Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 08.14.2007Notice of Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, August 14, 2007 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 at 06:00:00 PM at City Council Chambers, at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Streets, Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance. An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the Mayor, Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Saturday preceding the council meeting. The library's copy is available for public review. 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 that follows. A Sec.551.071: 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 - Discussion and possible action regarding Williamson County MUD No. 19, request for sewer Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (Application No. 35375-0) (SOAH Docket No. 582-07-0786; TCEO Docket No. 2006 - 1810 - UCR) - Consideration and possible action regarding legal issues related to public financing requirements for new and existing special districts — Carol Polumbo, McCall, Parkhurst 8 Horton, LLP B Sec.551.086 Competitive Matters - Discussion and possible action related to the City of Georgetown power supply options for LCRA 10% Market Participation for 2008-2010 Energy Years — Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 06:00 PM (Council may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Mayor, a Councilmember, or the City Manager for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) C Call to Order D Pledge of Allegiance E Comments from the dais - Welcome to Audience and Opening Comments - Review of procedure for addressing the City Council - Proclamation for Williamson County United Way F Announcements and Comments from City Manager G Public Wishing to Address Council As of the deadline, there were no persons who requested to address the Council on items other than already posted on the Agenda. H Action from Executive Session Statutory Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that Council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the Consent Agenda in order that the council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. City Council Agenda/August 14, 2007 Page 1 of 4 Pages I Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the Council Workshop on Monday, July 23, and the Council Meeting on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 -- Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary J Consideration and possible action to approve a contract with Lucas Adams not to exceed $18,500 to produce the 2008 Visitors Guide to Georgetown — Car! Miller, CVB Coordinator and Randy Morrow, Community Services Director K Consideration and possible action to accept the City's Quarterly Financial Report, which includes the Investment Reports for the City of Georgetown, Georgetown Transportation Enhancement Corporation (GTEC), and the Georgetown Economic Development Corporation (GEDCO) for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 -- Leticia Zavala, Controller and Mick! Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration L Consideration and possible action on license agreements approving encroachments into various public easements for the following properties: Lot 1 of the Lansdale Subdivision; Lot 2, Unit 1 of Serenade Country Estates; Lot 5 of Erin Acres; Lot 1, Block 1 of Reata Trails Addition; Lot 1, of the Bouffard Subdivision; Lots 1- 5, 13, 14 and 16, Block D of Berry Creek Section 5, Phase 1; Lots 14, and 15, of Georgetown Village Section 6, Block H; Lot 3, Block 1, of 2338 Plaza Phase 2.; and Crystal Knoll Terrace, Unit 1, Block 14, Lot 1 — Tommy Garcia, Planner I and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development M Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Attorney to issue a Quit Claim Deed to be filed abandoning the Electrical Easement in 86.153 acres of the Wright Survey, located at 4089 Williams Drive, to be known as, Estrella Crossing Estates — Tommy Garcia, Planner I and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development N Consideration and possible action to amend the professional services contract between the City of Georgetown and Kasberg, Patrick and Associates, LP for engineering services related to the fifth phase of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone testing program and approve a budget of $32,000.00 — Glenn Dishong, Water Services Director and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations O Consideration and possible action regarding the First Amendment to the 1999 Airport Land Lease Agreement with Advanced Air Services Inc. — Patricia E. Carls, City Attorney P Consideration and possible acceptance of a grant of $1,000.00 from the US Fish and Wildlife Department. -- Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director; Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services Legislative Regular Agenda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: Q Consideration and possible action to appoint the Social Services and Children's and Youth Program Funding Subcommittee to review and make recommendations regarding the funding allocations for FY 2007-08 — Mayor Gary Nelon R Consideration and possible action to approve the purchase of modular and dispatch furniture for the new Georgetown Communications and Technology (GCAT) Building from Furniture for Business and Watson Furniture Group through the State of Texas Purchasing Contract and Houston -Galveston Area Council in the total amount of $109,995.00 -- Marsha Iwers, Purchasing Manager and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration S Consideration and possible authorization to purchase 800 MHz radio equipment for public safety in the amount of $260,000 — David Morgan, Chief of Police T Consideration and possible action to approve a Resolution adopting "Guidelines and Criteria Governing Tax Abatement Agreements" within the City of Georgetown and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction -- Mark Thomas, Economic Development Director; Patricia E. Carls, City Attorney; and Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager U Consideration and possible action regarding a Resolution approving follow-up letters from Williamson County along with the Member Cities (Round Rock, Georgetown, Taylor, Cedar Park, and Liberty Hill) of the Williamson County and Cities Health District (WCCHD) to non -participating incorporated cities in Williamson County regarding the benefits of membership in the WCCHD -- Paul E. Brandenburg, City Manager V Consideration and possible action to transfer 1,680 acre-foot of BRA System Water Rights and associated Williamson County Regional Raw Water Line capacity to Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) — Glenn Dishong, Water Services Director, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations W Consideration and possible action for approval of the guaranteed maximum price for construction/renovation City Council Agenda/August 14, 2007 Page 2 of 4 Pages of the Recreation Center by Chasco Constructors in an amount not to exceed $10,788,438.00 — Terry Jones, Support Services Construction Manager and Micki Rundell, Director of Finance and Administration X Consideration and possible direction from City Council on a proposed amendment to the Unified Development Code (UDC) pertaining to the creation of incentives for residential subdivisions, which allows for the development of diverse housing types for the provision of affordable housing — Elizabeth A. Cook, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development. Y Consideration and possible action to authorize staff to negotiate a contract for professional services with Civic Design Associates for the Transit Oriented Development and Mixed Use Ordinances -- Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Z Forwarded from the Georgetown Utility System (GUS) Advisory Board: 1. Consideration and possible action to approve a contract with Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP (KPA) for Professional Services for Rock Street paving and utility Improvements in the amount of $71,500.00 — Mark Miller, Transportation Services Manager and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations 2. Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment with Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc. for professional services related to the design of the Park Water Treatment Plant 2MG Clearwell Improvements for $265,480.00 — Glenn Dishong, Water Services Director, Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations 3. Consideration and possible action for the award of bid for Utility Outage Management, and Integrated Voice Response System to Milsoft Utility Solutions in the amount of $169,330.00 — Michael Mayben, Energy Services Director and Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations AA Second Readings 1. Second Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 12.20 of the Code of Ordinances regarding deposits, security procedures, hours for use, and two-day rentals of the Georgetown Community Center — Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director and Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services 2. Second Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 12.20 of the Code of Ordinances to add Section 12.20.100 "Off -Leash Dog Recreation Areas" establishing a Dog Park — Kimberly Garrett, Parks and Recreation Director and Randy Morrow, Director of Community Services 3. Second Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning from AG, Agricultural District to IN Industrial District for Airport Industrial Park, Lot 1, located at 101 and 103 Helmer Cove -- Carla Benton, Planner II and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development 4. Second Reading of Ordinances for 1) a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use designation from Residential to Office/Service for 0.727 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract 497, and 2) a Rezoning from the RS, Residential Single -Family district to the OF, Office district for Lots 11 and 12 in the Williams Addition, Block 1, and 0.727 acres out of the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract No. 497, located at 1633 Williams Drive — Valerie Kreger, Planner III and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development 5. Second Reading of an Ordinance Rezoning from "AG, Agricultural" district to "RS, Residential Single -Family' district, with the condition that there are no single-family attached units permitted, for two tracts consisting of 0.775 and 11.655 acres in the A. Flores Survey (A-235) to be known as Katy Crossing Subdivision, Section 7, located on FM -971, west of Katy Crossing Boulevard — Elizabeth A. Cook, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development BB Public Hearings/First Readings 1. First Reading of an Ordinance adding New Chapter 6.60 to the Georgetown Municipal Code Relating To "Operation of Commercial and Residential Alarm Systems;" establishing permitting procedures, and fees and penalties — Roland Waits, Police Captain and David Morgan, Chief of Police 2. First Reading of an Ordinance Annexing into the City 1.77 acres, more or less, in the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract 229, for Somerset Hills, western boundary annexation to CR 245 and Jennings Branch Road — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development City Council Agenda/August 14, 2007 Page 3 of 4 Pages 3. First Reading of an Ordinance Annexing into the City 50.62 acres, more or less, in the Lewis P. Dyches Survey and Francis A. Hudsen Surveys for H.B. Longhorn Junction and Airborn property, located south of SE Inner Loop and Blue Springs Parkway -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development 4. First Reading of an Ordinance Annexing into the City 24.08 acres, more or less, in the Joseph Fish Survey and William Roberts Survey, for Georgetown Village Section 10, located at Westbury and Shell Road — Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development 5. First Reading of an Ordinance Annexing into the City 268.30 acres, more or less, in the I.&G.N. RR Survey, J.D. Johns Survey, The Key West Survey, D. Medlock Survey, W.E. Pate Survey, J. T. Church Survey, J. Thompson Survey, and Isaac Donegan Survey for Water Oak at San Gabriel Phase 1, Phase 3, Phase A1, and Phase 2, located north of RR 2243 and east of Escalara Subdivision -- Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Principal Planner and Bobby Ray, AICP, Director of Planning and Development CC Consideration and possible action to appoint Cheri Thanos to the Main Street Advisory Board to fill a vacancy for a position that expires in February of 2009 -- Mayor Gary Nelon Certificate of Posting I, Sandra Lee, 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 , 2007, at , and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Sandra Lee, City Secretary City Council Agenda/August 14, 2007 Page 4 of 4 Pages Council Meeting Date: August 14, 2007 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET DUB ECT: Consideration and possible action to amend the professional services contract between the City of Georgetown and Kasberg, Patrick and Associates, LP for engineering services related to the fifth phase of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone testing program and approve a budget of $32,000.00. ITEM SUMMARY: Chapter 213 — Edwards Aquifer rules of the TAC requires communities to test their wastewater collection system mains, 6" and larger in diameter, to locate structural damage and defects that potentially pose a threat to the Edwards Aquifer, once every five years. The TCEQ authorized the City to implement its testing program over an eight-year period. The first four years of testing were evaluated by GSW W, Inc. The staff is recommending the use of KPA for data evaluation due to their past involvement in the engineering of the remediation efforts and the resultant efficiency gains through using one engineering firm for related activities. The City has completed the fifth phase of testing. This item provides for the evaluation of the data obtained during the fifth phase of testing, the determination of remediation method, and the estimation of remediation costs. The project budget is $32,000.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. rINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this project will come from the Wastewater Capital Fund 651-101-6618-00. GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends contract amendment for engineering services by KPA. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: Engineering Proposal from KPA .ibmitted By: Glenn W. Dishong, Jim Briggs, Water Services Director Assistant City Manager for Utilities AMENDMENT DATED JULY 17, 2007 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE (EARZ) PHASE V PRELIMINARY REPORT The General Services Agreement between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN (City) and Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP, (Engineer) last authorized on March 14, 1995, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. The charges for the work in Amendment dated April 20, 2007 are to be paid on a lump sum basis unless additional work due to change in scope is authorized. Your signatures below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment dated April 20, 2007. Executed in duplicate original this day of 2007 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Parry of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Patricia E. Carls City Attorney Gary Nelon Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee Party of the Second Part: City Secretary KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP By KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOOCIATES GP, LLC, General Partner ",,7 z a By: R. David Patrick, P.E. Vice President STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BELL This instrument as acknowledged before me on this the 304ti day of Su I 2007. Notary Public DORIS M. WAITERS I , Notary Public, State of Texaa My Commission Expires V December 27, 2009 Printed name: VVjZ;s M. WAL-MILA Commission Expires: 12 • 2-7- O q Exhibit A (Updated April 20, 2007) This updated Exhibit A to the original General Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP, dated March 14, 1995, provides for the scope of engineering services required for preparing the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone Phase V Preliminary Report. The attached letter details the services and associated charges for the proposed work. KAKASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP CONSULTING ENGINEERS One South Main Temple, Texas 76501 (254) 773-37 •t1 Fax (254) 773-6667 mail@kpaengineers.com RICK N. KASBERG, P.E. R. DAVID PATRICK, P.E. THOMAS D. VALLE, P.E. July 17, 2007 Mr. Jim Briggs Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Re: City of Georgetown Proposal for EARZ Phase V Preliminary Report Georgetown, Texas Dear Mr. Briggs: This letter proposal is in response to your request for basic and special engineering services required to prepare a Preliminary Report for: Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EARZ) Phase V -- Preliminary Report The charges for this work are shown on Attachment "A" of this letter. We have priced the work according to the facts that we know about the project as of this date. Lump Sum charges are shown and will not change unless the scope of work is expanded, at which time we will meet with you and plan accordingly. The following are tasks that we have included in the work schedule: PRELFW[NARY DESIGN. The basic services for the preliminary design phase includes: 1. Reviewing field data collected by others (City and/or consultant), including test results, photographs and video of the City's wastewater infrastructure. 2. Identifying and summarizing defects in the wastewater infrastructure and classifying these defects as: a. Collection Lines b. Manholes c. Service Lines (public or private) 3. Quantifying the general amount of inflow/infiltration and/or exfiltration of each defect and classifying these defects as: a. Inflow/Infiltration b. Exfiltration Mr. Jim Briggs July 17, 2007 Page Two 4. Recommend rehabilitation method for each defect. 5. Prepare detailed opinion of probable costs for rehabilitation of all (exfiltration and inflow/infiltration) defects identified on public infrastructure. The exfiltration defects are required to be rehabilitated under the City's Multi -Year Program designed to achieve compliance with the Edwards Aquifer Protection requirements as detailed in Chapter 213 of the Texas Administrative Code. REPORT PREPARATION. The basic services for preparation of the preliminary design report includes: 1. Preparation of 2 (two) Draft Reports detailing the findings of the Preliminary Design, submitted to the City for review and comments. 2. Preparation of 5 (five) Final Reports incorporating comments from the review process. If this proposal is agreeable, please return two executed originals to our office. Sincerely, IAEA R. David Patrick, P.E. TDV/ ATTACHMENT A SUMMARY OF CHARGES FOR SERVICES EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE (EARZ) PHARE V — PRELIMINARY REPORT GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TASK EARZ Phase V Preliminary Report I. BASIC SERVICES A. Preliminary Design $ 24,000.00 B. Report Preparation $ 8,000.00 TOTAL BASIC SERVICES $ 32,000.00 Council Meeting Date: August 14, 2007 Item No. y AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to transfer 1,680 acre -ft of BRA System Water Rights and associated Williamson County Regional Raw Water Line capacity to CTSUD. ITEM SUMMARY: The Water Service, Water Rights, and Facilities Ownership Contract between the City and CTSUD ("Contract") provides for the transfer of up to 1,680 acre -ft of BRA System Water Rights upon written request by CTSUD subject to certain events and deadlines: Upon transfer, CTSUD would begin making the appropriate payments to the BRA for the water rights and pipeline capacity. CTSUD made a formal written request for the transfer of 1,680 acre -ft in a July 6, 2007 letter. The transfer of water rights is in conflict with the deadlines established in the Contract. The deadline for the transfer of the first 840 acre -ft was January 1, 2006, three years after Stillhouse Hollow water was available via the Williamson County Regional Raw Water Line. The deadline for the transfer of the second 840 acre -ft was October 7, 2006, three years after the substantial completion of the Lake Georgetown Water Treatment Plant Expansion. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Near term cost savings on water rights payments and WCRRWL payments. Long term cost increases due to reduction in total water rights and resultant need to pursue other more expensive alternatives. GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends amending the Contract if transfer of water rights is desired. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: CTSUD July 6, 2007 letter City of Georgetown August 1, 2007 letter Submitted by: Glenn W. Dishong, Water Services Director Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations CHISHOLM TRAIL SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT PHONE (254) 793-3103 P.O. BOX 249 FAX (254) 793-3100 Florence, Texas 76527 I RECEIEV July 6, 2007 Via Reeular Mail Mr. Paul Brandenburg City Manager City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Re: Request for Transfer of Water Rights Dear Mr. Brandenburg: JUL 0 9 2007 C17y MANAGER On behalf of Chisholm Trail Special Utility District (the "District"), I am hereby respectfully request that the City of Georgetown (the "City") transfer 1,680 acre-feet per year of its reserved contract BRA Brazos Basin system contract water rights and associated pipeline capacity to the District. Sections 7.1 and 7.2 of the Water Service, Water Rights, and Facilities Ownership Contract dated February 23, 1999, as subsequently amended (the "Contract") provide for the transfer of these water rights and pipeline capacity to the District within three years of designated events (the availability of water at Lake Georgetown and completion of the City's water treatment plant expansion). The District was not in a position financially to assume the additional costs associated with the water rights prior to this time. It is now ready to assume such costs, and respectfully requests that the City transfer the water rights and contract capacity. It is our hope that in the spirit of cooperation and good faith, the City will agree to do so. We appreciate your cooperation. Please call me if you have any questions. cerely, Don auschu er, P.E. J General Manager cc: Board of Directors ror III TEXAS August 1, 2007 Mr. Don Rauschuber, P.E. General Manager, CTSUD P.O Box 249 Florence, TX 76527 Dear Don, 0Il' HAL. I. CITY Or ( rom;uOWN The purpose of this letter is to respond to your letter dated July 6, 2007 where you requested the transfer of 1,680 acre -ft of Brazos River Authority (BRA) system contract water rights in accordance with the provisions of Section 7.1 and 7.2 of the Water Service, Water Rights, and Facilities Ownership Contract dated February 23, 1999, as subsequently amended. When taken in whole, Sections 7.1 and 7.2 state as follows: 7.1 Georgetown will transfer, in total or in increments, within sixty (60) days after receiving a written request from Chisholm Trail, 840 acre-feet of its reserved contract surface water rights in Lake Stillhouse Hollow, including the related Williamson County raw water pipeline capacity and any other associated rights, to Chisholm Trail. The parties agree that the transfer of the total amount of 840 acre-feet shall occur not later than 3 years after the date that Stillhouse Hollow water is available at the Existing Plant. Upon transfer of the 840 acre-feet, Chisholm Trail will assume Georgetown's annual payment on same to the BRA (including any pro rata share for the initial year). (Bold characters included for emphasis) 7.2 Georgetown will transfer, in total or in increments, within sixty (60) days after receiving a written request from Chisholm Trail, an additional 840 acre-feet of Georgetown's reserved contract surface water rights in Lake Stillhouse Hollow to Chisholm Trail (resulting in a total of 1,680 acre-feet of transferred contract surface P.O. NIX Ut9 i;t•ntgudncu;'Cesas 7;;(i;;-l!41MI (5 1 22 980-3652 (512, 930.3622 tr x) wwwgrwt•KeWwn.org I ntnG,l{eoty;etntwtttac.nrt; Mr. Don Rauschuber, P.E. August 1, 2007 Page 2 water rights pursuant to paragraphs 7.1 and 7.2 herein), including the related Williamson County raw water pipeline capacity and any other associated rights. It is agreed, however, that the transfer of this additional 840 acre-feet, or any part thereof, cannot occur prior to September 1, 2001, or Georgetown's next capital expansion of the Existing Plant or associated facilities, whichever occurs later. Upon transfer of the additional 840 acre-feet, Chisholm Trail will assume Georgetown's annual payment on same to the BRA (including any pro rata share for the initial year). The parties agree that the transfer of the total amount of 840 acre-feet provided for in this Paragraph 7.2 shall not occur later than 3 years after the Existing Plant is expanded to 15.8 mgd in accordance with Paragraph 8.3, below. (Bold characters included for emphasis) The transfer you have requested appears to be in conflict with the deadlines established by the contract. The deadline for the first transfer was January 1, 2006, 3 years from Stillhouse Hollow water availability on January 1, 2003. The deadline for the second transfer was October 7, 2006, 3 years from the substantial completion of the LWTP Existing Plant expansion on October 7, 2003. However, we will proceed with presenting your request to the Georgetown City Council on the next available date on August 14, 2007. We will promptly notify you of the Council's decision. _5Lncerely� Paul Brandenburg City Manager (512)930-3723 Cc: Gary Nelon, Mayor City Council Jim Briggs - Assistant City Manager Glenn Dishong - Water Services Manager Micki Rundell - Director, Finance and Administration Trish Carls - City Attorney Council Meeting Date: August 14, 2007 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUB E T• Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment with Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP (KPA) for Professional Services for Rock Street paving and utility improvements in the amount of $71,500.00. ITEM SUMMARY: This project is part of the maintenance and control of Austin Avenue Project. Proposed safety and traffic flow improvements on Austin Avenue include placing curbed medians in Austin Avenue to prevent uncontrolled left turn movements into driveways near high volume intersections. The Rock Street extension behind the Sonic and Twin Liquor is part of a mitigation plan to provide suitable movements and access to these businesses at a safe location. The design will be for a partial roadway section that will adequately serve the needs of the existing businesses on the east side of the Rock Street right-of-way. Utility improvements include replacing a portion of an old clay sewer line and a six inch water main. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: $33,000 From account #651-101-6102-09: Rock St. WW Extension & From account 9661-101-6300-03: Rock St. WTR Extension $38,500 From account # 130-401-6872-01: Rock Street Extension GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was recommended by the GUS Board for Council approval at the August 9, 2007 GUS Board meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of contract amendment. COMMENTS: None. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Contract amendment Submitted by: Mark Miller, Jim Briggs, Transportation Services Assistant City Manger Manager for Utility Operations AMENDMENT DATED AUGUST 1, 2007 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR ROCK STREET PAVING AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT The General Services Agreement between the CITY OF GEORGETOWN (City) and Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP, (Engineer) last authorized on March 14, 1995, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. The charges for the work in Amendment dated August 1, 2007 are to be paid on a lump sum basis unless additional work due to change in scope is authorized. Your signatures below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment dated August 1, 2007. Executed in duplicate original this day of Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Patricia E. Carls City Attorney Party of the Second Part: KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP By Kasberg, Patrick & Associates GP, LLC General Partner -) By: R. David Patrick, P.E., Vice President STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BELL Parry of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Gary Nelon Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary 2007 at This instrument as acknowledged before me on this the -64A day of &AU� q ws4-,2007. �llrs a"7j, Notary Public DORIS M. W L"' Notary Pudic, State of Texas fg 3; My Commission Expires December 27, 2009 Printed name: Weis M. WAL=radzS Commission Expires: 1:1- 27- D 9 Exhibit A (Updated August 1, 2007) This updated Exhibit A to the original General Services Agreement between the City of Georgetown and Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP, dated March 14, 1995, provides for the scope of engineering services required for developing design for the Rock Street Paving and Utility Improvements Project. The attached letter details the services and associated charges for the proposed work. KASBERG, PATRICK & ASSOCIATES, LP KA CONSULTING ENGINEERS One South Main Temple, Texas 76501 (254) 773-3731 Fax (254) 773-6667 mail®kpaengineers.mtn RICK N. KASBERG, P.E. R. DAVID PATRICK, P.E., C.F.M. THOMAS D. VALLE, P. E. August 1, 2007 Mr. Jim Briggs Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Re: City of Georgetown Proposal for Rock Street Paving and Utility Improvements Project Georgetown, Texas Dear Mr. Briggs: This letter proposal is in response to your request for basic and special engineering services required to provide construction drawings, bidding and construction administration for two lane roadway and utility improvements for: The Rock Street Paving and Utility Improvements Project The charges for this work are shown on Attachment "A" of this letter. We have priced the work according to the facts that we know about the project as of this date. Lump Sum charges are shown and will not change unless the scope of work is expanded, at which time we will meet with you and plan accordingly. This project will provide for a roadway section in the Rock Street right-of-way and replace the utilities with in this section in order that the street section can be constructed. There are extreme variations in grade within the roadway section and alternatives will need to be explored in order to determine what the best solution for addressing the change in vertical geometry. The following services will be performed: Mr. Jim Briggs August 1, 2007 Page Two SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE. This phase of project development will provide schematic design for the full roadway section. The basic services for the schematic design phase includes Services during this phase include: 1. Identifying the governmental agencies that will have jurisdiction within and connecting to the project area. Meeting will be set with the entities to review the project scope and begin any permitting processes.(If necessary) 2. Providing analyses of the CITY's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 3. Providing a schematic opinion of probable cost of the CITY's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 4. Consulting with the CITY, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. 5. Advising the CITY as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the CITY in obtaining such data and services. 6. Analysis of existing connectivity of the roadway system. 7. Schematic design of the horizontal and vertical geometry of the proposed roadway section. 8. Schematic design of the drainage systems including conveyance to natural drainage systems and determination of water quality features and their nessecity. 9. Schematic design of the roadway section. 10. Schematic design for the water utility. 11. Schematic design for the wastewater utility. Mr. Jim Briggs August 1, 2007 Page Three FINAL DESIGN PHASE. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the CITY has reviewed and approved the schematic engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1. Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted schematic engineering documents. 2. Preparing and furnishing to the CITY a revised opinion of probable costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3. Research and obtain regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applicatiops and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. Fees for any local, state or federal construction permit applications are not included as part of the professional fee charges. These will be paid by the CITY. 4. Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the CITY (and the CITY's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5. Furnishing to the CITY the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. 6. Design the final plans of the roadway. 7. Design the final plans for the water utility. 8. Design the final plans for the wastewater utility. 9. Design surveys including the transfer of validated benchmarks to the proposed area with brass monuments at the proposed Rights -of -Way. 10. Design and submittal of WPAP reports to the TCEQ for project acceptance in the Re- charge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer for the revised sections and alignments. 11. Meet regularly with the City of Georgetown Staff to review the progress of the design and coordinate any conflicts that arise. Mr. Jim Briggs August 1, 2007 Page Four SPECIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN FEATURES FOR THE PROJECT • Final Design Schematics of the Rock Street roadway • Design surveys of the project site and topographical representation of the surveys. • Hydrology and drainage design for the roadway. • WPAP reports to be submitted to the TCEQ for project acceptance. • Vertical geometry for roadway. • Vertical geometry for both the water and wastewater utility. • Intersection design. • Water quality feature design. • Environmental, archaeological and geotechnical surveys and investigations. • Contract Documents and Specifications. If this proposal is agreeable, please return one executed originals to our office. Sincerely, R. David Patrick, P. E. RDP/crc ATTACHMENT A SUMMARY OF CHARGES FOR SERVICES 2007 — 2008 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FOR THE ROCK STREET PAVING AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TASK The Rock Street Paving and Utility Improvements Project I. BASIC SERVICES A. Schematic Design Roadway $ 3,500.00 B. Final Design Roadway $ 14,500.00 C. Schematic Design Utilities $ 2,000.00 D. Final Design Utilities $ 10,500.00 $ 30,500.00 TOTAL BASIC SERVICES 11. CONTRACT ADMIN/CONSTRUCTION SERVICES A. Bidding and Award $ 5,000.00 B. Construction Staking $ 4,000.00 C. Construction Administration $ 11,500.00 TOTAL CONTRACT ADMIN SERVICES $ 20,500.00 111. SPECIAL SERVICES A. Design Surveys $ 5,000.00 B. WPAP Design & Submittals $ 4,000.00 C. Archaeological Investigations $ 4,000.00 D. Environmental Investigations $ 4,000.00 E. Geotechnical Investigations $ 3,500.00 TOTAL SPECIAL SERVICES $ 20,500.00 Agenda Item Check List amwn Financial Impact Agenda Item: Contract amendment with KPA for professional services related to Rock Street and Utility improvements. .agenda Item Subject: Consideration and possible recommendation to approve a contract with Kasberg, Patrick & Associates, LP (KPA) for Professional Services for Rock Street Paving and utility improvements in the amount of $71,500.00. Is this a Capital Improvement • Yes O No Project: Council Date: Was it budgeted? 08/21/2007 link to Agenda database => Q Need Help? Is it within the approved budgeted amount? If not, where is the money coming from? G/L Account Number Amount Going to Council Is there something (budgeted) that won't get done because you are spending these funds? If so, please explain. Will this have an impact on the next year's budget? If so, please explain. Does this project have future revenue impact? 0Yes 0No • Yes 0No 651-101-6102-09 Rock Street WW Extension 661-101-6300-03 Rock St. WTR Extension 130-401-6872-01 Rock St. Extension $ 71,500.00 O Yes • No Yes 0 No Yes • No Year: Department: If so, how? Identify all on-going costs (i.e., insurance, annual maintenance fees, licenses, operational costs, etc...). Estimated staff hours: Cross -divisional impact: Yes * No If €o, what division(s)? Prepared by: Mark Miller Date: 08/06/2007 on 08/08/2007 Lara IU81ity Financial Analyst 108/07/2007 08:48:06 AM 108/07/2007 08:48:06 AM b8/08/2007 08:21:00 AM IOW812007 08:: Approval Cycle Settings Council Meeting Date: August 14, 2007 Item No. 2 _ dL AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve a contract amendment between the City of Georgetown and Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc. for professional services related to the design of the Park Water Treatment Plant 2MG Clearwell Improvements for $265,480.00. ITEM SUMMARY: This contract amendment provides for the necessary design, engineering, construction management, surveying, geotechnical, material testing, and regulatory submittals for the 2 MG precast concrete clearwell improvements at the Park Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The Park WTP was originally constructed in 1986 with one 2 MG clearwell constructed of steel. Recent evaluations of the existing clearwell have identified that it is in need of painting and that there are structural issues with the roof caused by corrosion of the steel roof joists. Because there is only one Clearwell at this plant, to paint and repair the clearwell will require the plant to be taken off line. This is a hardship on the City's water system. Additional storage at the Park WTP was identified as a need in the City's Water Master Plan to continue to meet the demands of the growing population. The addition of a 2 MG clearwell will provide the additional storage, and will allow the work on the existing clearwell to be completed without having to take the plant off line. The estimated construction cost of the 2 MG clearwell improvements is $1,800,000. This includes the cost of the precast concrete clearwell and necessary yard piping and site civil improvements necessary to incorporate the new clearwell into the treatment scheme. Total cost for services is $265,480.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. .INANCIAL IMPACT: Funds will come from the Water Capital Fund 661-101-6904. GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATION: This item was recommended by the GUS Board for Council approval at the August 9, 2007 GUS Board meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the contract amendment for engineering services by CDM. None. ATTACHMENTS: Proposal for engineering from Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc. Submitted by: `Glenn W. Dishong, Water Services Director Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN A 2 MILLION GALLON CLEARWELL AT THE -PARK WATER TREATMENT PLANT The General Services Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER last authorized on November 26, 1991, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit 1. The fee for the work in this Amendment is to be paid on a lump sum basis. Your signature below will constitute your acceptance of this Amendment. EXECUTED in duplicate original this _ day of , 2007 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: City Attorney Party of the Second Part: CAMP DRESSER &M E IN . Z 1'1111't"LA141 v By: Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Vice President STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Gary Nelon Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary KRIMIMSUZANNECORPUS *1 NOTARY PUBLIC L> i State o9 Texas 1Fo`.i Cotlm. f.xp. C'8 -t5-2008 This instrument was ac owledged before me on this the J�_ day' ' 007, by Mr. Allen D. Wo Ike in his capa t as Vice Pre ident of Camp Dresser & McKe c Printed nam . l hk 0 I S otary ublic, State orllelxr Commission Expires: Page 1 of 1 C.`Docu nts andSeningskorpusk`Desktop\Gwwn_Amend=nt-2MG Park WTP Cleamell.doc EXHIBIT 1 SCOPE OF WORK Project Need: The Park Water Treatment Plant (WTP) has one 2 million gallon (MG) clearwell for storage of treated water. This clearwell is constructed of painted steel and is need of substantial improvements including a new roof. This work would require that the clearwell be taken out of service for an extended period which would require that the Park WTP be taken out of service for an extended period, which is unacceptable. The new 2 MG clearwell will be constructed of concrete and provide redundant clearwell capacity for the plant. Project Description: The project consists of the design of a 2 MG pre -cast, pre -stressed concrete clearwell, the piping to the new clearwell and the piping from the new clearwell to the existing pump station. The project also includes piping revisions to allow the new clearwell to be constructed. Preliminary Engineering Phase. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1) Reviewing available data and consulting with the OWNER to clarify and define the OWNER's requirements for the project. 2) Advising the OWNER as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. The project budget includes the following special services: a) Topographic Surveying b) Geotechnical Analysis C) Construction Materials Testing d) WPAP Application Preparation and TCEQ Fee e) Geologic Assessment 3) Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4) Providing analyses of the OWNER's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5) Consulting with the OWNER, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies Page 1 of 4 CADocuments and SettIngs\cotpusk\DesktopvGtown_Amendmcnt-2MG_Padc_WTP_Clea well.doc and affected utilities. 6) Advising the OWNER as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 7) Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. A maximum of five copies will be provided to the OWNER. 8) Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. Final Design Phase. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the OWNER has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1) Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2) Preparing and furnishing to the OWNER a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3) Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be famished as additional services. 4) Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the OWNER (and the OWNER's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5) Furnishing to the OWNER a maximum of five copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Bidding Phase. Services under this phase include: 1) Assisting the OWNER in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre-bid conferences, and receiving and processing deposits for bidding documents. 2) Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3) Assisting the OWNER in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. Page 2 of 4 CADocutnents and Settings\corpask\Desktop\Gtown_A=ndment-2MG_Padc_W1P_Cleamell.doc 4) When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the OWNER as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5) Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Construction Phase. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the OWNER during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the OWNER's representative. Such services comprise: I) Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the OWNER. 2) Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3) Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4) Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5) Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6) Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7) Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the OWNER. 8) Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9) Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. Page 3 of 4 C:000w nm and SetNngs`cotpwk`Desktop\Gtown_.4mendmentdMG Park WTP Cleatwell.doc CITY OF GEORGETOWN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN A 2 MILLION GALLON CLEARWELL AT THE PARK WATER TREATMENT PLANT • Preliminary Engineering Phase: $28,000 • Design Phase: $86,000 ■ Bid Phase: $16,000 ■ General Services During Construction Phase: $74,570 ■ Other Direct Costs, including: $4,000 Travel Telephone Copying/bluelines Postage/facsimile Total Basic Engineering Services Surveying $9,000 Geotechnical $4,800 Construction Materials Testing $18,000 WPAP Preparation $9,600 WPAP Fee $5,000 Geologic Assessment $3.000 Total Special Services TOTAL $216,080 $49,400 $265,480 Page 4 of 4 C:\[) c enu and SetnngsTorpuck`Desktop%Gwwn_Amendment-2MG Padc_WTPCcary iLdoc Council Meeting Date: August 14, 2007 Item No. Z AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action for the award of the bid for Utility Outage Management, and Integrated Voice Response System to Milsoft Utility Solutions in the amount $169,330.00. ITEM SUMMARY: On July 5, 2007 Request for Proposals were opened and read for Outage Management and Integrated Voice Response System proposal 927041 with Automated Customer Service and Incident Management and Prediction Systems. Responses were received from DataVoice International, Milsoft Utility Solutions and Centurion. City staff has evaluated the proposals and determined that only DataVoice International and Milsoft Utility Solutions conformed to all the specifications contained in the Outage Management and Integrated Voice Response System RFP. City staff comprised of IT, GUS Systems Engineering and GUS Electric evaluated each proposal and interviewed other electric utilities who are currently using this software. City Staff also made site visits to two vendors to observe the operations and support capability and also hosted in-house demos from DataVoice and Milsoft. Additionally, staff worked with each of our electric engineering firms, McCord Engineering and Schneider Engineering, to evaluate how each of the programs would integrate with the existing engineering, mapping and GPS functions GUS has in place and is used by these firms. Milsoft is the only vendor that could provide a product with a seamless interface. The staff recommendation is for award of the RFP to Milsoft Utility Solutions in the amount of $169,330.00. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The electric utility industry has for the last 5 years been increasingly moving to software that is MultiSpeak compliant so that integration scripts do not have to be written for each specific piece of software for compatibility. Milsoft Utility Solutions has worked since 1999-2000 to have all their software meet these requirements. They are the only vendor responding to this RFP that has this capability today. As our electric system has grown, the complexity and reliability requirements have increased. The addition of this system will greatly aid us in maintaining the reliability indices we pride ourselves on providing to our customers. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for this expenditure are budgeted in Electric Substation T&D capital accounts. GUS BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS: This item was recommended by the GUS Board for Council approval at the August 9, 2007 GUS Board meeting. COMMENTS: Milsoft has been our Electric System modeling and engineering database since 1990 and has provided timely updates to their software have been very professional to work with and have products that are all Multi Speak compliant. Additionally, Milsoft Utility Solutions will integrate with the City's GIS Database, all ESRI Software, Utility Billing Software (Incode) and all Electric Engineering Software used both by GUS and our consultants. ATTACHMENTS: 1. RFP proposals 2. Bid Tabulation Submitted By: Mike Mayben, Energy Services Jim Briggs, Assistant City Manager for Utility Operations REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR GEORGETOWN UTILITY SYSTEMS AUTOMATED CUSTOMER SERVICE & INCIDENT MANAGEMENT AND PREDICTION SYSTEM I. PURPOSE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Georgetown Utility Systems (GUS) is requesting the submission of proposals from qualified vendors to provide the following: • Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system. • Incident Management and Prediction (IMP) System (for water, sewer, waste- water, gas and electric services) The proposed system shall include hardware, software, installation, documentation, training and support in accordance with the requirements outlined in this specification. GUS will award a contract to the vendor submitting the best proposal that complies with the requirements stated in the RFP. GUS may, at its sole discretion, reject any or all proposals received or waive minor defects, irregularities, or informalities therein. II. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS Bid responses should be delivered to: Marsha Iwers, 300-1 Industrial, Georgetown, TX, 78626, 512-930-3647 Bids will be due on July 5, 2007, 5:00 P.M., at 300-1 Industrial, Georgetown, TX. All proposals must be on 8 1/2" by 11" paper and bound appropriately. Proposals must be enclosed in a sealed envelope and labeled IVR & Incident Management System Proposal for GUS. Pricing must be guaranteed for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of this RFP, The complete proposal must contain a point by point response to the RFP and all other materials requested in the RFP. Vendors may include any additional materials that they feel could assist in the evaluation of the proposed system; however, each point must be responded to completely. References to other documents will not be accepted as an appropriate response. Vendors should indicate the level of compliance by use of the following terms: ACKNOWLEDGE: The vendor reads and understands the information provided, however, no action is required of the vendor. COMPLY: The vendor meets or exceeds the requirements of the specification. PARTIALLY COMPLY: The vendor partially meets the requirement. Explanations shall always be provided. COMPLY WITH CLARIFICATION: The vendor meets the specifications. The manner in which the specification is met, however, differs from the method stated in the RFP. Explanations shall always be provided. EXCEPTION: The vendor does not meet the specification requirement. An alternative, with an explanation, could be provided, if available. III. HISTORY & BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Georgetown area is experiencing rapid growth in residential, commercial, and industrial customers. The City's Utilities, (Electric, Water, & Waste Water) each have specified service areas in which they operate. These areas do not occupy the same geographic boundaries, so areas of the City may contain any combination of the three. To properly serve our customers, IVR & IMP Systems are proposed to enhance a 24/7 System Control Center currently being implemented. The IVR will be used as a secondary system as an Operator will answer calls if they are available. The IMP will enable faster outage response by utilizing predictions and crew locations. The two Systems along with SCADA and Incode CIS shall be able to communicate to achieve these goals. IV. OVERVIEW The IVR will be the mechanism by which GUS customers will contact the utility for customer service and outage reporting. The primary requirement of the IVR is to automate answering and processing the high volume of customer calls that can occur during the day or during a power outage. The IVR system should be capable of the following: • Simultaneously answer a minimum of 12 number of lines, • Direct callers through various options by using a menu of choices • Permit the callers to respond using voice recognition or touch tones • Identify caller by caller ID or caller entered phone number • Further identify caller locations using text -to -speech • Allow customers to report their power outage and request a call back, • Perform outbound notifications to customers such as power restore verifications, planned outage notifications, etc. • Provic a outage status messages to callers using voice recordings and/or text to speech The Incident Management system should be capable of the following: • Receive outage reports from IVR, SCADA, AMR, Web or manually entered tickets from employ.�e workstations • Handle incidents for multiple service types, including electric, water, gas, waste -water, etc. • Show all open incidents in tabular view, distribution view and on interactive maps. • Interface directly to the CIS, GIS, Distribution Analysis System, and IVR. • Keep detailed history of outage reports by system, substation, circuit, and consumer • Retain history of previous device failures. • Outage indices shall be calculated upon request for the specified interval and will include SAIDI, CAIDI, SAIFI and ASAI V. SYSTEM INTERFACES The IVR and Outage systems shall communicate with the GUS's other systems via an Ethernet LAN. The vendur shall provide the LAN card for the IVR and Outage Systems. 2 For redundancy purposes, GUS requires the use of separate servers for the IVR and OMS systems. Please list the method(s) the vendor may use to interface with the following systems: • Billing or CIS System, Incode • SCADA, Wonderware/Intouch • Cisco AWID VoIP Phone System • GIS, ESRI, ArcGIS, Autodesk, AutoCad • IBM Lotus Notes email system • Distribution Analysis System • Netware eDirectory Services The system must be capable of accepting data base information from multiple sources or organizations. VI. COMPANY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE Please provide the background information for your company as requested below. General information including: • Mission/Vision statement • Company system development experience Vendor shall have demonstrated experience in establishing systems that may be operated from a large number of network and/or off site locations simultaneously. Vendor shall provide a list of at least five (5) utility installations of similar equipment already in place and in use for a period of one (1) year or longer. This list should include the name and location of the utility, a contact name and telephone number, approximate size of the utility, and the type of installation. VII. HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS Please provide minimum server requirements for both the IVR and OMS Servers. Please provide any minimum networking requirements for both the IVR and OMS Servers. Please provide minimum disk storage requirements and anticipated storage requirements for 3-5 year period of GUS use. Please also include the minimum workstation requirements for any computer that may access information from either of the systems. Please indicate any additional hardware requirements which might be needed for different levels of access, such as full access by dispatchers. Please provide cost estimate and recommended manufacturer for ALL necessary hardware associated with proposal. a. Server hardware b. Specialized Printers c. Any other hardware necessary or recommended (this includes any required remote equipment needed) Telephor iy Integration: System must be compatible with Cisco AWID H.323 phone gateways. K VIII. SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS All supplied back -end software must be based on the Microsoft Windows 2003 Server operating system. Identify all applications processing databases. Identify recommended file backup requirements. Identify any sendmail application requirements. All supplied client software must be compatible with Windows XP, SP2 and Internet Explorer 6.0. Describe all license requirements for delivered system and future expansions, All supplied software must utilize SQL or MY SQL applications. The system must be capable of operation from multiple remote locations, via internet or network connections. Please describe capability and any limitations. Supplied software must incorporate user log on control to allow or limit access to certain programs, reports or administrative features. Please describe the method for updating workstation software when new upgrades are available. The system must provide an automatic process for backing up all system software and outage data. Please describe. IX. REQUIRED INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE SYSTEM FEATURES The system shall interface with the existing City of Georgetown's VoIP PBX. Please describe the types of interfaces available and if any additional hardware is required to complete the interface. The system shall be capable of simultaneously answering and processing a minimum of 12 incoming calls. Please describe the process a caller goes through to enter an outage report into the outage system. Describrhow the system handles customers on disconnect lists to ensure proper reporting. Please describe how the system will handle callers that have an existing ticket in the out;.ge system. Will the system be able to know by the location of the caller that they are in an area that i_< known to be out of power or not in the service area? If so please describe. The system should have multi-lingual capabilities. Which languages are supported? The system must be able to recognize calls from priority customers as defined by the utility company. The system should be capable of verifying outage location address and other information usinc_ text -to -speech technology. 21 Please describe the available IVR reports. The system must be able to recognize calls from customers with multiple accounts or meters and distinguish which location is calling in the problem. System should have the ability to transfer by department differently, depending on the time of day and day of week. The system must capture the date and time of each call. The system must provide a method for changing the main company menu to speak any of the following: • A generic message stating that GUS is aware of outages and is experiencing a high volume of calls, • A specific message that speaks areas where outages are occurring, • Ability to record a specific message stating the areas where outages are occurring, the cause of the outages, and expected restore time. GUS should also have the option from this screen to temporarily disable all call transfers to a live person, and simply forward the calls to voice mail. The system must provide the ability for changing or re-recording voice prompts. Please indicate whether this feature is standard and if GUS has the ability to do their own recordings. The system must have a means for tracking all customer -recorded messages. This feature must include an on screen icon which identifies the customer call record as having a recording attached. On-site and off-site personnel must be able to easily retrieve these recorded messages. The system should clearly indicate when a message has been played (heard) at least once. Playback of messages should be through the PC speakers. System should allow information retrieved from the message to be entered in the customer record or trouble ticket. The system must have the ability to call back customers who called in using a touch tone telephone to verify restoration of power. The system must accept input from the customer indicating whether their power is on or off. If the customer indicates that service has not been restored, the system will automatically generate a new trouble ticket and highlight the caller's call record on the screen. The system should also indicate the status of the call out process to each customer (no answer, busy signal, not available, etc.) The IVR must have the ability to run multiple applications on separate lines simultaneously. The system shall have the ability to perform employee call out functions and record a re-,ponse from the employee. The system must have a storm mode that answers all calls. Descrlbe any overflow call handling provided. Describe a# available Automated Customer Service Modules available along with costs and interface requirements. Describe any web solutions offered along with associated costs to implement. X. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 5 The main functionality of the Incident Management System is to give dispatch, operations, and management the tools they need to better locate problems, manage outages and get power back on. The IMS shall import the line connectivity model from AutoCad/USMap. The IMS shall receive outage reports directly from the IVR, or by manually entered reports from workstations. The software for workstations shall provide color -coded outage input screens which provide the customer service representative information on the outage to inform the caller. This information shall include: a) Display if outage has been confirmed b) Display the cause of the outage and when first reported c) Display if an outage crew has been dispatched with a time and date d) Display the estimated restore time The system shall also display scripts for customer service representatives to ask customers about the occurrence. The system must provide some level of outage management capability beyond the simple sorting of trouble calls by common device. It must support sorting information by any field and provide prediction of device causing outage based on system connectivity model. The system should display outage reports in a tabular format and provide the ability to sort and display outage reports in a variety of fashions. The system should have the ability to display system connectivity, group outage reports under various devices that make up the electrical system, and predict the failed device based upon incoming reports. Dispatchers need to be able to simultaneously enter outage tickets, review predictions, update predictions, indicate outage restorations and provide up-to-date information from the outage system to crews from 5 locations. The system should display the number of customers affected by the outage and the number of customers who have called about the outage. Please explain the process used to display outage reports to AutoCad/USMap If multiple viewers are supported, please list all options available. Tne system shall allow keeping a trouble ticket open so it is not restored along with its device. The OMS should provide a method for keeping personnel and customers informed of current outage statistics. Please describe. The system should graphically identify priority customers as defined by the GUS. It should maintain priority flags throughout the system, on reports and displays. The system should provide standard outage history reports by device, consumer, date and time ranges, etc. It should also provide tools to edit and change outage history, customer counts, device causes etc. Outage reports must include: a) Outage history by cause, customer, location, circuit, device b) Active outage tickets by substation and feeder 6 C) Call back request list d) Reliability reports such as SAIDI, LAID, SAIFI and ASAI. e) FEMA report Ability to handle planned and unplanned outages. Ability to handle partial or incomplete restorations. Please describe any remote notification available that will alert utility personnel of large outages, Please describe any remote notification alerts available to notify personnel when key accounts are out of power. The system must allow real-time shifting of feeds and customers and allow lockout/tagout functionality. XI. BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR SCADA INTERFACE A SCADA interface should automatically report device status directly to the OMS and confirm or open a device ticket. This interface must tie to the IVR system and inform callers if they are in the area affected by a SCADA outage. This interface should include automatic status updating of OMS regarding SCADA alarms and instant text messaging to pagers or cell phones indicating type of alarm and location. XII. REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION Remote administration is required. Please explain methods used and security provided. System must provide method for easily adding and modifying users and their access levels in the system. Periodic software updates must be done remotely with the ability to update new software to the workstations. Please describe this process. Customer file downloads must be able to be performed without the assistance from GUS. XIII. INSTALLATION, TRAINING & DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS Pricing for the IVR and OMS Systems shall include all on-site visits including installation and training as well as first and subsequent years` annual support maintenance. Please indicate optional support solutions and associated annual costs. The vendor will provide installation of the IVR and OMS hardware and software. Travel expenses are also to be included in this pricing. Please describe any pre -installation meetings that are required. Will travel expenses and time for meetings be included? 7 Please describe the training classes provided during system installation. Please include a copy of the course outline. XIV. WARRANTY AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS Vendor will provide a six month warranty on all system hardware and software. List all anticipated costs for immediate and ongoing maintenance. Describe how upgrades and new releases are purchased. Are they a part of the continuing maintenance charges? Describe fully any maintenance agreements offered along with how costs are calculated and all software and hardware components covered. This should also include how future expansions are addressed. Indicate minimum response time for: • Support during business hours • Support after business hours • On-site maintenance Please describe any automated 24-hour system monitoring programs used by the system to test system health, software operability, network connections, etc. XV. DELIVERY AND PACKAGING All equipment is to be delivered F.O.B. to: Georgetown Utility Systems 300-1 Industrial Georgetown, TX 78626 Each piece of equipment shall be properly boxed to prevent any damage during shipping and handling. XVI. BID EVALUATION CRITERIA Proposals will be evaluated using, but not limited to, the following criteria. The order is not indicative of importance. Favorable references from current electric utility accounts. Previous experience in developing IVR systems for electrical utilities. The software capabilities of the system and how they meet the requirements of this specification. The performance, expansion/upgrade capability, compatibility with existing systems and reliability of the hardware proposed. 8 The availability and quality of maintenance and support services for the hardware and software proposed. Price. The award shall be made to one vendor for the entire package. Each vendor must bid on all of the items listed in the package or the bid may be considered non-responsive. XI dataVoice Intemational, Inc. Milson Centuron IVR and dVIMS Pricing City of Georgetown CIS: Incode Phone:CISCO LCM:AutoCad US Map - . • - $6,000.00 $88,800.00 ow M nyInco" Haming Lines Will dataVoice Answer? $6,240.00 $16,340.00 How Many Out Bound Lines Will dataVoice Use? $2,080.00 $5,000.00 VOIP IVR to Phone System Integration Fee $8,500.00 $3,500.00 Intel IVR Hardware Required? $0.00 Message Board (Unlimited Licenses) VOIP Server $0.00 Speech Recognition (System can handle max of 48 lines per server) $7,200.00 $1,500.00 Voice Recognition Application Development $10,000.00 $2,000.00 Overflow Call Handling $0.00 System Administration Tools Number of Lines Needed For Overflow Call Management $3,500.00 Monthly Fee For Overflow (includes unlimited callsrno long dist.) $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Optional Components for IVR: Include IVR Modules? Yes/No Multilingual Functionality to IVR Yes $2,500.00 $1,850.00 'Includes standard functionality to provide Spanish Language - Specialized rewrdings are billed separately Include avlrht:i r $75,000.00 $67,560.00 dvIMS Server Required $0.00 $2,420.00 View Open Incidents - Unlimited $3,500.00 $3,500.00 Message Board (Unlimited Licenses) $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Incident Entry -(Unlimited) Color Coded Screens $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Automatic Upload of New Customer File $2,000.00 $2,000.00 System Administration Tools $3,500.00 $3,500.00 Reporting Module - Individual and Device Outage History $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Include IVR Modules? Yes/No Standard IVR Modules $19,000.00 Automated Outage Ticket Entry through IVR $3,500.00 $2,420.00 Identification of Multiple Accounts $1,000.00 Acknowledgement of Existing Ticket $1,500.00 Address Validation Using Text To Speech $3,000.00 Automatic Notification of Outages By Name $1,500.00 Optional IVR Modules: Priority Account Recognition Yes $500.00 Storm Mode - Customer Message System Yes $6,500.00 Call Customers Verify Restored Power Yes $5,000.00 Employee Call Out $0.00 After Hours Notification of Outages No $0.00 Planned Outage Notification No$0.00 dvIMS Options: GISlEngineering Analysis Available? ® $0.00 $40,000.00 Prediction Engine $7,500.00 $7,500-00 Device Management - Unlimited Licenses $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Connectivity Information GIS $12,000.00 Additional Service Types for Tracking Incidents 2 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Branch Offices $0.00 Threshold Notification to Managers No $0.00 Check Disconnect List Yes $3,500.00 Key Account Management No $0.00 SCADA Interface Yes $12,500.00 $25,000.00 Mapping Interface Yes $10,000.00 Mail Merge to Customers Downline No $0.00 Outage Status Maps via Web yes $4,500.00 Installation, Design and Training $11,875.00 $15,800.00 Final dvIMS Total: $157,895.00 $223,830.00 International, Inc. AMR Power Verification Labor Installation $0.00 Final AMR Data Analysis Software SubTotal: $0.00 Payment Arrangements/Extension No $0.00 Input Meter Reading No $0.00 Payment by Credit Card - Via 3rd Parry Internet No $0.00 Payment by Check No $0.00 Annual Meeting Reminders No $0.00 Marketing Campaigns No $0.00 New Customer/Member Greeting Calls No $0.00 Validate and Update Customer Phone Numbers No $0.00 Customer Satisfaction Surveys No $0.00 Call Delinauent Accounts , . en nn Payment By Check Workstation Software No $0.00 Monthly Credit Card Draft Processing Software No $0.00 Payment By Credit Card Via Web No $0.00 Payment By Check Via Web $0.00 Account Balance/Payment Information No $0.00 Usage History and Graphs No $0.00 Payment Extensions No $0.00 Report Power Outage/Check Status No $0.00 Milsoft Centuron Software System Pricing Installation $157,895.00 and Labor dvIMS Total AMR Data Analysis Software $0.00 Automated Customer Service Modules Total $0.00 Web Solution Interfaces Total $0.00 Total Software System Pricing $157,895.00 $223,830.00 OptionsMaintenance Coverage/Warranty Premier Maintenance Package $16,304.25 $31,680.00 Standard Maintenance Package %10,869.50 dataVoice provides a caller ID interface from the phone system to the dataVoice system, but does not provide any additional hardware or software required by the telephone system to get caller ID Note: The above system pricing includes 5 seat licenses for Windows 2003 Server. If you feel that more than 5 users will be logged on to the outage server at any one given time, you may contact Microsoft to purchase additional seat licenses. PRICING IS HONORED FOR 90 DAYS FROM MARCH 1, 2007 discount Evaluated Price Engineering integration -$54,500.00 $157,895.00 $169,330.00 $156,360.00 $35,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 Total evaluated cost $192,895.00 $169,330.00 $256,360.00 Outage Management System (OMS) and Integrated Voice Response (IVR) Cost to Integrate into Total Evaluated Vendor Adjusted Bid existing database Cost Milsoft Utility Solutions" $169,330.00 100% compatible $169,330.00 Selected Vendor with best overall pricing and functionality Engineer Estimate at DataVoice Int. $157,895.00 $35,000.00 $192,895.00 New Mapping Centurion $156,360.00 Database Required $256,000.00 "" Recommended award DataVoice also has the capability to utilize our current system, however, would require a more complicated integration into our proposed mapping and Engineering systems at an estimated cost of $35,000.00 Centurion would require a conversion of existing information before integrating into the OMS & IVR Agenda Item Check List LSLMUM Financial Impact Agenda Item: Agenda Item Subject: Is this a Capital Improvement Project: Council Date: Considerations and award of bid for Utility Outage Management, Integrated Voice Response System to Milsoft Utility Solutions Award of bid for Outage Management, Integrated Voice Response System for GUS • Yes O No 08/14/2007 link to Agenda database => Q Need Help? Was it budgeted? 0 Yes O No Is it within the approved budgeted amount? 0 Yes O No If not, where is the money coming from? G/L Account Number 610-120-5601 Amount Going to Council $ 169,330.00 Is there something (budgeted) that won't get O Yes 0 No done because you are spending these funds? If so, please explain. Will this have an impact on the next year's O Yes 0 No budget? If so, please explain. Does this project have future revenue impact? Year: 2008 and beyond If so, how? Identify all on-going costs (i.e., insurance, • Yes O No Department: Enhanced service restoration $31,680.00 annual maintenance fees, licenses, operational costs, etc...). Estimated staff hours: Cross -divisional impact: • Yes O No If so, what division(s)1 Information Technology Prepared by: Mike Mayben Date: 08/06/2007 9_genda Item Checklist: In Process Lara I Utility Financial Analyst Approval Cycle Settings