Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-14-12 Board of Public Works Meeting AgendaINS] F1 a ki Lei I Dqztel 2:1*CM W-11 W A meeting of the Board of Public Works will be held on Monday, May 14, 2012, at 4:45 p.m. in Common Council Chambers — Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. 2. Mayor's Communications 3. Communications and Hearings from Persons Before the Board 4. Response to the Public 5. Reports Special Committees of the Board Council Liaison Board Liaisons Superintendent and Staff Other Department Heads Approval 6. 7. Administration and Communications T. VOTING ITEMS Buildinas. Prooerties. 8.2 Hiahways, Streets and Sidewalks 8.3 Parking and Traffic 8.4 Creeks, Bridges and Parks 8.5 Water and Sewer (45 min.) A. Water Treatment Plant — Possible Resolution 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS n 7 Cvan� ��ivn Cn�oinr� _ u. � �nc%.uuvG VGJJIVII - `VV I I 11 1.1 10. New Business 11. Adjournment If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 607- 274 -6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. The Board of Public Works meets on the second, third and fourth Wednesdays of the months at 4:45 p.m. All meetings are voting meetings, opening with a public comment period. Meeting agendas are created from prior public input, Department operating, planning issues, and requests made to the Superintendent. The Board reserves the right to limit verbal comments to three minutes and to request written comments on lengthy or complex issues. This information may then be used to create committee agendas, with the speaker or author invited to attend. Page 1 1 • �' • • �` 8.5A Water Treatment Plant — Possible Resolution This agenda is devoted to the City's Water Treatment Plant because we are at a milestone decision. We need to authorize several million dollars in design and construction support fees to take this project into and through construction. This is. a milestone only because of the way this project has been handled prior to this date, broken down into individual decisions for each incremental step, with those steps spread out over years. O'Brien and Gere has provided a Basis for Design Report that outlines the project in sufficient detail to provide site plans, process and equipment layout, and a detailed estimate for the 30% design state of the project. With this information and the completion of their contracted work to date, we need to agree to undertake the rest of the design and proceed to construction. Your final decision point will be the award of $25 to $30 million dollars in construction contracts over the next two years. This all assumes that Common Council agrees to increase the project funding from the roughly $6 million to over $36 million so that the construction contracts can be awarded. We currently have funding to undertake the design iVork. This is the largest construction project the City has undertaken since the wastewater plant was finished in 1987 for roughly $35 million. It will have a significant impact on water rates in the city. We currently estimate that it will raise them by a factor of one third from roughly $6 per thousand gallons to about $8 per thousand gallons. The "average" household will use roughly 90,000 gallons per year so we are talking about raising the average bill from $540 per year to $720 per year. Most people see their water bill combined with their sewer bill so they will see the $180 increase on a larger bill. (The combined rate for water and sewer is $9.56 per 100 cubic feet or $12.78 per 1000 gallons, making the "average" current combined bill $1,150 annually.) The attached information is designed to answer questions we anticipated would come up, or should be addressed. What was the project in 2006? What is the current proposed project, and why are they different? How has this impacted the project budget? Where have the cost increases come from? What happens if we want to reduce the project size and cost? Should Win rPvicit tha riPricinn to rPhi dirl the C itv'c nnnnt rather than nn to RNMn Pnint fnr water? I nm sure you will think of your own questions as you review the material and we start the discussion. The cost estimates and water rate projections here contains a lot of assumptions and they could be refined with much more sophisticated analysis, but they are accurate enough to tell you about what the project costs and about what the rate impact will be. We believe this will allow us to start the discussion, and to generate any more question you may have prior to making the decision to authorize the extension of the design contract. If we were having a third meeting in May, I would have delayed this presentation until the information I am providing you had been more thoroughly reviewed. If it is updated in the next two days, we will forward the updates. However, I believe that any changes or updates at this point may change a few numbers but will not change the basic information. This is an important project that prepares the City's water production to start its next 100 years of production. Page 2 9.1 Executive Session I will ask for an Executive Session with the Board. VVULL,awtJ. ctYa�, T>. E. s�tperEwtewdev�,t of PL, bUiG Words Mai _q, 2012 Page 3 Date /Time: May 14, 2012, 4:45 PM Location: Board of Public Works Meeting Meeting Objectives: Closeout the Preliminary Design Phase and Obtain Authorization to Proceed with Final Design Items for Discussion: 1. Review Project Scope Changes Since The Last Comprehensive Update Reflecting the Outcomes of the following: a. City and State Environmental Quality Review Process b. City Site Plan review Process c. Preliminary Design Development 2. Review Updated Project Cost Estimate 3. Review Projected Impact on Water Rates 4. Compare Updated Project Costs with Alternative to Purchase Water from Bolton Point Attachments: Water Supply Project Scope Changes 2012 Estimated Project Cost Estimated Water Rate Impacts Estimated Water Rate Impacts — Purchase Option C: \DOCUME- 1 \bitig \LOCALS -1 \Temp \XPgrpwise \Progress MTG Agenda_ 05_14_12.doc GO CYBRIEN 6 GERE 360° Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions Subtotal Contingency Total Estimated Construction Cost Design & Construction Engineering $ 2006 $ Escalation to 2012 2012 Estimate Reservoir Site Improvements $ 1,428,000 $ 1,718,713 $ 5,245,436 Access Road $ 195,600 $ 235,420 $ 63,945 Dam Safety Related Work 22,954,976 $ 27,353,468 1 $ $ 3,176,840 Pre -Sed Basin /Intakes $ 652,398 $ 785,214 $ 1,000,000 Dredging- Allowance $ 312,240 $ 375,806 $ 375,000 Gatehouse $ 71,028 $ 85,488 $ 276,384 Utility Building $ 60,000 $ 72,215 $ 100,000 Electric Service, Water Service, Misc. Site Work & Equip. $ 136,734 $ 164,570 $ 253,267 Raw Water Transmission Main Upgrades $ 438,000 $ 527,168 $ 267,602 Purchase Water - Allowance $ 1,018,350 $ 1,018,350 $ 600,000 Water Treatment Plant $ 12,097,442 $ 14,560,246 $ 18,678,426 Phasing Considerations (Temp. Facilities) $ 364,458 Demolition $ 268,943 $ 323,695 $ 1,196,449 Site Work /Utilities $ 410,384 $ 493,930 $ 792,498 I Electrical /Instrumentation $ 1,995,794 $ 2,402,099 $ 2,146,971 HVAC /Plumbing $ 704,398 $ 847,800 $ 1,134,144 Arch /Structural $ 3,718,500 $ 4,475,514 $ i I 6,324,644 c Process Equipment $ 4,999,423 $ 6,017,208 $ 6,355,702 Clearwell Repairs $ 113,560 c High Lift Pumps Replacement $ 250,000 Distribution System Improvements Interconnection Building $ 223,535 Elm Street PS $ 350,000 Giles St- Residual Handling $ 2,342,718 $ 2,819,650 $ 2,529,177 Subtotal Contingency Total Estimated Construction Cost Design & Construction Engineering $ 17,324,510 $ 20,644,127 $ 27,894,176 $ 3,464,902 $ 4,128,825 $ 4,184,126 $ 20,789,412 $ 24,772,952 $ 32,078,302 $ 2,165,564 $ 2,580,516 $ 4,291,667 Estimated Total Project Cost $ 22,954,976 $ 27,353,468 1 $ 36,369,969 ENR Construction Cost Index C: \DOCUME- l \billg \LOCALS -1 \Temp \XPgrpwise \Copy of construction_cost_com pare _0312 (3) Jun -06 Mar -12 7700 9268 Notes: - onstruction Work now proposed to be completed by City staff. Dam Safety Work added. Previously to be a separate and independent project. as result of intake inspection a complete replacement of the structure is warranted. Nater purchase allowance adjusted for phase 1 construction (anticipate 10 month schedule) Includes trailers for office, restroom, lab, chemical feed and membrane filtration. This minimizes required purchases of water In 2006 the estimate used a rough order of magnitude approach which was low, based on current knowledge of requirements. ncludes connection to interconnection, clearwell pipe gallery and finished water pipes. o reflect input received during the DEIS process and to accommodate operational needs, the interior spaces of the plant were icreased by approx. 25% by building out the second floor to match the first. Arch. and finish selections were upgraded during the site ,Ian review process to reflect community input. The upgrades result in an increase of 10% in the anticipated construction costs. A learwell pipe gallery was added to provide safer year round access to metering and water quality equipment. quantity of pipes and valves increased to provide by -pass options, provisions for future hydroturbine and splitting plant flow onsidered an operational issue for the 2006 estimate. Clearwell Repairs: Includes $5 /sq ft for lining of clearwells 2006 uses 20% (to match that original estimate), 2012 uses 15% to reflect higher level of project development - urrent estimate is based on O'Brien & Gere providing all contract administration, inspection, and design services. Previous estimates assumed City staff would untake some of this work. Estimate includes $475,000 authorized to date. Increase in construction cost index (inflation) by approximately 20% since 2006. Date:4/26/2012 City of Ithaca Water Supply Project Cash Flow Projection 5/8%2412 C: \DOCUME— I \kgehring \LOCALS -1 \Temp \XPgrpwise \Copy of Quarterly_breakdown _ withlogo (2) 909 EYEIRIEN 1. State and City Environmental Review Process $375,000 a. Added chlorine dioxide feed room and equipment. Required two rooms (Sodium Dioxide Room and Sodium Chlorite Room) with total footprint of $250,000 approximately 850 sq ft. b. Added interior space for standby generator. Room provides noise $75,000 reduction and has a footprint of approximately 410 sq ft. c. Added provisions for future hydroelectric power generation. Set aside an $50,000 approximate 150 sq ft space for future hydro-turbine. 2. Site plan review process $425,000 a. Increased number and size of windows. $200,000 b. Upgraded structural and architectural features of interconnection 5125,000 building. c. Upgraded architectural features and finishes to improve building $100,000 appearance and community setting. 3. Deferred maintenance $4,065,000 a. Incorporated clearwell lining into project. $115,000 b. Incorporated replacement of five existing high lift pumps. $250,000 c. Incorporated distribution system improvements for disinfection $350,000 byproduct management (Elm St. tank pumping station and tank mixing)• d. Incorporated dam safety upgrades $3,175,000 e. Incorporated replacement of existing gatehouse $175,000 4. Process and Operational Upgrades $1,535,000 a. Added interconnection building to improve pressure and flow regulation of interconnection with SCLIWC. The interconnection building will allow for separate flow measurement and regulation into each of the City's $200,000 three pressure zones and metered flow from the City back into SCLIWC transmission main. 360' Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions 0BRIENGGERE e. Increased interior space for the laboratory, offices, storage, and meeting $325,000 rooms. Added 2250 sq ft. f. Selected more conservative basis of design for membrane process units as a result of piloting to address fouling potential over the wide range of raw water quality expected and to reduce energy requirements. Flux $200,000 rate for membranes changes from 50 to 40 GFD (decrease of 20%). Increased room by approximately 500 sq ft. g. Added piping and valves to allow for a split flow treatment operation $60,000 (operate as two independent plants). h. Modified approach to residuals handling to incorporate a mechanical press and building. Design included two concrete basin thickeners and two volute presses located inside of the new press building [no anticipated cost increase] S. Other cost related issues a. Demolition: In 2006 the estimate used a rough order of magnitude approach. Based on current knowledge of requirements we now believe the original estimate was low do to staged and sequencing • demolition $850,000 required and the objective of recycling and reusing materials to the extent practical and the protection of existing operational facilities. Total $7,250,000 1:\Ithaca-C.1598\45762.Water-Treatment\N-D\Fee Estimate\ Summary of Process and Operational Upgrades.doc 360* Engineering and Project Delivery Solutions r" CYBRIENSGERE N a--I O N a-i O \ Ln O a-+ to a� O m v O C 0 d' N 7 0 O N v E LO C) O N N fl N O N N N N Q 0 0 N E C N O N f6 N U W i-+ U O C f0 � O cr- O O O � N ,F, O l6 l0 ` + O N LL O � N U -O h O .Q O `^ Lli w ,4 O ,Ln N N N m cn ate+ f6 L � c +� LL sa O is h0 � N Q' O U N Q N C O OA O O O O O th N f0 i N tII l6 v ro O C N O U V) 4- U eo Q i 4, O am U O � O i a � +r v Q co Q +-' Ln +O 4— O � cu N E a,•, to +� U w N a� O m v O C 0 d' N 7 0 O N v E LO C) O N N fl N O N N N N Q 0 0 N E C N O N f6 N U W i-+ U O C f0 � O cr- O O O � N ,F, O l6 l0 ` + O N LL O � N U -O h O .Q O `^ Lli w ,4 O ,Ln N N N m cn ate+ f6 L � c +� LL sa O is h0 � N Q' O U N Q N C O OA O O O O O th N f0 i N tII l6 v ro O C N O U N O N 01 O \ art a) a-+ m 0 . i;_ OI N 41 T O M 0 m Y O O1 Q O O N T N E N 41 O N N U W 0 0 N T N 0 txo Q Q l-i O 0 O v m E N QJ Q O N a1 U W r-I N 0 v N L ca N E Q a N T .tom+ m E c N LO C) N i� v ro O. _E ai c cr- O O tj ~ O 4- O ca O L' ai \ O O l0 O tJ} 0 -n U O O -0 —! - O `^ � w �t ai a) a) N m ai Vi CIC L � C 4�+ ti f6 fII aj O (A aj r U `= N O' c-I f6 O U N Q vi O to OA O O O �—I O O Lri t!) 4 - m aj CG fII U tB 4- O C O a-+ C a) O U C O O. O I N co t ® L CL N La U f0 Q U + v - O � O i d a) U Q f6 Q L 19 4— O L m O E > a'' {" — � U e�if w OI N 41 T O M 0 m Y O O1 Q O O N T N E N 41 O N N U W 0 0 N T N 0 txo Q Q l-i O 0 O v m E N QJ Q O N a1 U W r-I N 0 v N L ca N E Q a N T .tom+ m E c N LO C) N i� v ro O. _E ai c cr- O O tj ~ O 4- O ca O L' ai \ O O l0 O tJ} 0 -n U O O -0 —! - O `^ � w �t ai a) a) N m ai Vi CIC L � C 4�+ ti f6 fII aj O (A aj r U `= N O' c-I f6 O U N Q vi O to OA O O O �—I O O Lri t!) 4 - m aj CG fII U tB 4- O C O a-+ C a) O U City of Ithaca Mayor's Budget City of Ithaca Summary of Water and Sewer Rates 1989 -2012 Page 21 Per 100 cu ft Per 100 cu ft Year Water Rates %Change !, ;Sewer Rates ' % Chance 19891 $ 0.90 $ 0.90 1990 $ 1.00 11% $ 1.16 29% 1991 ' $ 1.16: 16 %' $ 1.25 8% 1992 $ 1.21 4% $ 1.40 12% - 1993'; $ 1.21 0% ' $ 1.40 0% 1994' $ 1.271 5 %' $ 1.47: 5% 1995; $ 1.40 10 %; $ 1.62 10% 1996; $ 1.54 10 %' $ 1.70 i 5% 1997; $ 1.69 10% j $ 1.70 0% 1998; $ 1.83 8% j $ 1.70 j 0% 19991 $ 2.01 !, 10% $ 1.70 ' 0% 2000' $ 2.21 ! 10 %! $ 1.87 10 %0 2001 $ 2.32 ! 5 %i $ 1.96 ! 5 % 2002 $ 2.46 6%' $ 2.16 10% _ 2003 $ 2.53 3% $ 2.38 10% -- 20041 0 %1 j $ 2.62 10% 2005 $ _2.53 2.68 ! 6%o $ 2.80 '� 7% 2006 $ 2.76 3 %; $ 3.08 _10% - - - -� 20071 $ 2% I $ 3.39 10% 2008; j $ _2.82', 2.91 3% j $ 3.73 _ 10 % 2009; $ 3.02, 4 %' $ 4.10 ! 10% -- 2010' $ - 3.32 10 °l0 j $ 4.43 8 °l0 2011 ' 2012r $- $ - 3.75 4.50 13 %'i 20% $ $ 4.87 5.06 10% - 4% average _ -- - 7 %0 8 %° Page 21 City of Ithaca Fund Balance Activity Water Fund As of 9/30110 File:Budoetreserves Water Fund % of Oper.i Total Fund'% of Oper.j Unappropriated' Apr FIB Per; Fund Balance, Results of Year Ending Revenue' Balances Revenues Fund Balance Budget;- Used Operations Water Fund Balance 1213111997 58.16% $ 1,386,143.00 42.50 %( $ 1,012,724.00 $ 48,204.00 $ $ 347,621.00 Water Fund Balance 12131/1998 72.91 %' $ 1,738,324.00 53.93 %I $ 1,285,689.00 ` $ - $ - $ 352221.00 Water Fund Balance 12/31/1999 81.33 °lo $ 2,279,665.00 !. 63.08 %f $ 1,768,110.40 $ $ $ 399,938.00 i Water Fund Balance 12131!2004 76.99 %,' $ 2,206,840.00 61.47 %1 $ 1,7 62,023.00 ! $ $ $ 45,468.00 Water Fund Balance 12!31 12001 76.63 °l0', $ 2,295,348.00: 51.85 %' $ 1,852,714-00 89,077.00 Water Fund Balance 12/31/2002 i 79-77%-! $ 2,592,940-00 61.88 %1! $ 2,011,463.00 $ s $ $ 302,444.00 Water Fund Balance 12/31/2003 87.26 %1 $ 2,675,627.04 ! 69.19 %, $ 2,121,605.00 $ - $ $ 82,687.04 Water Fund Balance 12/31/2004 87.29 %i' $ 2,839,575.04 ' 71.35 %I $ 2,321,207.00 ! $ 21,184.00 $ $ 163,948.00 Water Fund Balance 12131/2005 88.99% $ 2,885;153.00 60.68% $ 1,967;391.00 $ 56,508.00 ? $ - $ 45,578.00 I Water Fund Balance 12!3112006 93:69 %1 $ 2,754,321.00 69.07 %'' $ 2,030,457.00 $ 402,015.00 $ 123,721.04 $ (123,721.00) Water Fund Balance 12/31!2007 92.80 %! $ 2,777,949.00 65.03% $ 1,946,606.00 $ 252,724.00 ! $ $ 23,628.00 Wate Tmd Balance 12/31/2008 80.26 %; $ 2,365,259.00- 51.40 %! $ 1,514,94700 $ 261,460.04 $ 412,689.00 j (412,689.00) _ Water Fund Balance 12131/2009 64.49% $ 1,820,239.00 35.84% $ 1,011,524.00 $ 371,270.00 $ 559,995.00 $ 559,995.00 Water Fund Balance 12/3112010 53.32% $ 1,677,778.00 14.41 %, $ 453,505.00 $ 703,007.00 $ 137,323.04 ! $ (137,323.00) As of 9/30/11 i 2011 revs I $$ 2,570,537.00 -- —� -exp - $ 2,602,707.00 - - - -- -- — !$ (32.170.00), -- -- - 2010! revs $ 3,146,389.00 — iexP - $ 3,283,712.00 -- $ (137,323.00) - -- -- - -- - -- - -- 2009revs $ 2,822,480.00 -_ exp $ 3,382,475.00 - - -- .. - -- $ (559,995.00): --- 2008 revs $ 2,947,147:00--- eXp - $ 3,359,836.00 $ (412,689.00)` - - 2007 revs $ 2,993,324:00 , -- ;exp $ 2,969,696.00 $ 23,528.00 - -_ -- 20061 revs ! $ 2,939,892.00 - -- - - exp $ 3,063,613.00 $ (123,721.00)= - - - -- -_- 2006':revs $ 3,241,985.00 - exp $ 3,196,407.00 . -- - $ 45,578.00 . - - - - -- 2004 revs $ 3,253,100.00 lexp $ 3,0_89,15200 $ 163,948.00 --- - 2003'revs $ 3,066,343.00 exp $ 2,983,656.00 - - $ 82,687.00 -- - 2002 revs exp - - $ $ 31250,722.00 2,948,278.00 - - - - - -- -- - -- - - $ 302.444.00 Page 22