary design, and financial
modelling are non-proprietary so that they may inform distinct project components for
subsequent competitive bidding processes, as appropriate.
1.2 BACKGROUND – MUNICIPALITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CHESTER
Located in Lunenburg County, the Municipality of the District of Chester (MODC) is the
gateway to Nova Scotia’s South Shore with close transportation links with Halifax,
Bridgewater, and the Annapolis Valley. MODC offers residents, visitors, and businesses
alike access to ocean and lakeside waterfront, tracks of farmland and forested areas as well
as an abundance of amenities and services.
MODC has a land area of 1,128 km2 and a population of 10,310 residents (2016 census).
Although primarily a rural municipality with a population density of 9.14 residents per km2,
many of MODC’s 7,063 residential civic addresses are concentrated in a number of distinct
Page 3
communities, six of which are served—to varying degrees of serviceable boundaries—by
central wastewater systems.
In terms of economic profile, MODC is typical of rural Nova Scotia with light industrial,
commercial, tourism, residential, agricultural, and wildland sectors. There are no major
hospitals or large multi-tenant high-rise buildings. There is a large ocean coastline and
several inhabited offshore islands. The Municipality is crossed by several major highways,
namely Highway 103, Highway 12, and Highway 14, and numerous private and secondary
connecting routes and private roads within the Municipality.
More information about MODC can be found on the Municipal web site at www.chester.ca.
1.3 BACKGROUND – MUNICIPALITY’S WASTEWATER SYSTEMS
The Municipality of the District of Chester owns and operates six wastewater systems that
serve six distinct communities. These wastewater assets are aging, which exposes the
provision of existing levels of service to risk, including:
Service disruption;
Environmental regulatory non-compliance due to spills and overflows, particularly during
flood events;
Overall service degradation due to deferred maintenance, renewals, and upgrades; and
Insufficient capacity to accommodate projected growth.
As a result, the Municipality is developing a comprehensive Wastewater Strategy that seeks
to manage risks through evidence-based actions available through existing budgets and
strategic new investment, including:
Proactive systems maintenance;
Condition and performance assessments of critical assets and failure modes that have
the highest risk consequences; and
Prioritizing repair, renewal, upgrades, and new builds that either maintain existing levels
of service or provide expansion of service in areas that are underserved and offer
opportunities for growth.
The proposed Wastewater Service Study is an integral component of MODC’s Wastewater
Strategy in that it focuses on identifying appropriate renewals, upgrades, new builds, and
decommissions/consolidations necessary for current and expanded service provision by five
of the six wastewater systems.
Brief profiles of those five wastewater systems are as follows:
Chester Basin
The initial construction of the Chester Basin system was completed in 1995. The system
consists of one (1) lift station, 50m of force mains, 120m of gravity mains, two (2)
maintenance holes, five (5) service connections (roughly 6.1m/connection to property line),
and one (1) wastewater treatment plant. The system has an average daily flow of
7.27m3/day. Treatment consists of two septic tanks, a siphon chamber, two intermittent sand
Page 4
filters, and a chlorine disinfection system with an outfall for the treated effluent at Chester
Basin Harbour.
Current service risks:
Effluent discharged by the CB system does not meet environmental requirements.
There is no additional system capacity to accommodate growth in service.
Western Shore
The initial construction of the Western Shore system was completed in 1977. The system
consists of six (6) lift stations, 5,200m of force mains, 9,500m of gravity mains, 165
maintenance holes, 298 service connections (roughly 6.1m/connection to property line), and
one wastewater treatment plant. The system has an average daily flow of 1,000m3/day.
Treatment consists of an oxidation ditch, a secondary clarifier, an EQ tank, and a UV
disinfection system with an outfall for the treated effluent at Vaughan Brook.
Current service risks:
Influx and infiltration is a concern and may interfere with an accurate assessment of the
Western Shore system capacity, particularly in terms of accommodating possible
serviceable area expansion. This will be an important consideration in evaluating the
possibility of decommissioning the Chester Basin treatment plant and linking the existing
CB collection system, as well as additional new service connections along this new
‘service corridor’, to the Western Shore system for treatment.
Otter Point (Chester Acres)
The initial construction of the Otter Point system was completed in 1976. The system
consists of one (1) lift station, 230m of force mains, 1,000m of gravity mains, 18
maintenance holes, 22 service connections (roughly 6.1m/connection to property line), and
one (1) wastewater treatment plant. The system has an average daily flow of 34m3/day.
Treatment consists of a primary settling tank, a tricking sand filter, a secondary settling tank,
and a chlorine disinfection system with an outfall for the treated effluent in Mahone Bay.
Current service risks:
Effluent discharged by the OP system does not meet environmental requirements.
There is no additional system capacity to accommodate growth in service.
Village of Chester
The initial construction of the Village of Chester system was completed in 1975. The system
consists of nine (9) lift stations, 4,500m of force mains, 18,400m of gravity mains, 289
maintenance holes, 545 service connections (roughly 6.1m/connection to property line), and
one (1) wastewater treatment plant. The system has an average daily flow of 1,000m3/day.
Treatment consists of a bar screen, an oxidation ditch, two clarifiers, pH adjustment,
chlorine disinfection (in the process of being upgraded to an UV light disinfection system),
and an aerobic digester with an outfall for the treated effluent in the Chester Harbour.
Current service risks:
Influx and infiltration is a concern and may interfere with an accurate assessment of the
VoC system capacity. This will be an important consideration in evaluating the possibility
of decommissioning the Otter Point treatment plant and linking the existing OP collection
Page 5
system, as well as additional new service connections along this new ‘service corridor’,
to the existing Village of Chester system or a second system for treatment.
During peak flow (the VoC system faces significant flow increase during summer,
tourism season) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS),
and e-coli limits are exceeded.
There is little or no additional system capacity to accommodate growth in service.
New Ross
The initial construction of the New Ross system was completed in 1990. The system
consists of two (2) lift stations, 310m of force mains, 700m of gravity mains, 14 maintenance
holes, 18 service connections (roughly 6.1m/connection to property line), and one (1)
wastewater treatment plant. The system has an average daily flow of 16.625m3/day.
Treatment is an onsite, sloping sand filter system with no outfall.
Current service risks:
Influx and infiltration is a concern and may interfere with an accurate assessment of the
NR system capacity.
There is no additional system capacity to accommodate growth in service.
1.4 SCOPE OF WORK
The primary objective of the Wastewater Service Study is to analyze development
constraints and opportunities for the five wastewater systems profiled in Section 1.3 that are
the focus of this study.
Outcomes of this Wastewater Service Study will provide options for wastewater
infrastructure improvements that evaluate design and technical solutions as well as the
potential expansion of service to currently unserviced properties and undeveloped lots,
particularly as part of potential ‘service corridors’ to lead future growth and development for
the next 25 years. To that end, the Wastewater Service Study will:
Determine maximum service levels already existing for the study areas, subject to
system design capacities.
Assess and analyze serviceable areas for existing and possible expansions of service
provided by sanitary sewers systems and the related service capacity of associated
wastewater treatment facilities that will accommodate projected loads and satisfy
regulatory requirements.
Include a phasing program for those portions of the study area that may require new
service in response to foreseeable development pressures / growth opportunities, in
order of priority based on functional and/or regulatory requirements.
Prepare a preliminary design brief detailing the study findings including conceptual
layouts for each recommended collection and treatment facility (whether renewed,
upgraded, new, decommissioned/consolidated, as appropriate) as well as associated
cost estimates for each system. Note: The expectation for preliminary design briefs is a
deliverable that will serve as the basis for plans and specifications for the final design
and construction contracts for each distinct phase of wastewater infrastructure
recommendations made by the Wastewater Service Study. The preliminary designs
shall include drawings and criteria that define general and spatial allowances for
architectural, structural, mechanical, and other components, and include proposed
Page 6
construction plans outlining at a minimum the number and scope of phases of
construction contracts and their interrelationships and a proposed preliminary
construction schedule.
Ensure pre-design and serviceable area recommendations are location specific to the
greatest extent possible.
Outline financial modelling that will assess present value of investment in respect to
rates of return on:
o current connections that could be made within existing serviceable boundaries;
and
o potential residential and commercial connections in response to foreseeable
development pressures / growth opportunities.
Supporting documentation and existing service area maps for these wastewater systems
are available to Proponents preparing proposals.
The Wastewater Service Study is to include an assessment of how any required expansion
of wastewater serviceable areas, consolidation of wastewater facilities, and upgrades or
new builds can be implemented within the context of existing MODC policy and by-law
frameworks, as well as other related Regulations, with respect to development. Guidelines
for the study will include:
MODC’s Municipal Planning Strategy and Land Use By-Law, and the Secondary
Planning Strategy and Land Use By-Law for the Village of Chester
Municipal Regulations as outlined in MODC’s Subdivision By-Law and By-Law #34:
Municipal Sewers and any other Legislation that may have an impact on the
provision of wastewater services.
All existing wastewater system reports prepared for MODC.
Any other legislative, regulatory, and code requirements that may influence the
design of proposed facilities.
The Proponent is to follow pertinent guidelines and requirements as may be documented in
the following:
Atlantic Canada Wastewater Guidelines Manual for Collection, Treatment, and
Disposal (2006), Environment Canada
Canada-wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent (2009),
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME)
Water and Wastewater Facilities and Public Drinking Water Supplies Regulations,
made under Sections 66 and 110 of the Environment Act, Government of Nova
Scotia
Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations, Fisheries Act, Government of Canada
Finally, the Proponent will consult with the Director of Infrastructure & Operations as the
Project Manager for MODC, and consult the relevant Departments of the Government of the
Province of Nova Scotia, and the Government of Canada, and other stakeholders, as
required.
Page 7
2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The Proponent will develop a work plan and propose an estimated schedule for execution of
the project within a suitable timeframe. An accepted schedule shall be agreed upon by the
successful Proponent and the Director of Infrastructure & Operations / Project Manager for
the Municipality. Meetings and regular progress reports should be incorporated into the
Proponent’s proposed work plan submitted as part of a complete Proposal submission.
3 REPORTING
The successful Proponent will report to the Director of Infrastructure & Operations / Project
Manager for the Municipality. The Director will manage and coordinate the overall project
and will report to MODC Council and Environment as required.
4 CONTRACT
The contracting Agency will be the Municipality of the District of Chester. Changes in scope,
extension of services or increases in approved budgets must be approved in advance by the
Municipality.
5 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Each submission must include the Proponent’s full legal name, if incorporated, and the
name, title, address, telephone number, and e-mail address of the individual to be contacted
with respect to the submission. The Proponent shall submit a written proposal containing the
following:
1. Understanding of the Project
An explanation to indicate the Proponent understands the project requirements.
The proposal shall illustrate the Proponent’s understanding of the work to be
done and the objectives of the project.
2. Approach & Methodology
Approach and methodology to various project components, including, but not
limited to design management, communication with project stakeholders,
procurement, quality control, adherence to schedule and cost control. This
section of the proposal shall outline the project approach for each phase
identifying the tasks to be done and the chronological order in which they will be
done, as well as a schedule of time for the task.
3. Relevant Experience / References of Proponent’s Team
Identify relevant recent project experience and provide a minimum of three
project references including client contact details. Relevant corporate experience
shall be submitted. For each reference, Proponents should outline:
Page 8
Client’s objective for the project contracted to the Proponent
Methodology used
Brief overview of project outcomes
Proponents must provide the corporate contact information of references,
including name, title, organization, address, phone/cell, email, and website.
Provide a project organizational chart, assignment of key personnel and
allotments of time for each member of the team. Provide curriculum vitaes,
maximum of 3 pages per person, for all key personnel including their education,
experience, and involvement in past projects of similar scope. The relevant
experience of key team members must be stated and relevant experience of
members or firms with the project team should be highlighted. Indicate the use of
any sub-consultants, if any.
4. Timeline & Work Plan
Develop a work plan that includes estimated schedule for execution of the project
within a compressed timeframe. It should be noted that expedient completion
and delivery of this Wastewater Service Study will be weighted in Proposal
evaluations in order to meet the grant-funded timeframe of this Study and to
meet plan development timeframes for wastewater systems that do not currently
satisfy regulatory compliance requirements. Meetings and regular progress
reports should be incorporated into the Proponent’s proposed work plan
submitted as part of a complete Proposal submission.
5. Cost
Provide a total estimated cost including fees, expenses, and disbursements.
Provide a schedule of fees for professional services, plus disbursements,
including an estimate of the amount of time each member will devote to a
particular task, and an estimated cost of each budget item. Note: the total
project budget is not to exceed $300,000
6 PROPOSAL EVALUATION
Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
1. Understanding of the Project 20%
2. Approach & Methodology 20%
3. Relevant Experience / References of Proponent’s Team 15%
4. Timeline 20%
5. Cost 25%
Page 9
The Municipality of the District of Chester reserves the right to reject any or all proposals,
not necessarily accept the lowest cost proposal, or to accept any proposal which it may
consider to be in its best interest. The Municipality also reserves the right to waive formality,
informality, or technicality in any proposal and negotiate changes in scope. The Municipality
retains the right to contract with any qualified Proponents through subsequent open Request
for Proposals bids for distinct detailed design and construction phases that may arise from
the completion of this Wastewater Service Study.
The contract for the Wastewater Service Study will be awarded to the Proponent that scores
the highest on the evaluation, provided that the financial proposal falls within the budget
indicated and the general proposal satisfactorily meets the expectations of the evaluation
committee.
In the event that no satisfactory proposals are received, the Municipality reserves the right
to re-issue the project.
Once a conditional award is made, any concerns with the proposal which have been
brought out through the evaluation process may be negotiated with the selected Proponent.
Final award will be subject to satisfactory submission of the Work Plan.
It is acknowledged that the contents of proposals submitted in response to this RFP are
confidential and shall not be released to other parties.
7 PROPOSAL CLOSING
Proponents are requested to submit four (4) hard copies of the proposal and one (1) digital
copy on a USB drive, in a sealed envelope, clearly marked “MODC RFP for Wastewater
Service Study” to the contact noted on the cover page of this RFP prior to 2:00 p.m. AST
December ##, 2020.
Bidders are solely responsible for the method of conveyance of their proposal to the
receiving point.
Questions regarding this RFP should be addressed to:
Christa Rafuse
Director, Infrastructure & Operations
crafuse@chester.ca
902-275-3554
8 TERMS AND CONDITIONS
8.1 AGREEMENT
By submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, the Proponent agrees to abide by the
terms and conditions outlined in this RFP. All proposals shall remain irrevocable unless
withdrawn in writing prior to the designated closing time.
Page 10
8.2 PRIVILEGE
The Municipality reserves the right to:
1. Modify the terms of this RFP at any time at its sole discretion.
2. Suspend or cancel the RFP at any time for any reason without penalty.
3. Reject any or all proposals, not necessarily accept the lowest proposal, or to
accept any which it may consider being in the best interest of the Municipality.
4. The Municipality also reserves the right to waive formality, informality or
technicality in any proposal.
5. In the event that a number of submissions are substantially the same amount or
score, the Municipality may, at its discretion, call upon those Bidders to submit
further information.
6. Award a contract on the basis of the initial offers received, without discussions or
requests for best or final offers.
7. Disqualify bidder(s) if there is an existing or recent business or personal
relationship which can be perceived as causing a conflict of interest. Proposals shall
contain a declaration of conflict of interest.
8. Reject any bidder if after an investigation of the evidence submitted by the bidder
fails to satisfy the Municipality that the Proponent is properly qualified to carry out the
obligations of the contract and to complete the work contemplated therein.
9. No term or condition shall be implied, based upon any industry or trade practice or
custom, any practice or policy of the Municipality or otherwise, which are inconsistent
with the provisions contained herein.
8.3 CONFIDENTIALITY
This RFP document (including all attachments and appendices) may not be used for any
purpose other than the submission of an offer. Proponents shall not use information
obtained through the RFP process without written permission of the Municipality.
The successful proponents will be permitted access to files and reports that relate to this
RFP. Information pertaining to the Municipality obtained by the successful proponents as a
result of this project is confidential and must not be disclosed without written permission of
Municipality.
By submitting an Offer, the Proponent agrees to public disclosure of its contents subject to
the provisions of the Municipal Government Act relating to Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy. Anything submitted in the proposal that the proponent considers to be
personal information or confidential information of a proprietary nature should be marked
Page 11
confidential and will be subject to appropriate consideration of the Municipal Government
Act as noted above.
The work described in this RFP is being conducted with public funds, and the fees and
expenses proposed in the Bidder’s submission will be made public.
8.4 LAW
The law applicable to this RFP and any subsequent agreements shall be the law in force in
the Province of Nova Scotia.
In responding to this RFP, Proponents warrant their compliance with all appropriate
Municipal, Provincial and Federal regulations, laws and orders. Respondents must agree to
indemnify the Municipality and its employees if they fail to comply, and the Municipality
reserves the right to cancel any agreement arising from this RFP if the proponent fails to
comply with the above.
The selected firm shall indemnify the Municipality, its officers and employees against any
damage caused to the Municipality as a result of any negligence or unlawful acts of the
successful proponent or its employees. Similarly, the successful proponents shall agree to
indemnify the Municipality, its officers and employees against any claims or costs initiated
by third parties as a result of any negligence or wrongful acts of the successful proponent or
its employees.
8.5 PAYMENT OF FEES
The fees of the consultant will be paid as follows:
30% of the quoted fees on contract signing
50% of the quoted fees on the submission of the draft report
20% of the quoted fees on the satisfied acceptance of the final report
The Municipality shall have the right to withhold, from any sum otherwise payable to the
Proponent, such amount as may be sufficient to remedy any defect or deficiency in the
work, pending correction of the same.
8.6 SUBCONTRACTORS
Proponents are responsible for obtaining Municipality’s permission prior to hiring a
subcontractor. The Municipality may, for reasonable cause object to the use of a proposed
subcontractor and require the Proponent to employ another subcontractor.
All subcontractors employed by the proponent will be subject to the same terms and
conditions of the Contract, and will be under the supervision and control of the Proponent.
Nothing contained in the Contract shall create a contractual relationship between the
Municipality and subcontractor.
Page 12
8.7 CONTRACT
The successful Proponent shall enter into a contract within 30 days of award. Except as
expressly and specifically permitted in these instructions to proponents, no proponent shall
have any claim for any compensation of any kind whatsoever, as a result of participating in
this RFP and by submitting a proposal, each proponent shall be deemed to have agreed
that it has no claim.
Unless otherwise noted in previous sections, the contract will be terminated for any of the
following reasons:
1. Unsatisfactory performance of work,
2. Conduct detrimental to the Municipality,
3. Lack of response to work requests,
4. Evidence of Collusion,
5. An existing or recent business or personal relationship which could be perceived
as causing a conflict of interest.
6. Becoming insolvent or has filed against a Petition in Bankruptcy or makes an
Assignment for the benefit or Creditors or it a Receiver is appointed for its assets.
8.8 NOTICE TO PERSPECTIVE PROPONENTS
1. The information contained in this RFP is supplied solely as a guideline for
proponents. While every reasonable attempt has been made to ensure its accuracy,
the Municipality does not guarantee or warrant its accuracy, nor is it necessarily
comprehensive.
2. By submitting a response to the RFP, the Proponent represents and warrants that
such bid is genuine and not false and collusive or made in the interest or in behalf of
any person therein named, and that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, induced
or solicited any other bidder to put in a false bid, or any other person, firm or
corporation to refrain from bidding, and that the bidder has not in any manner sought
by collusion to secure to the bidder an advantage over any other bidder.
3. If at any time it shall be found that the person, firm or corporation to whom a
contract has been awarded has in presenting any bid or bids, colluded with any other
party or parties, then the contract so awarded shall be liable to the Municipality for all
loss or damage which the Municipality may suffer thereby; and the Municipality may
advertise for a new contract and for said labour, supplies, materials, equipment or
service. Unauthorized conditions, limitations or provisions attached to an RFP may
cause its rejection.
4. The Proponent, by submitting a bid, shall represent and warrant that he / she has
sufficiently informed themselves in all matters affecting the performance of the work
Page 13
or the furnishing of the labour, supplies, materials, equipment, or service called for in
the quotation documents; that he/she has checked their bid for errors and omissions;
that the amounts stated in his/her bid are correct.
5. If a written agreement cannot be negotiated within 30 days of notification to the
proponent(s) initially selected, the Municipality may, at its discretion, terminate
negotiations with the proponent(s) and either negotiate a contract with the next
highest qualified proponent or cancel the RFP process and not enter into a contract
with anyone regarding the RFP.
8.9 PROCUREMENT OF ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The Municipality may procure services from additional Proponents under the following
circumstances:
1. If the project scope is outside the scope of services, as deemed by the
Municipality; or
2. If the project is being performed on behalf of a Village or another municipal unit,
that Village or municipal unit may invite one service provider of it’s choosing to bid
on that project.
8.10 PROPONENT RESPONSIBILITIES
1. The offer must be signed by the person(s) authorized to sign on behalf of the
company and binds the company to the statements made in the proposal.
2. The Proponent shall confirm in their submission that the Proponent agrees to
abide by the terms and conditions outlined in the RFP. Submissions which do not
have this confirmation will not be considered.
3. Proposed subcontractors and or consultants must be listed with attached
resumes. A joint proposal submission must indicate which Proponent has overall
responsibility for the offer. If a Proponent wishes to submit alternative options, each
option is to be submitted as a separate proposal.
4. The Proponent is entitled to amend its proposal at any time before the closing
time. After the closing time, the consultant will not change the wording or content of
its proposal and no words will be added to or deleted from the proposal, including
changing the intent or content of the presentation of the proposal, unless requested
by the Municipality.
5. The Proponent shall not transfer responsibility to meet the obligations of the
contract to a third party without the written consent of the Municipality.
6. Proponents are solely responsible for their own expenses in preparing the
proposal, presentation of the proposal, and any travel costs incurred in presentation
and/or interviews and negotiating a contract.
Page 14
7. It is the Proponent’s responsibility to ensure that its submission is complete and
is delivered to the Municipality by the date and time indicated. Proposals submitted
after the above noted time shall be returned unopened.
8. Except as expressly and specifically permitted in these instructions to proponents,
no proponent shall have any claim for any compensation of any kind whatsoever, as
a result of participating in this RFP and by submitting a proposal, each proponent
shall be deemed to have agreed that it has no claim.
8.11 DATA
All data materials, and information collected and work products created either directly for, or
in support of the work outlined in the RFP, is the property of the Municipality.
The successful Proponent is expected to submit both paper and digital copies (.pdf, .doc,
etc.) of all work completed to the Director, Infrastructure & Operations or designate.
The consultant shall not be permitted to publish or in any way use said information without
the expression or final approval of the Municipality of the District of Chester.
8.12 QUOTATIONS & PAYMENT
Prices must be in Canadian funds, and shall include all handling, freight, duty, and any other
charges, which are applicable at time quotation is awarded. It is the responsibility of the
Proponent to find out from the appropriate authorities what rates and charges are applicable
to this quotation.
8.13 HST
The quoted prices must clearly show the Harmonized Sales Tax as a separate item from the
total price submission.
8.14 INSURANCE AND WCB
The Proponent must provide the Municipality with a copy of a “Certificate of Professional
Liability Insurance” prior to commencement of the work. The General Liability Insurance
minimum will be one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) with The Municipality of the District of
Chester named as additional insured.
The Proponent acknowledges that he/she is an independent Contractor and shall,
indemnify, protect and save harmless The Municipality of the District of Chester, its agents
and employees from all damages, liabilities and claims of whatsoever nature arising out of
the furnishing by the Proponent, its agents or employees of the materials and/or performing
of the services covered by this RFP. The Vendor remains responsible for maintaining the
required insurance even if the certificates are never exchanged and/or requested.
It is also expected that bidders shall be in good standing with the Workers’ Compensation
Board of Nova Scotia at all times when providing the service outlined herein or, if exempt,
provide written proof thereof.
Page 15
8.15 INQUIRIES/CONTACT/ADDENDA
All inquiries about the RFP must be directed to MODC at least five (5) business days prior to
the submission date (preferably through e-mail, which receipt shall be confirmed) to:
Christa Rafuse, Director, Infrastructure & Operations: crafuse@chester.ca
Copies of all questions and answers and any addenda will be uploaded to the Provincial
Procurement Website no later than three (3) business days prior to the Final Submission
date.
Only formal written responses to properly submitted questions will be binding on the
Municipality.
All responses by the Municipality (addenda) will form part of the Request for Proposal
process.
Vendors may be advised by addenda, via the website at
https://novascotia.ca/tenders/tenders/ns-tenders.aspx , of required additions, deletions or
alterations in the requirements of the Request for Proposal documents. It is the
responsibility of the vendor to check the website to ensure all information has been
obtained. All such changes shall become an integral part of the Request for Proposal
documents and shall be allowed for in arriving at the total submission price.
8.16 NOTIFICATION
Submissions will be assessed and proponents may be contacted to answer questions or to
present their proposal. The unsuccessful respondents will be informed in writing.
8.17 CONTRACT AWARD
The award of this RFP is conditional upon the successful respondent entering into an
agreement to perform the services and other obligations as required by this RFP