Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Public Works Committee 2002-06-12TOWN BOARD GOALS 2002-2004 GOAL #6: Implementation of Cardboard Recycling Team Meeting #1 - June 12, 2002 3:30 p.m. Members present: Stephen Gillette, Sue Doylen, Pete Brandjord, Bill Linnane Members absent: None Purpose: To determine Action Steps and Timeline. 1. Possible Locations: The pros and cons of the Parks Shop, old Light & Power Shop, Water Shop, and the existing recycling area at the Transfer Station were discussed. All of the areas except the Transfer Station would need either surveillance cameras or personnel to prevent problems. It was decided to focus on the existing recycling area at the Transfer Station. 2. Containers: A recycling center could either have a self-compacting roll-off container or basic non-compacting container similar to the ones used by the high school during its cardboard recycling attempt this past spring. 3. Costs: The following recycling costs and revenues were discussed: 1.10\© • Recycled cardboard revenue: $30 to ©26·per ton • Cost to transport 40-yard receiver: $250 per trip (twice per week) • Cost of small roll-off: $3,000 4. Concerns: The recycling area at the Transfer Station is currently congested and Larimer County is sensitive to increasing this congestion with another recycling item. Stephen will talk to the Larimer County Natural Resources Director, Janelle Henderson, to see if the county would be open to the addition of cardboard recycling on a trial basis at the Transfer Station. Stephen will try to set up a meeting with the Cardboard Recycling Committee, Waste Management and Janelle Henderson for 4 p.m. Wednesday, June 10. The purpose ofthe meeting is to discuss temporary cardboard recycling at the Transfer Station. This would be a non-compaction type of recycling. Waste Management will be asked to donate dumpsters in the off-season for this trial effort. Next meeting: 1. The next meeting of the Team is scheduled to take place at 4 p.m. Wednesday, June 19, in the Administrative Conference Room. Bill Linnane, Team Leader cc: Mayor and Trustees 4-4 /E TOWN BOARD GOALS 2002-2004 GOAL #6: Implementation of Cardboard Recycling Team Meeting #2 - Julie 19,2002 4:00 p.m. Members present: Rick Hurt, Waste Management Mgr., Stephen Gillette, Sue Doylen, Bill Linnane Members absent: Betty Kilsdonk Bob Joseph Purpose: To determine feasibility and schedule of a cardboard recycling trial period. As requested by Stephen Gillette, Rick Hurt handed out lease/purchase costs for three different unmanned trash compactors. The prices vary from: $828/mo - $1,000/mo for a 3-year lease $553/mo - $ 706/mo for a 5-year lease Rather than enter into a capital expense program that may not be successful, it was decided and agreed by all parties (Town, Larimer County, Waste Management) to set up a recycling trial period from October through December. Waste Management will supply the rolloffs and Larimer County will absorb the hauling costs. One cardboard rolloff will be placed adjacent to the existing recycling bins. Cardboard access to the rolloffs will be similar to the type used by the school this spring (small openings). When the rolloffs get full, Waste Management will transport the rolloffto the landfill and replace with an empty bin. After 4 or 5 rolloffs are full and stored at the landfill, Waste Management will move them back to the transfer station for crushing and transport to Fort Collins. Larimer County will keep all recycle revenue. If the demand is such that Waste Management is spending too many man-hours on the roll-off, jockeying between our landfill and the transfer station, they will let us know and ask for reimbursement. It is vague as to what is determined as too many man-hours. The proposed trial period cardboard recycle plan will be presented at the August Public Works Committee meeting to ask for approval to proceed. Unfortunately the trial period will not coincide with the budget process. Since hauling costs and C- d :•1 46 - et-' th. -eempesitien. roll-off lease costs could be as high as $3,000/month ($2,000 hauling, $1000 lease) a rough recycle program cost estimate may need to be plugged into the budget. It should be noted that summer cardboard recycling demand may be estimated by using the trial period cardboard percentage of total trash and applying it to the summer trash volume. Next meeting: 1. The next meeting ofthe Team is scheduled to take place on Thursday, August 15, in the Board Room. ' Bill Linnane, Team Leader cc: Mayor and Trustees 4-5 444 =22 lief WASTE MANAGEMEN ~ , I il Central Rcpon #05.3.1 Northern Colorade DR,·ihint: 680 Eli·ti :*.·.·:i.:.1 P.O. 11'x llc Estes Patk, CO 805 1 7 (970) 586-5740 (970) 586-2077 E-,x 2*%934»«44%44*4©92~3:2.:F:~47-.. ·i~%2.~·fr-fil- :-L7. .~.17;;t=neifkus>:6:1:June-191?:2002 Steven Gillette - Council Member Town of Estes Park PO Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Steven Gillette: During the past months, the Town of Estes Park has benefited from some of the services Waste Management of Estes Park provides to handle your waste needs. We appreciate the opportunity we have had to do business with you, and look forward to continuing our partnership. Recently, you indicated your increasing concern about implementing a recycling program. I know this is important to you, as it is for many of the municipal customers we service. An effective recycling program is not only good for community relations, it's good business, too. For example, an aggressive recycling program can lower the volume of waste hauled from the Town, reducing or stabilizing the citizens costs. This recommendation is based on having completed key steps in the WM of EP process. In particular, we have discussed your business objectives. I will call you soon to discuss details of the service we are recommending. I am confident this solution will address your needs. In the meantime, please call me at (970) 586-5740 if you have any questions. Thank you for your continued business. Sincerely, lgL,5/or.Li, Rick Hurt District Manager 4-6 zervice . 11 4 *§94490NF0RIHEEE.~.:gz~N 3244144 · When it comes to handling commercial recycling, you can count on Waste Management of Estes Park. The service outlined in this proposal is designed to give you the most out of your recycling program. WM of EP is committed to ensuring the success of your recycling program. Cardboard Recycling Drop Off Center Commercial Recycle Waste Pricing Summary Service Type Quantity Size Frequency Charge Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 3 year term $828.38/mo 225 VL w/2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (basic options) Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 5 year term $553.49/mo 225 VL w/ 2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (basic options) Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 3 year term $880.06/mo 225 VL w/ 2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (same as above w/ electric eye start) Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 5 year term $589.22 225 VL ~ w/ 2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (Same as above w/ electric eye start) 1 ©Information in this proposal is confirlential And nrnnerty of Waste Management of Estes Park. 4-7 Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 3 year term $1,050.31/mo 225 VL w/ 2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (same as above with electric eye start and trashminder) Marathon RJ 1 2 yd packer 5 year term $706.91/mo 225 VL w/ 2 - 40yd Compactor reciever Lease boxes /Purchase (same as above w/ electric eye start and trashminder) Cardboard 1 40 Yd as needed $250.00 per Compactor Compactor (estimate pick-up Hauling weekly Price hauling) Basic Options include: Locking Doghouse with cardboard slit 220 V Single phase motor with Soft Start Auto shut down Oil heater ©Information in this proposal is conf 1 -,-A nrnnorh, of Waste Management of Estes Park. 4-8 . -. 'vivil. n VALUE-ADDED SERVICES In addition to the variety of environmental services that WM of EP offers you, we also provide some excellent benefits that will bring additional value to your overall service. Service Flexibility. We know that as your business changes, your waste removal needs may change, too. That's why we believe in providing flexible service options, including the ability to schedule extra pickups if needed. We want our service to match your needs. KEY DiFFERENTIATORS We know that you have a clear choice when it comes to environmental service and waste removal companies. So, why buy the products and services you need from WM of EP? The answer is simple: by working with the best provider, you obtain the best results. And there are certain key factors that make us unique in the industry and that translate into a powerful partnership for the Town. Community Involvement. When you choose WM of EP, you're choosing a company that's right in your neighborhood. Even though we're part of North America's largest provider of waste services, we're based here locally. Our employees are your neighbors and the people who live and work in your community. ilnformation in this proposal is confidential and property of Waste Management of Estes Park. 4-9 u I c ii, ' '.1 AGENDA TOWN OF ESTES PARK PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 19, 2002 8:00 A. M. Preparation date: 9/13/02 *Revision date: 9/16/02 1. YMCA Bulk Water Emergency Tap Request approval 2. Municipal Building Ist Floor Remodel Preliminary Design Scope of Services Request approval 3. Riverside Drive Retaining Wall and Roadway Project Request approval to award bid *4. Water Rights Fee Update Report Request approval of Black and Veatch Scope of Services 1. Willows Condos/Fall River Trail 2. Cardboard Recycling project Note: The Public Works Committee reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. TOWN of ESTES PARK Inter-Office Memorandum DATE: September 16, 2002 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Bill Linnane /'£/~- C SUBJECT: YMCA Emergency Tap Request Background: The YMCA has sent us the attached letter requesting an emergency use tap. This tap would be identical to the emergency tap for Park Entrance Estates. The tap would be physically connected during an emergency only which we interpret as a severe drought condition or a YMCA treatment plant failure. The YMCA would prepare an agreement stipulating: 1) The emergency use only; 2) Town personnel only would connect and disconnect the tap; 3) YMCA agrees to the bulk water rate; 4) YMCA will prepare construction plans of the connection to be approved by the Town; 5) YMCA is or shall be included in the NCWCD prior to the tap connection. Cost/Budget N/A Action: Staff recommends approval of the Emergency Tap. BL/mjs Attachment 1-1 4'· '1-771 '*2· ~-V YMCA OF THE ROCKIES ~F=TVE Mr. Rich Widmer, Town Administrator Town of Estes Park P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 September 6,2002 Dear Rich: The YMCA of the Rockies would like to inquire about the feasibility and associated costs of having a tap from the Estes Park municipal,water supply for bulk water at our Estes Park Center. This water would be used only in the event of an emergency caused by a situation such as loss of our treatment plant capability or extreme drought conditions. Such a tap would need to be sufficient to provide for our center's water needs for a short period of time during our peak season, summer. Please let me know what information is needed from us to study the feasibility of such a tap. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely yours, M. Kent Meyer, Pre#Ment/CEO YMCA of the Rockies MKM/ns Schlessman Center Executive Offices Estes Park, CO 80511-2800 (970) 586-4444 (970) 586-6088 (FAX) (303) 448-1615 (Denver line) www. ymcarockies.org E-mail: info@ymcarockies.org 1-2 1 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: PUBUC WORKS OOMMITIEE FROM: FIRST FLOORDESIGN COMMITIEE: PETE BRANDJORD, BILL LINNANE, LORRAINE MGOOWN, GREG SIEVERS, RICHARD MATZKE & RANDY REI?OLA SUBJECT: SELECHON OFDESIGNSERVICES PROFESSIONAL FORMUNIGPAL BULDING PREUMINARY DESIGN DATE: 9/17/2002 CO FILE Background A committee has been formed to determine the future use of the old Town Board Room space and to improve the customer service area in Finance on the first floor of the Municipal Building. As discussions have progressed on the issue, it was determined that many of the potential changes to these areas would have inlpacts on the traffic flow and functionality of the building for most customers and employees of the Town. In order to optimize the space, the committee decided to seek an architectural firm to conduct a professional conceptual design study of first floor of the Municipal Building. The committee sent requests for proposals (REP's) to the three following local architectural firms: b TW Beck Architects, no bid returned - > Basis Architecture, $10,125 * Thorp Associates, PC, $6,448 Basis Architecture and Thorp Associates responded to the REP. The respondents also conducted presentations before the committee explaining their approaches and concepts for the design study. The committee rated the firms based upon the criteria listed on the attached decision matrix. It should be noted that Thorp's scope of work included a preliminary design for the entire building, including the second floor even though the REP did not include this. Cost/Budget Cost: $6,448 Thorp Associates, PC Budget: no line item, allocate expenditure on a 50/50 basis between Light & Power Fund and Water Fund. Recommendation The committee requests approval to award the conceptual design contmct to Thorp Associates, PC 2-1 •r, tr) 0! h 91-rn 00 9 9 r191- 00 OX fr, 1- F 00 9 1 01 91- 2 0 2 66 64 £ 00 "r "r ~8 *1& m = 0 clm, 2-2 Quality & Completeness Quality & Completeness uoted price Vision of Relevant Qualifications sponse of Presentation rvices Process & Plan Experience Statement Decision matrix for Municipal Building architectural design services Quoted prices were: 10,125.00 Basis Architecture solmoossv w od.IoU 008ff'9 Criteria - rank 1 through 5, 5 3.40 ssociates 4.40 Numbers reflect the average of the scores received by respondents. Basis Architecture 21.05 Thorpe & Associates 26.25 g jirms Total scores Public Works Engineering Memo To: Public Works Committee From: Greg Sievers CC: Bill Linnane Date: September 19,2002 Re: East Riverside Drive Retaining Wall & Rehabilitation Project Background: The PWD budgeted for the construction of a retaining wall along the Big Thompson River between the Rockwell Street and East Riverside Drive bridges. This 300' long section of river bank is eroding and requires slope improvements. Constructing this wall has triggered the repaving of this section of street, which in turn, lead staff to review the 4uality of the underground & overhead utilities along this block as well as the next block south. VanHorn Engineering mailed out 6 bid packages. 2 Bids were received on Sept. 13, 2002 1. G. L. Hoff $ 357,429.11 2. Mountain Constructors $ 451,907.05 G.L. Hoff is the low bidder @ $357,429.11. Traffic control and contingencies at 13% needs to be added for a total of $410,450.00 which matches the engineers estimate. Cost/ Budget: Engineering, design and construction management costs of $ 21,277 have already been approved ( PWC 5/02) and are not included in this construction cost. Constructioh Cost Budget Parks Department: $139,187.58 $139,187.58 Water Department $122,300.24 See below Street Department $ 85,046.00 $ 85,046.00 Light & Power Dept. $ 63,899.50 See below TOTAL incl. 13% $ 410,433.32 Recommendation: Staff is requesting to proceed with contracting with G.L. Hoff Company from Loveland, CO for this project in the amount of $410,433.32 allocated to the budget mentioned above. They have worked for the Town many times in the past, including the Rockwell& Ivy Street bridge project, with very satisfactory results. The Light and Power Department would like to fund their portion of the East Riverside Project from the Brownfield's Underground Circuit Tie Project line item in the 2002 budget ($95,000). The Light and Power Department has requested $100,000 to fund the Brownfield's Underground Circuit Tie project in the 2003 budget. The East Riverside Drive Project will complete a large portion of the East Riverside Project that was recommended for funding in 2004 in the Underground priority list recently approved by the Town Board. The Water Department cost can be funded by the proposed Mary's Lake Pump Project. 3-1 TOWN of ESTES PARK Inter-Office Memorandum DATE: September 16, 2002 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Bill Linnane (/6,·4~ SUBJECT: Black & Watch, Scope of Services Water Rights Fee Report Background: Greg White & I gave a Water Supply Report at the Public Works Committee meeting in July. There was a discussion about the amount of Water Department funds, approximately $2,000,000, that was being spent on water rights. As a result it was decided to get a Scope of Services from Black and Veatch to update the Town's current water rights fee for new development Black and Veatch has performed all of the Town's Tap Fee Studies and submitted the attached Water Rights Fee Study Scope of Services. Included with the Report will be a comparison that other communities charge for water rights in their tap fee structure. Cost/Budget Cost $6,000 Budget To be funded from the postponed Marfs Lake Pump Project Action: Staff recommends approval of the $6,000 Scope of Services. BL/mjs Attachment 4-1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Public Works Committee - July 18, 2002 - Page 2 REPORTS. Estes Valley Water Supply. Director Linnane and Attorney White briefed the Committee on the water supply in the Estes valley and addressed concerns expressed at the July gth Town Board meeting. Attorney White explained that the Town's water system differs from systems along the Front Range for the following reasons: 1) only 6.5% of total water consumption is used for lawn irrigation (compared to 80% by other communities), and 2) because of the Town's closed basin, location at the top of the system, and augmentation plan, the town has the ability to utilize its Windy Gap water to augment stream diversions at a rate of 10-1 (i.e., the Town replaces 1 acre foot for every 10 acre feet diverted out of the stream). Even though the water levels are at historic lows and other communities are experiencing extreme water conditions, the Town's water system does not operate the same and Director Linnane and Attorney White noted that the Town has adequate water to meet the needs of its community and conservation efforts are not required at this time, but staff encourages voluntary conservation efforts. Other areas addressed include: consumption limitations during continued drought conditions, physical constraints at Glacier Creek, and the need for public education regarding the condition of the Town's water supply. Stan Gengler/Estes Valley Recreation & Park District (EVRPD) updated the Committee on the District's water situation. EVRPD owns 250-acre units of water And is-currently at 70% of their allocation. They have reduced their water usage by approximately one- third of normal consumption nightly. Mr. Gengler expressed concern regarding the continued drought and projections for next year. Big Horn Dr. Project. Construction Manager Sievers explained that the Estes Park Sanitation District, private developer, and the Town joined together for this project to replace 400-500 feet of sewer line and decades of asphalt from Spruce Dr. to the top of the US" curve on Big Horn Dr. Funds were pooled to allow all entities to achieve a reconstructed road (with enhanced visibility) and improved sewer service in the area. Director Linnane commended staff for their efforts and noted the financial benefits of such projects. Under 24-6-402(4)(e), C.R.S., determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations, it was moved and seconded (Doylen/Gillette) the Committee go into Executive Session to discuss said item listed above, and it passed unanimously. Whereupon Chairman Barker adjourned the regular meeting to Executive Session at 8:55 a.m. Chairman Barker reconvened the meeting at 9:28 Water Tap Fee Update. Director Linnane reported that the current water tap fee is $4,000 and has not been increased in fifteen years. Staff is requesting to solicit the services of Black & Vetch to study the Town's water tap fee to determine if the current fee sufficiently covers water acquisition costs. The Committee recommends approval to request a Scope of Services from Black & Vetch for a Water Rights Tap Fee Study. Upon completion, the Scope of Services will be presented to the Committee for approval. There being no further business, Chairman Barker adjourned the meeting at 9:34 a.m. APPROVED T.Vob 4*670 Rebecca van DeuteKorn, CMC, Deputy Town Clerk JUL 2 3 2002 TOWN OF ESTES PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES 4-2 5EP.16.2002 3:59PM BLACK AND VEATCH NO.894 P.2 BLACK & VEATCH 11900 East Corrls|1Avenue Black & Vearch Corporation SUke 900 Aumra, Colorado 80014 USA Tel: (303) 871-4200 fax: (303) 6714285 September 16, 2002 Mr. Bill Linnane Public Works Director Town ofEstes Park P. O. Box 1200 Estes Park, CO 80517 Dear Mr, Linnane: Black & Veatch Coiporation is pleased to submit this proposal to update the water rights fee for the Town of Estes Park. Our proposal includes a scope of services and estimated fee. SCOPE OF SERVICES Proposed services include: 1. Attend project kick-off meeting with Town representatives. 'The purpose of this meeting is to collect study information, discuss Town policies affecting study, and develop study deliverables schedule. Consultant will provide a data request list and agenda prior to the meeting. 2. Review base water rights fee and make appropriate revisions to reflect current market conditions. 3, Survey water rights fees of Front Range and Summit County entities. A maximum of ten entities will be surveyed, 4, Summarize study assumption, procedures, findings, and recommendations in report. 5. Attend two meetings with Town representatives to present study findings. t11 4-3 IV™ SEP'. 16.2002 31; 59PM BLACK AND VERICH NO. 894 P. 3 BLACK & VEATCH CORPORATION Page 2 Mr, Bill Linnane September 16, 2002 ESTIMATED FEE We will perform the above scope of work for a lump sum of $6,000. This fee will be billed in monthly increments commensurate with the amount of work completed. The final invoice will be sent following completion of the study. We greatly appreciate this opportunity to submit this proposal, Please call me if you have any questions. If this proposal is acceptable to you, please return one executed original agreement to me. Very truly yours, John A. Gallagher JAG:alh ACCEPTED BY TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO MaIne Title Date 4-4 . 0 45 3 ~ ~4) TOWN OF ESTES PARK .*r ¥, 4/ 1 - 711-. 923*15&42,4/#W*8 - W "f /F 1 _.AM< NEWS RELEASE September 16. 2002 For publication September 20 & September 27,2002 CARDBOARD RECYCLING LIMITED TIME TEST PROJECT Larimer County, Waste Management, Inc., and the Town ofEstes Park are sponsoring a free (to the public) residential cardboard recycling test project. Commercial cardboard recycling is available for a fee. The purpose of the project is to determine the public demand for cardboard recycling as well as the associated costs. The project is for residential generated cardboard only and is limited to one cubic yard of nattened cardboard per household per day. Commercial cardboard recycling has been available for a fee for the past year. The project will begin Tuesday, October 1, 2002, and will be available during the normal recycling schedule of Tuesday, Thursday & Saturday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. It is anticipated that the project will be available through the month of October and possibly longer if the conditions of operation are followed and the location can handle the extra customer load. 5-2 http://www.estesnet.com (970) 586-5331 • RO. BOX 1200 • 170 MAC GREGOR AVENUE • ESTES PARK, CO 80517 0 FAX(970) 586-2816