Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Public Works, Utilities and Public Safety 2010-10-14Preparation date: October 4, 2010 * Revision date: October 6, 2010 ** Revision date: October 7, 2010 AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK PUBLIC SAFETY, UTILITIES & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE October 14, 2010 8:00 a.m. Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. PUBLIC SAFETY a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement. Chief Kufeld. b) REPORTS i) None. 3. UTILITIES a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Water Department Vehicle Replacement - 2003 GMC 2500HD Utility Truck #9037. Superintendent Mahany. b) REPORTS i) Renewable Systems. Director Goehring. 4. PUBLIC WORKS a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD ** i) 2010 Concrete Rehabilitation. Director Zurn. b) REPORTS * i) Self -Compacting Trash Cans. Deputy Town Administrator Richardson. ii) Concrete Rehab Update. Director Zurn. (Moved to Action Item). iii) Pothole Patcher & Roller and Street Sweeper. Superintendent Mahany. 5. ADJOURN a) Meeting adjourned to inspect new Public Works equipment. NOTE: The Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. Jackie Williamson From: Admin iR3045 Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 2:56 PM To: Jackie Williamson Subject: Job Done Notice(Send) ***************************** *** Job Done Notice(Send) *** ***************************** JOB NO. 3521 ST. TIME 10/07 14:51 PGS. 1 SEND DOCUMENT NAME TX/RX INCOMPLETE TRANSACTION OK 5869561 KEPL 5869532 Trail Gazette 5861691 Channel 8 6353677 Reporter Herald 6922611 EP News ERROR Preparation date: October 4, 2010 * Revision date: October 6, 2010 AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK PUBLIC SAFETY, UTILITIES & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE October 14, 2010 8:00 a.m. Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. PUBLIC SAFETY a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement. Chief Kufeld. b) REPORTS i) None. 3. UTILITIES a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Water Department Vehicle Replacement - 2003 GMC 2500HD Utility Truck #9037. Superintendent Mahany. b) REPORTS i) Renewable Systems. Director Goehring. 4. PUBLIC WORKS a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) None. b) REPORTS * i) Self -Compacting Trash Cans. Deputy Town Administrator Richardson. ii) Concrete Rehab Update. Director Zurn. iii) Pothole Patcher & Roller and Street Sweeper. Superintendent Mahany. 5. ADJOURN a) Meeting adjourned to inspect new Public Works equipment. NOTE: The Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. Preparation date: October 4, 2010 * Revision date: October 6, 2010 AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK PUBLIC SAFETY, UTILITIES & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE October 14, 2010 8:00 a.m. Board Room, Town Hall 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 2. PUBLIC SAFETY a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement. Chief Kufeld. b) REPORTS i) None. 3. UTILITIES a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) Water Department Vehicle Replacement - 2003 GMC 2500HD Utility Truck #9037. Superintendent Mahany. b) REPORTS i) Renewable Systems. Director Goehring. 4. PUBLIC WORKS a) RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD i) None. b) REPORTS * i) Self -Compacting Trash Cans. Deputy Town Administrator Richardson. ii) Concrete Rehab Update. Director Zurn. iii) Pothole Patcher & Roller and Street Sweeper. Superintendent Mahany. 5. ADJOURN a) Meeting adjourned to inspect new Public Works equipment. NOTE: The Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. Jackie Williamson From: Admin iR3045 Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 4:35 PM To: Jackie Williamson Subject: Job Done Notice(Send) ***************************** *** Job Done Notice(Send) *** ***************************** JOB NO. 3510 ST. TIME 10/06 16:30 PGS. 1 SEND DOCUMENT NAME TX/RX INCOMPLETE TRANSACTION OK 5869561 KEPL 5869532 Trail Gazette 5861691 Channel 8 6353677 Reporter Herald 6922611 EP News ERROR Jackie Williamson From: Admin iR3045 Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 3:48 PM To: Jackie Williamson Subject: Job Done Notice(Send) ***************************** *** Job Done Notice(Send) *** ***************************** JOB NO. 3501 ST. TIME 10/06 15:41 PGS. 1 SEND DOCUMENT NAME TX/RX INCOMPLETE TRANSACTION OK 5869561 KEPL 5869532 Trail Gazette 5861691 Channel 8 6353677 Reporter Herald 6922611 EP News ERROR 110 11111111111111 N o 1511' 1' iii111111111111111,1111111111111111,1111111k ""' 11111111111i1111111111:1111111111110111:1E1ii.11.11 1011'1.61111100 11111 „, „11,,,„VOVIVI111I01111111I1I1I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111?, 111111111111111111111 111,1111111111111111111111111111111111111100 To: Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works Committee From: Wes Kufeld, Chief of Police Date: October 5, 2010 RE: Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement Background: The Police Department has provided School Resource Officer (SRO) services to the Park School District R-3 since 2005. Beginning the 2009 /2010 school year, the district agreed to and has paid $20,000.00 each school year. This revenue is utilized to offset overtime costs associated with the SRO position. On March 9th, 2010, the Staff of Park R-3 School approached the Town Board and presented "Colorado Education Funding and the effects on Park R3 School District". Superintendent Linda Chapman, at that presentation, commented on the importance and need of the School Resource Officer at the schools. She also commented that the District is hoping the town will be of assistance in allowing the School Resource Officer to continue without funding from the school. On June 17th, 2010, the Town received a letter of request from Park School District formally asking for the $20,000.00 fee to be waived and to continue the needed SRO services. The Memo of Understanding has been modified to reflect the services for the 2010/2011 school year. The hours of operation has been changed limiting the SRO to three days per week. Budget: Due to the School District's inability to fund the $20,000 to offset the expense for SRO being in the schools, the cost to the Town is $12,000 a year to have an SRO in the schools three days a week. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement and placed on the October 26, 2010 Town Board agenda as a Consent item. Page 1 Excellent Education for Every Student in Every Classroom Every Day! June 17, 2010 Town of Estes Park Wes Kufeld, Chief of Police P.O. Box 1287 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Chief Kufeld, Adminish7ati on Park District. 1605 BK.:lie Avetni Estes Park., Colorado. :1A:k517 970-5,16-2361 Fax 970-51?4-111:kt %VW W. eslessdlools. Park School District R-3 has benefitted greatly by the School Resource Officer services provided by the Estes Park Police Department. The presence of an SRO has assisted the school district in maintaining a safe school environment for students as well as for staff and community. The SRO has not only provided a police presence in our schools, but has also built a better rapport between students and law enforcement agencies. The school district has been able to provide more educational health and safety programs that are delivered to students directly through the SRO. At the secondary level, the SRO has become a role model for students and presented a career possibility for students to consider and explore. As a result of the positive impact an SRO has had in the school district, it is in the best interests of the school district to request that the SRO program be continued. Unfortunately, our budget has decreased substantially for the 2010-2011 school year, and the priorities must remain in the classroom. Please consider funding this position for us until we begin to recover financially, at least for the 2010-2011 school year. Thank you for considering this proposal. Sincerely, C Linda Chapman Superintendent of Schools AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), made and entered into the 21st, day of October, 2010, by and between: THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT R-3 (hereinafter referred to as "BOARD") AND TOWN OF ESTES PARK (hereinafter referred to as "TOWN") WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the BOARD desires the TOWN to have a police officer serve as a School Resource Officer in all of its schools to assist in maintaining safe school environments, to improve school law enforcement collaboration, and to improve perceptions and relations between students, staff and law enforcement officials. WHEREAS, the BOARD and the TOWN both recognize the outstanding benefits that the School Resource Officer program has for the citizens of Estes Park and particularly for the students attending the BOARD'S schools. The parties agree that it is in the best interests of the BOARD, The TOWN, and the citizens of the community to continue the program as set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TOWN 1.01 TOWN shall provide one (1) School Resource Officer (hereinafter referred to as SRO) to the school campus operated by the BOARD 24 hours per week or (3) school days per week, when school is in session: Estes Park R-3 Elementary 1505 Brodie Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Estes Park R-3 Middle School 1500 Manford Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Estes Park R-3 High School 1600 Manford Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 1.02 The SRO shall abide by BOARD Policies, regulations, and TOWN Policies, rules and regulations. 1.03 TOWN shall be responsible for the supervision, control, and direction of all aspects of employment of the police officer assigned to the SRO Program. However, the TOWN shall solicit input from the principals and Superintendent each year for evaluation and program effectiveness of the SRO program. 1.04 TOWN shall ensure that the exercise of the law enforcement powers by the SRO is in compliance with the authority granted by law. 1.05 The SRO shall not function as a school disciplinarian or security officer, and shall not intervene in the normal disciplinary actions of the school system, nor be used to witness any disciplinary procedures in the school. The SRO, at all times, will be expected to act within the scope of authority granted by law as a police officer and shall be expected to the following: (a) To perform daily law enforcement functions within the school setting. (b) To respond to emergency situations for the protection of students and staff consistent with the SRO's responsibility. (c) To identify and mitigate, through counseling and referral, delinquent behavior, including substance abuse. (d) To foster a better understanding of the law enforcement function. (e) To develop positive concepts of law enforcement. (f) To develop a better appreciation of citizen rights, obligations and responsibilities. (g) To provide information about crime prevention. (h) To provide assistance and support for crime victims identified within the school setting, including abused children. (i) To promote positive relations between students and law enforcement officers. (j) To enhance knowledge of the fundamental concept and structure of law. (k) To provide to students instruction in various aspects of law enforcement and education, emphasizing an educational component for students concerning policing practices and enforcement initiatives related to juvenile behavior. The SRO shall consult and coordinate instructional activities through the school principals. (1) To participate each year with career activities held by the schools. (m) To meet, when requested, with the Superintendent or her/his designee for the purpose of reviewing the needs of the schools relating to the SRO. (n) To provide information and reports allowed and required by Colorado law to the Superintendent or her/his designee relating to enrolled students within the Park R-3 School District and as it pertains to the Attorney Generals Order - Information sharing. (o) To support specific administrative actions taken by the building administrators and the Superintendent in maintaining a drug free school environment, such as locker and parking lot searches and to provide supportive resources (i.e. drug dogs) only when asked by the Superintendent of schools. (p) The SRO may, when requested, work closely with the schools primary emergency service provider for the coordination and planning of all crisis situations that potentially affect campus safety. (q) The TOWN shall ensure the SRO receives annual and updated training relevant to providing police services within the school environment. 1.06 Qualifications for officer assignment to the SRO program are: (a) The applicant must be a full-time peace officer, level 1 with full police authority as defined by C.R.S. §18-1-901(3)(1)(I), with a minimum of two (2) years of law enforcement experience. (b) Shall possess a sufficient knowledge of the applicable Federal and State laws. City and County ordinances, and Board of Education polices and regulations. (c) Shall have access to police resources to conduct criminal investigations. (d) Shall possess even temperament and set a good example for students. (e) Shall possess communication skills that would enable the officer to function effectively within the school environment. 1.07 The TOWN reserves the right to change the officer assigned to SRO duties during the course of the agreement. 1.08 The SRO shall be on duty at the school 24 hours per week or (3) school days per week, as determined by and at the sole discretion of the town, during regular school hours when students are required to attend, subject to the absence of the SRO for police department emergency needs, training needs or law enforcement requirements prohibit. A monthly schedule will be created and provided to building and district administration, outlining the days and hours that the SRO will be present. If absence must occur during these scheduled days, due to vacation or sick time, the SRO or department will notify the Administrative Assistant of the Superintendant, of the SRO's absence. Patrol Officers, while performing their regular patrol duties, will respond to calls for service, perform extra checks and walkthroughs and or offer support in the absence of the SRO. During non-scheduled days, district personnel will contact dispatch for police services. SECTION 2. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBLITIES OF BOARD 2.01 The principal or his/her designee at the designated school shall be the on -site contact person for the SRO and shall be responsible for communicating the day-to-day need of service from the SRO. The Superintendent shall ensure the SRO Program supports meeting the mission and vision of the BOARD within the school district. The Superintendent of Schools shall assign a designee to serve as the district liaison for the program. 2.02 The BOARD agrees to provide the SRO at each school an office to conduct matters of confidentiality with a desk, necessary office furnishings and a telephone. 2.03 The BOARD shall maintain control over the content of all educational programs and instructional materials. 2.04 SRO's shall have access to educational records under the following conditions: (a) Law enforcement access to educational records shall be in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as it pertains to the Attorney Generals Order relating to information sharing. (b) The SRO shall have access to confidential educational records to perform work that is directly related to their duties at the school. (c) Law Enforcement access to records for purposes outside the scope of the SRO's duties at the school shall be limited to: (1) Public information, such as yearbooks or student directory information (2) Information needed in an emergency to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals, based on the seriousness of the threat to someone's health or safety; the need of the information to meet the emergency situation and the extent to which time is of the essence. (3) If confidential student records information is needed, but no emergency situation exists, the information, depending on the situation, may be released by the school Principal or Superintendent. Otherwise, the records will be made available by the issuance of a search warrant or subpoena. (d) Law Enforcement records shall be made available by the Police Department to the Principal, Superintendant or designee, as described and in accordance to the Attorney Generals Order pertaining to information sharing. SECTION3. FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF SRO POSITION 3.01 SECTION 3. TERM OF AGREEMENT 3.01 This agreement shall be made for the duration of school each year, beginning the first day of student attendance through the last day of student attendance. 3.02 This agreement shall continue in effect until the duration of the term described in paragraph 3.01 or until terminated by either of the parties in accordance with the terms listed in Section 4 below. 3.03 The TOWN agrees to cover the cost for the SRO position in full for the contracted period, noting that the BOARD will work toward financial contribution to the program for future contracts. SECTION 4. TERMINATION 4.01 Either party may terminate this agreement by serving written notice upon the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of such termination. SECTION 5. INVALID PROVISION 5.01 Should any part of this Agreement be declared invalid by a court of law, such decision shall not affect the validity of any remaining portion which shall remain in full force and effect as if the invalid portion was never a part of this Agreement when it was executed. Should the severance of any part of this Agreement materially affect any other rights or obligations of the parties hereunder, the parties hereto will negotiate in good faith to amend this Agreement in a manner satisfactory to the parties. Failing agreement on such amendment, either party may by notice in writing, terminate this Agreement forthwith subject to the provisions of this Agreement relating to termination. SECTION 6. INDEMNIFICATION 6.01 The BOARD agrees to indemnify and save harmless the TOWN for any liability whatsoever arising out of the negligent acts of the BOARD's employees or agents. The TOWN agrees to indemnify and save harmless the BOARD of any liability whatsoever arising out of the negligent acts of the School Resource Officer or the TOWN. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to affect in any way the TOWN or the BOARD's rights, privileges, and immunities, including sovereign immunity as provided by law. The parties hereto understand and agree that the BOARD, the TOWN, and their officers and employees are relying on, and do not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this Agreement, the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. 24-10-101 et seq., as from time -to -time amended, or otherwise available by other provision of law to either party, their officers, or their employees. SECTION 7. ASSIGNMENT 7.01 Neither party to the Agreement shall, directly or indirectly, assign or purport to assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations in whole or in part to any third party without the prior written consent of the other party. SECTION 8. NO WAIVER 8.01 The failure of either party to enforce at any time any of the provisions, rights, or to exercise any elections provided, shall in no way be considered to be a waiver of such provisions, rights or elections or in any way effect the validity of the Agreement. The failure to exercise by either party any of its rights herein or any of its elections under the terms or conditions herein contained shall not preclude or prejudice it from exercising the same or any other right it may have under this Agreement, irrespective of any previous action or proceeding taken by it hereunder. SECTION 9. COMPLETE AGREEMENT 9.01 This Agreement is the complete Agreement of the parties; may be amended or modified only in writing; and supersedes, cancels and terminates any and all prior agreements or understandings of the parties, whether written or oral, concerning the subject matter hereof. SECTION 10. CHOICE OF LAW 10.01 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed and interpreted according to the laws of the State of Colorado. It shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors of the TOWN and BOARD. SECTION 11. NON-DISCRIMINATION PROVISION 11.01 The parties shall not discriminate against any employee or participant in this program because of race, age, religion, color, gender, national origin, martial status, disability, or sexual orientation. SECTION 12. NOTICE PROVISIONS 12.01 When any of the parties desire to give notice to the other, such notice must be in writing sent by US Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the party for whom it is intended at the place last specified; the place for giving notice shall remain such until it is changed by written notice in compliance with the provisions of the paragraph. For the present, the parties designate the following as the respective places for giving notices: To BOARD: To TOWN: AUTHORITY PROVISION Superintendent of Schools Park School District 1601 Brodie Avenue Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Town Administrator Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Each person signing this Agreement on behalf of either party individually warrants that he/she has full legal power to execute this agreement on behalf of the party for whom he/she is signing, and to bind and obligate such party with respect to all provisions contained in this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. PARK SCHOOL DISTRICT R-3 By Todd Jirsa President, Board of Education Date: TOWN OF ESTES PARK By Bill Pinkham Mayor Town of Estes Park Date: 1 11,,,livvl 1111111111111111 III, I'llil,11,1111,1,11 „iIIIIIIIIII thoillillillippliqpimi.11,11 11111111„Ilv1111111111,o1 I u 1 IIII1111 170 N oi 7,SITES • To: PUP Committee From: Dave Mahany, Public Works Superintendent Date: October 14, 2010 RE: Water Department Vehicle Replacement — 2003 GMC 2500HD Utility Truck #9037 Background: The 2010 Vehicle Replacement budget includes $40,000 (635-700-435.34-42, page 166) for the replacement of the Water Department's 2003 GMC 2500 HD Utility Truck. This truck is 7 years old with 86,747 miles; it is within the Vehicle Replacement Policy parameters, (Replacement Type 4 / 7-8 years or 80,000 — 90,000 miles). • Alternative fuel option: "No option available" for this type of equipment. Groove Ford, Centennial, CO 2011 Ford F350 4X4 w/ utility body $50,344.10 Trade-in: 2003 GMC 2500 Utility Truck $ 9,625.00 Bid Price $40,719.10 Sgradley Barr Ford, Fort Collins, CO 2011 Ford F350 4X4 w/utility body $51,821.00 Trade-in: 2003 GMC 2500 Utility Truck $ 9,000.00 Bid Price $42,821.00 Weld County Garage, Greeley, CO no bid received Transwest GMC, Henderson, CO no bid received Budget: $40,000.00 Vehicle Replacement Fund 635-7000-435.34-42 /p-166 $40,719.10 Cost Recommendation: I recommend trading the 2003 GMC Utility Truck and purchasing the budgeted 2011 Ford F350 4X4 w/utility body for $40,719.10 from Groove Ford of Centennial for the low bid of $40,719.10 to the Town Board, to be included on the Consent Agenda at the October 26, 2010 Town Board f R)WN OF ES111:.E.17 PARK 100 ,1111,11,11Aul 0111111119!1! To: PUP Committee From: Bob Goehring, Utilities Director Date: October 14, 2010 RE: Renewable Systems Report Background: Estes Park Light & Power (EPL&P) entered into partnerships with the Colorado Governor's Energy Office (GEO) to offer rebates on the installation of residential small wind turbines as a pilot program in 2008 and residential photovoltaic (solar) systems in 2009 and 2010. Each rebate program had $50,000 (half of which was provided by EPL&P) available to the Town's electric customers. Rebates for the wind turbine pilot program were calculated at $2/Watt up to a maximum of $5,000, and solar rebates are calculated at $3/Watt up to $9,000. Colorado House Bill 08-1160 sets limits on net metering to residential renewable systems rated at 10 and commercial renewable systems rated at 25 kilowatts. The EPL&P net metering agreement mirrors this requirement; however, no commercial rebates were offered through the solar program. These rebate programs began in response to numerous requests from our rate payers and in the interest of reducing local carbon emissions. In conjunction with offering the wind turbine pilot program rebates, the EPL&P joined the anemometer loan program through Colorado State University (CSU) in an effort to measure and categorize our wind conditions. An anemometer was installed on an existing 60-foot high light pole in Stanley Park in September, 2008. Every six months data is sent to CSU wind scientist Michael Kostrzewa, P.E., who analyzes the data. The results are posted on line at: http://www.enqr.colostate.edu/ALP/ALP 63 Estes Park.htm Response to the rebate programs was mixed. The pilot wind turbine rebates were never fully subscribed and funding was extended through 2009. Those interested in the solar rebates were wait -listed in 2009 and a lottery was held to determine the participants. In 2010, the administration of solar rebates was taken over by the GEO; at this time, the local solar rebates are fully subscribed for this year. The pilot program for wind rebates was discontinued by the end of 2009. Last month EPL&P polled participants in the 2008 and 2009 rebate programs to determine the customer's satisfaction with their renewable systems. They were asked three questions: 1. What type of renewable system did you install and when did you install it? 2. Are you happy with the performance of your system? 3. Do you feel your system is performing as indicated on your payback analysis? The poll also allowed for general comments. Out of 15 current net -metering customers polled (three of which did not participate in our rebate programs), six responses were received — two wind turbine users and four solar users. Of the two wind turbine participants, one is quite happy with the system and the other is very disappointed. John Stencel, who installed a Skystream 3.7 horizontal axis small wind turbine in February, 2009, is pleased with his system. His turbine was installed during his new home construction and is located about six miles east of Town off Highway 36. "Our home is entirely electric and each month since its installation, (the wind turbine) has decreased the cost of our electricity by 25-50%," said Stencel. He predicts that at this rate, the wind turbine will have paid for itself in 8-10 years. However, another wind turbine user — the system is a Helix vertical axis turbine — is unhappy with the system. The customer stated, "When we purchased the Helix S322 we were lead to believe that this system was proven and that is would reduce our electric bill and pay for itself over time. That is, obviously, not the case. "Our system has only produced 3.889 kilowatts total (over approximately 11 months); the payback analysis indicated that it would produce 5,000-6,000 kWh each year. Our bill has been higher than the previous year each month that we have had the generator in operation." This customer goes on to report receiving misleading information during the purchase and installation of the system and all attempts to correct the problems have failed. The customer's system is currently for sale on the secondary market. As a final comment, this customer stated, "We believe in renewable energy. Our hope is that this failure will not result in the end of wind power in Estes Valley; in 10 years a viable process will probably exist." All of the solar panel users who responded to the survey were generally satisfied with their systems. A customer who installed his system three years ago states he is very, very happy with the performance of his system. He was not a rebate recipient and installed a photovoltaic and solar thermal system three years ago. He feels his system is performing as indicated on his payback analysis, but cannot provide exact figures. "While it is a little early to evaluate a true average annual cost, our electric costs are very low and our propane usage is approximately 300 gallons/year." This customer goes on to say, "Solar should be a requirement of every new home construction." Patrick Hardman, who installed a ground -mounted solar electric 16-panel system and a roof -mounted 2-panel solar hot water system in June, 2009, is pleased. "The solar hot water system is doing so well that I have turned off the electric backup system as we have always had hot water without the need for backup. "Last year we landscaped the ground -mounted panels and moved one large pine tree to help with (neighborhood) aesthetic concerns which seems to have helped with the acceptance of this new technology to Estes Park." Another solar customer installed solar on new buildings as they were being built. The homes have not been sold and are currently empty, but "we are rolling up a lot of credit, as electric use is limited," he reported. The fourth respondent has a total of six 6 kW of solar panels installed and is happy with the performance of his system, "with qualifications." "I expected to be able to generate more power from it than I seem to be getting," he said. He feels the system is not really performing as indicated on his payback analysis. In conclusion, it seems that the owners' satisfaction with their systems vary significantly in each case. Wind may not be a viable option at this time for this area, but the technology for photovoltaic and solar thermal systems are promising, but expensive. II III110,011 III �II IIIIIII vo 11111114111111111111111 p, l li i llll1i,i 111111.. i 0 ii Iqii • To: PUP Committee From: Scott A. Zurn, PE, CFPM, Public Works Director Date: October 14, 2010 RE: 2010 Concrete Rehabilitation Background: The Public Works Department is planning to do concrete replacement in the 100 block of East Elkhorn, the Riverwalk, the 100-300 blocks of West Elkhorn, Cleave Street area, Ptarmigan Trail, and 4th Street in 2010. Public Works plans to start the work following Town Board, and Contract approval. Staff organized a list of priorities based on concrete surface quality, pedestrian safety issues and the age, damage, and wear of sidewalks, curbs and trails. Request for price quote packages were provided to all four of the insured, local concrete companies and bids were received October 7, 2010. Bryson Concrete Company Jon Bryson No bid Cornerstone Construction Concepts Kerry Prochaska $ 63,980 Cornerstone Concrete Company Robert Pavlish $ 50,650 Mountain Concrete Company Scott Miller No bid Staff requests to proceed with the project. We will modify quantities to stay within the budget and proceed as weather permits. Budget: 101-3100-431-35.51 Annual Concrete Rehab $50,000 Recommendation: I recommend awarding the contract for the 2010 concrete rehabilitation to Cornerstone Concrete Company for an amount not to exceed the budget of $50,000 to the Town Board, to be included on the Consent Agenda at the October 26, 2010, Town Board meeting. lot 11111111 1 111110 1 Self -Compacting Trash Cans. This will be a verbal report by Deputy Town Administrator Richardson 1111 IIII eport To: From: Date: PUP Committee Dave Mahany, Public Works Superintendent October 14, 2010 RE: Inspection of New Public Work Equipment 111111111111111 Background: The Public Works Department purchased three essential pieces of equipment for the Streets Department in 2010 — a street sweeper, an asphalt roller, and a pothole patcher. The street sweeper was purchased in August through the Vehicle Replacement Fund (VRF) for $149,012. The VRF contained $185,000 for this scheduled replacement which was needed because the existing sweeper was 14 years old and its operating costs has risen to $39.69 per hour (normal is $18-$21). The asphalt roller was contained in the 2010 Street Department budget as a new piece of equipment, necessary to help staff repair local streets. The used roller was purchased in July from MacDonald Equipment Company of Commerce City, CO for $20,5000 ($25,000 was budgeted). The pothole patcher, another new piece of equipment, was purchased in June as a budgeted expense for $34,097, also from MacDonald Company. The budget contained $47,300 for this expense. All of this equipment was delivered last week and are parked in the lot today for your inspection.