Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas November 8, 2016

Transcription

1 Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas November 8, 2016 The Georgetown City Council will meet on November 8, 2016 at 3:00 PM at Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th St., Georgetown, Texas The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Policy Development/Review Workshop - A B C D Presentation, discussion, and possible direction on the solid waste contract, services, and strategic objectives -- Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager Presentation and discussion on the Bid Review for Garey Park -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director Discussion on the status of planning activities related to the MoKan Corridor by the Lone Star Rail District and other regional agencies -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Planning Coordinator Discussion and direction regarding a review and future adoption of a legislative agenda for the City of Georgetown during the 85th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session. E Sec : Consultation with Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - PEC Settlement Sec, : Deliberation Regarding Real Property Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) - Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd. - Parcel 18, 1521 Northwest Blvd : Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal : Competative Matters - Buckthorn Update Page 1 of 58

2 : Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project CAT Adjournment Certificate of Posting I, Shelley Nowling, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the day of, 2016, at, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Shelley Nowling, City Secretary Page 2 of 58

3 Des cri pt i on City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Presentation, discussion, and possible direction on the solid waste contract, services, and strategic objectives -- Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager ITEM SUMMARY: An overview of the S olid Waste contract will be presented focusing on four (4) topics for discussion. Contract Terms: T he current term of the solid waste contract between the City of Georgetown and Texas Disposal S ystems (T DS ) expires on S eptember 30, T here are three (3) five (5) year renewal options built into the current contract. S taff is in preliminary discussions with T DS to review proposed adjustments for a potential renewal as well as options for amended or expanded services and adjusted term. Downtown Services: T he current Downtown solid waste services are constrained by lack of adequate space for carts and dumpsters. T he current remedy is inconsistent with expected future growth and future changes in occupants. Transfer Station: T he current T ransfer S tation is uncovered and subject to rain exposure which impacts operations. T he City s current permit includes the City s stated future intent to cover the S tation. Master Plan: T he need to establish long term goals and objectives for infrastructure, services and diversion increase as the City continues to grow and develop. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Contract Terms: - 5 year renewal with no service changes = 12-22% rate increase ($1.50-$1.90/month/customer) - 5 year renewal with service changes = 12-22% rate increase plus cost of additional services - Long-term contract = service and billing changes unknown at this time Downtown Services: - Financial impacts to be determined based on billing basis chosen Transfer Station: - Cost to perform engineering study to determine cover and replacement options with estimated costs Strategic Goals: - Cost of the study plus future Financial impacts to be determined through an MS A engineering firm Funding Source: - T ypically funded through retail sanitation rates subject to Council Approval - Environmental S ervices is a General Fund cost and revenue center SUBMITTED BY: Mike Babin - Deputy General Manager, Utilities ATTACHMENTS: Solid Waste Plan Workshop Presentation Page 3 of 58

4 Solid Waste Plan Contracts, Services, and Strategic Objectives 11/08/2016 Page 4 of 58

5 Agenda Contract Terms Downtown Services Transfer Station Master Plan Council Direction Page 5 of 58 2

6 Contract Terms Page 6 of 58 3

7 Contract Terms-Current Status TDS is the contractor Selected by RFP process in 2012 Contract is set to expire in Sept. 30, 2017, but has 3 5- year renewal options in it. Renewal options are mutual between TDS and City Opportunity to address multiple issues Potential Service Amendments Transfer Station Future (Regulatory requirement to cover it) Solid Waste Plan Page 7 of 58 4

8 Contract Terms Contract Alternatives Page 8 of 58 5

9 Solution 1 Renew with no changes Contract would extend from Oct thru Oct Wholesale prices would increase About 12% or $1.90 per In-City Residential per month if the increase is applied flat across the board About 22% across all Commercial rates All services would stay the same Page 9 of 58 6

10 Solution 2a Renew with service changes Same price change and term extension as Solution 1 City would move metal recycling to TDS City could evaluate service amendments (additional cost) Adding Brush/Bulky to Tier 2 customers Setting a price for Green Teams as City events Exclusive In-City Commercial Recycling (99% TDS now) Weekly Recycling versus Every Other Week Every other week yard trimming pickup Changing Collection Station Customer Drop-Off Rates Page 10 of 58 7

11 Solution 2b - Renew for longer term Target 20 year length (10+10) design New pricing adjustment method Modified Inflation indexes Some form of Audited Cost Reimbursement Redesign services Cooperative transfer station operation design Pilot programs Page 11 of 58 8

12 Solution 3 RFP for new contract Retain Consultant? RFP for new contract would be launched in Dec.-Jan. Close bids in Feb. Review results/evals with Council in March. Negotiate new contract Apr-June. Council execute contract in July. New contract begins Oct. 1, 2017 RFP based on Council direction of services desired Page 12 of 58 9

13 Contract Terms Potential Service Amendments (Wholesale price based on TDS renewal) Page 13 of 58 10

14 City generated Metal Recycling Status Quo Currently have contracted, unsecured, open top roll-offs at City sites. Contractor hauls when notified Costs eats up 40 percent of revenue Suggested Site secured TDS containers at transfer station City weighs metal at each drop off City gets credit on accounts Page 14 of 58 11

15 Tier 2 Scope Changed with Chisolm Trail Acquisition Tier 1: Inside City-limits 20,229 Trash Customers 19,789 Recycling Customers Tier 2: Outside City-limits 3,176 Trash Customers 3,128 Recycling Customers Page 15 of 58 12

16 Tier 2* Brush/Bulky (currently not offered) *Out of City customers with City utility service Brush Pickup Every Other week yard trimmings - $2.05 per cust per month (T2 only) Monthly - $1.00 per cust per month (T2 only) Seasonal monthly - $0.70 per cust per month (T2 only) Bulky 2 times per year 3 Cubic Yard maximum $1.30 per cust per month (T2 only) Page 16 of 58 13

17 Exclusive In-City Commercial Recycling Status Quo Voluntary Commercial Recycling is open market TDS has 99% of the market Prices are bid assuming short term service Recycling more expensive than trash service Suggested Remains Voluntary Close market to City provider TDS changes prices to account for bulk service and longer term to spread overhead costs out Results in significantly lower prices for commercial recycling Makes recycling cheaper than trash service Page 17 of 58 14

18 Weekly Recycling TDS Estimated that up to 10% of customers are running out of recycling space Solution Weekly recycling essentially doubles the capacity at the home, but doesn t take up more space Easy to remember, convenient Costs about $2.80 per cust per month (All Customers) Alternative Solution Give customers that need more recycling space a free extra cart Fixes the capacity issue for the 10% who need it Takes up more space at home Costs about $0.01-$0.05 per cust per month (All Customers) Page 18 of 58 15

19 Every other week yard trimming pickup Solution Everyone gets more frequent yard trimming pickup Costs about $1.02 per cust per month (All Customers) Service is vastly under utilized Page 19 of 58 16

20 Changing Collection Station Customer Drop-Off Rates Status Quo Pay per load Rates set by TDS Must be at least 10% below the Williamson County Landfill Alternative No drop charge TDS would allocate cost to wholesale rates Cost socialized in retail rates Issues Historically high incidence of misuse Page 20 of 58 17

21 Contract Terms Other Items Page 21 of 58 18

22 Other items Services Apartment Recycling Green Teams Side Arm Loaders EV truck Pilot Contract Issues CPI language Software integration Page 22 of 58 Philosophical Issues Behavioral Shift of customers to diversion Long term goal for transfer station/landfill area 19

23 Downtown Services Page 23 of 58 20

24 Downtown Services Issues Fire code prohibited carts in alleys Limited space for dumpsters Carts were removed and Dumpsters became shared City renting spaces for dumpsters Contract and ordinance rates are not designed for shared dumpsters/carts Incode to TDS bill reconciliation Solutions for equity maintenance Physical Solutions Shared Dumpsters Concierge Rate Solutions Property Tax solution (Maint. PID) Industry code/size based rate Pay per throw (Bag rate) Page 24 of 58 21

25 Transfer Station Page 25 of 58 22

26 Transfer Station Regulatory need to cover or enclose operations Cover current station Replace current station with new enclosed station Current station permit capacity is for 600 tons per day Growth trends (5-7%) means that City is likely to exceed current station permit capacity in years Cover current station option still requires a new transfer station in years (capacity limit) Page 26 of 58 23

27 Transfer Station Activity Current average utilization is 260 tons per day of 600 tons per day permitted 56% of current utilization is City-billed customers Residential: 79% Solid Waste, 19% Recycle, 2% Yard Trimmings Commercial: 95% Solid Waste, 5% Recycle 44% comes from non City-billed customers 29 service trucks per day 15 In-City 14 Tier II billed and Non-City (incl. roll-offs) Semi-truck loads leaving per day Page 27 of 58 24

28 Master Plan Page 28 of 58 25

29 Master Plan Strategic Goals Council Developed Per City Charter a Solid Waste Master Plan should be part of the Comprehensive Plan Done in conjunction with Planning Department Behavioral Shifts Diversion Targets/Goals Incentives/Penalties Mandated Services Development Code standards Page 29 of 58 26

30 Council Direction Page 30 of 58 27

31 Council Direction Direction on Contract 5 year or 20 (10+10) year contract design Renew, negotiate, or RFP Service Amendments Direction on Other Items Transfer Station Perform Cover vs. Replace Study Solid Waste Master Plan Develop Plan Page 31 of 58 28

32 Reminder of Service Amendment Options City generated Metal Recycling Adding Brush/Bulky to Tier 2 customers Setting a price for Green Teams as City events Exclusive In-City Commercial Recycling Weekly Recycling versus Every Other Week Every other week yard trimming pickup Changing Collection Station Customer Drop-Off Rates Page 32 of 58 29

33 Des cri pt i on City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Presentation and discussion on the Bid Review for Garey Park -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ITEM SUMMARY: Bids were received for the construction of Garey Park on October 12, The bids were all in excess of the budget. Staff will present next steps moving forward with the construction bidding process. FINANCIAL IMPACT: TBD SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENTS: Garey Park Bid Review Presentation Page 33 of 58

34 Garey Park Bid Review City Council Workshop November Design Team Support: Parks & Recreation Department Mr. Jack Garey and Mr. Glen Garey Design Team: Halff Associates Landscape Arch./Civil Moman/Mode DC Architects Populous Equestrian Architects Jim Rodgers Parks Dev. Consultant Page 34 of 58

35 Agenda Update on the bids received Bid evaluation review Proposed revised project scope Impacts to project Next steps Schedule City of Georgetown Page 35 of 58

36 Bids Received Construction Budget: $13.5M Anticipated bids to come in high due to cost escalation & design factors. Anticipated the need to value engineer the project after we received bids. Opened Bids October 12 th Three bidders responded Harrison-Walker & Harper, Jordan Foster, and Smith Contracting Low bid of $22.2 Million City of Georgetown Page 36 of 58

37 Factors for high bids Bidder Market record development in Williamson & Travis Counties driving bid prices up Strived to include as much of the master plan as possible and making enhancement to improve cost recovery. Design Impacts fire flow, electrical utilities, drainage, and road widths due to emergency access Feedback from General Contractors regarding bid package and general contractors noted difficulty in bid response from sub contractors. Project has significant diversity in trades City of Georgetown Page 37 of 58

38 Bid Evaluation Staff & Halff Associates met with the Garey family to review bids and discussed holding off on specific amenities. Focus to hold off on items that were High Cost with a Low ROI Minimal impact on entry fee for day users Continue to value engineer the project on site work that supports vertical. City of Georgetown Page 38 of 58

39 Reviewing Bids Site and Civil Construction numbers were close to estimates Vertical Construction was extremely high New construction was 2X estimate Renovation was 3X estimate A third party estimator was used on the vertical construction throughout the project City of Georgetown Page 39 of 58

40 Primitive Camping Group Camping Event / Day-use Area Gate House Park Entry Amphitheater Event Center Remove Equine Roof Retreat Cabins Host House Open Play Area Maint. Facility Equine Facility Garey Dog Ranch Garey Play Ranch Site Plan Page 40 of 58

41 Proposed revised project scope Consider holding off on the following items All Cabins and Camping Areas Amphitheater and associated improvements Caretaker House Equestrian Arena Roof Reduced site work that supports above items Estimated cost savings based off of low bid: $11 million ( within budget) City of Georgetown Page 41 of 58

42 Overall Budget Summary Construction Budget $13.5M Competitive Bid Contracts $11.0M Site/Civil Work Garey House Remodel Active area construction/installation Items provided by City through separate contract $2.5M Playground structure, Splash Pad components, Electrical Service by PEC, Fiber/Security Page 42 of 58

43 Impacts to the project No overnight guests No need for on site caretaker housing No formal amphitheater structure, but still opportunities for festivals and special events in the meadow/event area Opportunity for portable stages and generators to accommodate multiple venues City of Georgetown Page 43 of 58

44 Impacts to the project Retain Active Recreation Components Drive day use visitors Play Area/Splash Pad/Pavilions Equestrian Arena Dog Park Hiking and Equestrian Trails Recreation Programming Retain Garey House/Event Venue City of Georgetown Page 44 of 58

45 Impacts to the project Business Plan Model and Pro Forma Model showed annual cost of $295,000 Currently reviewing the impact of operations with revised scope Anticipate annual cost to remain the same or even decrease based on ROI for elements being put on hold City of Georgetown Page 45 of 58

46 Impacts to the project Business Plan Model and Pro Forma Example: Camping O/M Cost of $357,000 Revenue of $344,500 Will continue to evaluate to provide a firm estimate Anticipate update to Council in early 2017 City of Georgetown Page 46 of 58

47 Next Steps Repackage into 3 distinct projects 1. Bid package for site/civil with alternates for remaining vertical construction elements. 2. Bid package for Garey House Renovation 3. Create package for active recreation construction and installation though The Cooperative Purchasing Network (TCPN) Job Order Contract City of Georgetown Page 47 of 58

48 Revised Schedule Consent item on City Council to reject all current bids November 8, 2016 Recommendation for construction contract to Parks Board February 9, 2017 Construction contract recommendation from Parks Board to City Council for approval February 21, 2017 City of Georgetown Page 48 of 58

49 Revised Schedule Cont. Ground Breaking March 2017 Construction Complete Early 2018 Remain close to original completion schedule as planned Opening in early 2018 City of Georgetown Page 49 of 58

50 Page 50 of 58 Questions?

51 Des cri pt i on City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Discussion on the status of planning activities related to the MoKan Corridor by the Lone Star Rail District and other regional agencies -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Planning Coordinator ITEM SUMMARY: On October 8th, 2016, the CAMPO Policy Board voted to remove the Lone Star Rail project from the CAMPO 2040 Plan. That move along with the suspension of work on the EIS process for the Rail District has created an opportunity to revisit regional planning activities related to the MoKan Corridor and potential regional partnerships. FINANCIAL IMPACT: $49,500 allocated for membership in Lone Star Rail District in FY 2016/17. SUBMITTED BY: Edward G. Polasek, AICP ATTACHMENTS: MoKan/Lone Star Update Page 51 of 58

52 Status of Planning Activities in MoKan Corridor City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 Page 52 of 58

53 CAMPO Action (October 10 th, 2016) Removed the Lone Star Rail Project from the CAMPO 2040 Plan. CAMPO/AAMPO and TxDOT discussing possible Plan Amendments for Corridor Analysis. Lone Star Rail has suspended work on Environmental Analysis. 1. Rail District Staff have confirmed no additional background work completed in the MoKan corridor to date. 2. Record of Decision not reached to date. Page 53 of 58

54 Next Steps: Region TxDOT working on method to close out environmental process with record of decision. CAMPO/TxDOT will work to develop regional analysis project for 35 corridor from Austin to San Antonio. CAMPO/TxDOT working on updates to MoKan Corridor Analysis with regional partners. Lone Star Rail cancelled the November 4 th Executive Committee Meeting. A Board Meeting is scheduled for December 2 nd. Page 54 of 58

55 Current Status: City The City s 2017 membership dues for Lone Star Rail is currently loaded into the budget as a placeholder. Payment for membership to Lone Star Rail is not due until January. Working with CAMPO/TxDOT on MoKan Corridor Study. Page 55 of 58

56 Next Steps: City Staff Recommends to not renew membership in Lone Star Rail. Focus activities on CAMPO/TxDOT led Mokan Corridor Study. Participate in ARRO Regional Transportation Study: A coalition of Cities looking at holistic transportation alternatives, including Mobility35, Project Connect and other programs to serve the region. $5,000 contribution from Lone Star allocation, returning $44,500 to CC Discretionary Fund. Page 56 of 58

57 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Discussion and direction regarding a review and future adoption of a legislative agenda for the City of Georgetown during the 85th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: Staff will discuss a proposed legislative program and propose a draft Legislative Agenda for the City Council to adopt for the 85th Legislative Session at a future meeting. Typically, the state legislature considers approximately 1,500 bills that directly affect Texas cities. Staff hopes to track certain bills during the upcoming legislative session, as well as communicate regularly with state elected officials and staff. To help ensure City staff is acting in accordance with Council direction, the proposed legislative agenda will serve as a guide when engaging with state officials. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. SUBMITTED BY: Jackson Daly Page 57 of 58

58 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Sec : Consultation with Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - PEC Settlement Sec, : Deliberation Regarding Real Property Forwarded from the Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC) - Parcel 14, Northwest Blvd. - Parcel 18, 1521 Northwest Blvd : Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal : Competative Matters - Buckthorn Update : Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project CAT ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 58 of 58