Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 11.08.2016 WorkshopNotice of M eeting of the Governing B ody of the City of Georgetown, Texas November 8 , 2 0 1 6 The Ge orgetown City Council will meet on No vember 8, 2016 at 3:00 PM at Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th St., Geo rgeto wn, Texas The City o f Georgetown is committed to co mpliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you re quire assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or ac c ommo datio ns will be provided upo n request. P lease contact the City Se c retary's Office, at least three (3 ) days prio r to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930- 3652 o r City Hall at 113 East 8th Street fo r additional information; TTY use rs ro ute through Relay Texas at 7 11. Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop - A Prese ntation, discussion, and possible directio n on the solid waste co ntract, services, and strategic objectives -- Mike Babin, De puty General Manager B Prese ntation and discussion on the Bid Review for Garey Park -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Re c reatio n Director C Discussion o n the status of planning ac tivities related to the MoKan Corridor by the Lone Star Rail District and other regional agencies -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation P lanning Coo rdinato r D Discussion and direction regarding a re view and future adoption of a le gislative agenda for the City of Geo rgetown during the 85 th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Morgan, City Manager Exe cutive Se ssion In compliance with the Open Meetings Ac t, Chapter 551, Government Co de , Verno n's Texas Codes, Annotate d, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular se ssio n. E Se c . 55 1.0 71 : Consul tati on wi th Atto rney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigatio n and other matte rs on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Co uncil, including agenda items - PEC Settlement Se c , 55 1.0 72 : Del i berati on Regardi ng Real Property F orw arded from the G eorgetow n Transpo rtati on Enhancement Corporati on (G TEC) - Parcel 1 4, Northwest Blvd. - Parcel 1 8, 1 521 Northwest Blvd. 5 51 .07 4: P ersonnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Co nsideration of the appointment, employment, evaluatio n, reassignment, duties, discipline, o r dismissal 5 51 .08 6: Co mpetati ve Matters - Buc ktho rn Update Page 1 of 58 5 51 .08 7: Del i berati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Neg oti ati o ns - Pro ject CAT Adjournme nt Ce rtificate of Posting I, Shelley No wling, City S ecretary for the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , do hereby c ertify that this Notic e o f Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lac e read ily acc es s ib le to the general pub lic at all times , o n the _____ day of _________________, 2016, at __________, and remained so p o s ted for at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the s cheduled time of s aid meeting. __________________________________ Shelley No wling, City S ecretary Page 2 of 58 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: P resentation, discussion, and possible direction on the so lid waste contract, servic e s, and strategic objectives -- Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager ITEM SUMMARY: A n overview of the S olid Wa s te contract will b e pres ented focus ing on four (4) topics for dis cus s ion. C ontra c t Terms : T he current term of the s olid wa s te contract between t he C it y of G eorgetown and Texas D is pos a l S ys t ems (T D S ) expires on S ept ember 30, 2 01 7. T here are three (3) five (5 ) yea r renewa l options built into the current cont ra c t . S taff is in preliminary dis c us s ions with T D S t o review propos ed adj us tments for a potential renewal a s well as options for a mended or expanded s ervices and adj us ted term. D owntown S ervic es : T he current D owntown s olid was te s ervices are cons tra ined b y lack of adeq uate s pace for cart s a nd dumps t ers . T he c urrent remedy is incons is tent wit h expected future growth and future c hanges in oc c upants . T ransfer S tation: T he c urrent T rans fer S tation is uncovered a nd s ub j ec t to ra in expos ure which impact s opera tions . T he C ity’s current permit includes t he C ity’s s tated future intent t o c over the S tation. M aster P lan: T he need to es tablis h long term goals and ob j ectives for infras tructure, s ervices and divers ion increas e a s the C ity continues to grow and develop. FINANCIAL IMPACT: C ontract Terms: - 5 yea r renewa l with no s ervice c hanges = 1 2-22 % ra te increas e ($1 .50 -$1.9 0/month/cus tomer ) - 5 yea r renewa l with s ervice changes = 12 -2 2% rate increas e plus c os t of additional s ervices - L ong-t erm c ontract = s ervice and b illing c hanges unknown at this t ime D owntown S er vic es : - F ina nc ia l impa c ts to be determined ba s ed on billing b as is chos en T ransfer S tation: - C os t to perform engineering s tudy to determine cover and replacement opt ions with es timated cos ts S trategic G oals : - C os t of the s t udy plus future F ina nc ia l impacts to be determined through an M S A engineering firm F unding S our c e: - T ypic ally funded through retail s anit ation rates s ubj ect to C ouncil A pproval - E nvironmental S ervices is a G eneral F und cos t and revenue c ent er SUBMITTED BY: Mike Babin - De puty General Manager, Utilities ATTACHMENT S: Description S o lid Waste Plan Works hop Presentatio n Page 3 of 58 Solid Waste Plan Contracts, Services, and Strategic Objectives 11/08/2016 Page 4 of 58 Agenda •Contract Terms •Downtown Services •Transfer Station •Master Plan •Council Direction 2Page 5 of 58 Contract Terms 3Page 6 of 58 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 4Page 7 of 58 Contract Terms Contract Alternatives 5Page 8 of 58 Solution 1 –Renew with no changes •Contract would extend from Oct. 2017 thru Oct. 2022. •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 6Page 9 of 58 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 7Page 10 of 58 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 8Page 11 of 58 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 9Page 12 of 58 Contract Terms Potential Service Amendments (Wholesale price based on TDS renewal) 10Page 13 of 58 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 11Page 14 of 58 Tier 2 Scope Changed with Chisolm Trail Acquisition 12 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 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) 13Page 16 of 58 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 14Page 17 of 58 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) 15Page 18 of 58 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 16Page 19 of 58 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 17 Issues •Historically high incidence of misuse Page 20 of 58 Contract Terms Other Items 18Page 21 of 58 Other items Services •Apartment Recycling •Green Teams •Side Arm Loaders •EV truck Pilot Contract Issues •CPI language •Software integration Philosophical Issues •Behavioral Shift of customers to diversion •Long term goal for transfer station/landfill area 19Page 22 of 58 Downtown Services 20Page 23 of 58 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) 21Page 24 of 58 Transfer Station 22Page 25 of 58 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 14-20 years •Cover current station option still requires a new transfer station in 14-20 years (capacity limit) 23Page 26 of 58 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) –12-13 Semi-truck loads leaving per day 24Page 27 of 58 Master Plan 25Page 28 of 58 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 26Page 29 of 58 Council Direction 27Page 30 of 58 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 28Page 31 of 58 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 29Page 32 of 58 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: P resentation and discussio n on the Bid Review fo r Garey Park -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ITEM SUMMARY: Bids were received fo r the co nstruction of Garey P ark o n Octo ber 12, 2016. The bids were all in excess of the budge t. Staff will present ne xt steps moving forward with the construction bidding process. FINANCIAL IMPACT: TBD SUBMITTED BY: Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENT S: Description Garey Park Bid Review Presentatio n Page 33 of 58 Garey Park Design Team: Halff Associates | Landscape Arch./Civil Moman/Mode DC | Architects Populous | Equestrian Architects Jim Rodgers | Parks Dev. Consultant Design Team Support: Parks & Recreation Department Mr. Jack Garey and Mr. Glen Garey Bid Review City Council Workshop November 8. 2016 Page 34 of 58 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 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 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 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 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 Site Plan Park Entry Event / Day-use Area Primitive Camping Group Camping Group Camping Retreat Cabins Event Center Equine Facility Gate House Maint. Facility Garey Play Ranch Garey Dog Ranch Open Play Area Host House Amphitheater Remove Equine Roof Page 40 of 58 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 Questions ? Page 50 of 58 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Discussion on the status of planning activities relate d to the MoKan Corridor by the Lone Star Rail District and other regional agencies -- Edward G. P olasek, AICP, Transpo rtation Planning Coordinato r ITEM SUMMARY: On October 8th, 2 01 6, the CAMPO Policy Board vo ted to remove the Lone Star Rail project fro m the CAMPO 2040 P lan. That move alo ng with the suspension of work o n the EIS process for the Rail District has created an opportunity to revisit regional planning activities related to the Mo Kan Corridor and potential regional partnerships. FINANCIAL IMPACT: $49,500 allocated fo r membership in Lone Star Rail District in FY 2016/17. SUBMITTED BY: Edward G. Polasek, AICP ATTACHMENT S: Description MoKan/Lone Star Up d ate Page 51 of 58 Status of Planning Activities in MoKan Corridor City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 Page 52 of 58 CAMPO Action (October 10th, 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 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 4th Executive Committee Meeting. A Board Meeting is scheduled for December 2nd. Page 54 of 58 Current Status: City •The City’s 2017 membership dues for Lone Star Rail is currently loaded into the 2016-17 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 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 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Discussion and directio n regarding a review and future adoptio n of a legislative age nda fo r the City of Georgetown during the 85th Legislative Session -- Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager and David Mo rgan, City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: Staff will discuss a pro posed legislative program and pro pose a draft Legislative Agenda for the City Council to adopt fo r the 85th Legislative Session at a future meeting. Typic ally, the state legislature considers appro ximately 1,500 bills that directly affect Te xas cities. Staff hopes to track c e rtain bills during the upcoming le gislative 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 propo sed 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 City of Georgetown, Texas City Council Workshop November 8, 2016 SUBJECT: Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending o r co ntemplated litigation and other matters o n which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - P EC Settlement Sec, 551.072: De l i berati o n Regardi ng Real P ro perty Forwarded fro m the G eo rgetown Transportati on Enhancement Corporati on (G TEC) - P arcel 14, No rthwe st Blvd. - P arcel 18, 152 1 No rthwest Blvd. 551.074: Perso nne l Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Sec re tary and Municipal Judge: Consideratio n of the appointment, employme nt, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal 551.086: Competati ve Matters - Buckthorn Update 551.087: Del i be r ati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel o pment Negoti ati ons - P roject CAT ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 58 of 58