The City Council’s request for a parking study has generated minimal response from potential bidders. Just one proposal arrived, and it carries a steep price tag of $210,000.
Last year, the Council voted to commission a comprehensive parking analysis covering the entire city. The municipality subsequently launched a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) to identify a qualified consultant.
According to City Manager Tom Ambrosino, the response was disappointing. Only Howard Stein Hudson (HSH) submitted a bid, and their proposal addressed just a portion of Chelsea rather than the full municipality. “HSH believes that a
parking study encompassing the entire City of Chelsea will be too big and
likely too expensive of an undertaking,” wrote Ambrosino. “Instead, HSH is
proposing that, in addition to the downtown, it would identify only a few other
target neighborhoods for study. I don’t know if the Council would be satisfied
with that limitation.”
The financial dimension adds another layer of difficulty to the situation.
HSH’s constrained scope came with a price of $210,780, according to Ambrosino.
“That is much more than
we anticipated, and I don’t know if the Council is prepared to expend that
sum,” he wrote.
Ambrosino requested that the Council establish a subcommittee to consider options moving forward. Two paths exist: accepting HSH’s costly proposal as presented, or reformulating the project specifications to potentially attract additional bidders.
The subcommittee meeting date remains to be scheduled.
•In another matter, City Manager Tom Ambrosino is advising against internalizing trash collection operations, an idea the Council introduced last month.
Initial analysis by the Department of Public Works indicates that bringing these operations in-house would cost approximately the same as maintaining the current arrangement with contractor Russel Disposal.
“The (figures) make clear
that there are no obvious savings by taking the work in-house,” he wrote. “Our
best estimate is that annual costs would probably be somewhat greater than what
we pay to Russell.”
Nevertheless, Council members, particularly Councilor Enio Lopez, had raised concerns centered on inconsistent service quality during pickups.
While Ambrosino acknowledges these concerns, he contends that internal management would not prevent the errors currently occurring.
“It is my opinion that,
given the nature of the trash business, where litter, rough handling of barrels
and occasional missed deliveries are inevitable no matter who is performing the
work, bringing this work in-house would not demonstrably improve quality, at
least not to the extent where any improvement would be noticeable to our
residents.”
He has stated his position against implementing this change.
Other potential in-house operations remain open for consideration, though.
Water and sewer functions could potentially be brought back in-house, in Ambrosino’s view.
“I feel strongly that we
should probably take in-house certain water, sewer and drainage work that we
currently outsource,” he said. “But, in the case of that utility work, I can
definitively show that the City will save substantial money doing the work
ourselves, and I do believe the quality will be a noticeable improvement to our
residents.”
Trash collection, he maintains, does not fall into the same category for potential internalization.