Summary#
Montréal City Council approved two engineering-services contracts for the city’s annual investigations of road and related structures. The decision awards the contracts to Les Services EXP inc. and IGF axiom inc.; city staff say the program is intended to help the city assess structures and plan interventions.
- Les Services EXP inc. receives Lot 1, worth up to $1,313,359.43; IGF axiom inc. receives Lot 2, worth up to $934,163.25. Both amounts include taxes.
- The contracts cover 48 months and include two 12-month extension options. The city may use the options only if the budget envelopes have not been used up.
- The city must evaluate both firms’ performance. City staff say the contracts include penalties for delays and for replacing a key resource without a valid reason.
- The city cancelled Lot 3 because its bids were more than 20% above the estimate. It will not be awarded through a separate later file.
What it means for you#
- Residents and road users: City staff say the contracts cover inspections, load-bearing capacity assessments and emergency investigations of structures. The work is intended to inform the city’s decisions about interventions; the decision does not itself require repairs or guarantee a particular safety outcome.
- Taxpayers: The city has authorized spending up to the two contract amounts. The contracts pay for engineering services and related technical support.
- Engineering firms: Six firms submitted bids. City staff report that the proposals were compliant; the two contracts went to the firms with the highest final scores under the selection criteria, not necessarily the lowest bids.
Money#
The approved total is $2,247,522.68, taxes included.
- City staff say this includes $1,741,632.68 in professional fees and $505,890 in disbursements for technical support, such as traffic signage and equipment rental.
- The decision allows extensions only if the budget envelopes have not been exhausted. The materials do not give a separate cost for any extension.
What is unclear#
- The decision and staff summary do not make clear whether the 48-month period includes the two 12-month options or whether the options would extend it.
- The materials do not explain how the work planned for cancelled Lot 3 will be covered.
- The actual spending will depend on services used and the budget envelopes; no expected annual spending is given.
Case for#
- City staff say the city is responsible for 588 road and related structures, many built before 1970, and needs ongoing inspections to understand their condition.
- Staff say existing contracts are close to or at their spending limits. Awarding new contracts could help maintain access to external engineering services.
- The contracts include emergency investigations as well as planned inspections and assessments.
Case against#
- Lot 3 was cancelled because its bids were more than 20% above the estimate. The materials do not explain whether the two awarded contracts can cover the work that had been planned for that lot.
- The total authorized spending is substantial, and the materials do not provide an expected year-by-year cost or explain how actual use of the contracts will be reported publicly.