Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2000Dcc F. F.TA-e CT MINUTES OF THE FOREIGN FIRE TAX BOARD MEETING ; 2000 Present:M.McDermott,Ellis,J.DiDon.Muno,Upp,J.M Cox,Adam, and Janetski Called to order 16:00 hrs. Minutes read and approved 5-0 Financial: Total funds of $73.305.00. Motion to approve 5-0 Old business: • Stickers to mark equipment purchased by F.F.T. Board will be ordered thisweek • Chief Hunter is in the process of getting bids to maintain exercise equipment There were questions raised about previously purchased equipment. The board, city, and staff were in agreement abort purchasing and maintenance of equipment hems marked below are the ones in question, • Dry suits and emergency air bottles were ordered for the dive team, It was mentioned at the same meeting that there would be boat training for members of our department. This has not taken place and we would like to know when all 3 shifts will be properly trained for the emergency use of the city boat. At an irx;ident less then 2 months ago, the coast guard from Wilmette was the first boat to arrive on the scene at the Dempster Street break water. • The purchase was made of a LCD projector after the last meeting. We were also told that all personnel would be trained .The training should be on all three shifts, this will allow all members to attend. • There has been various fitness exercise machines ordered through the fore�gn fire tax. The City has agreed to maintain this equipment. There has been no service to any equipment since the machines were received. We would like to find out when a semi- annual servicing will begin to take place on the machines. New business: • The purchase of 3 sets of dumbbells was approved 5-0 for station 1,3,5. ($1863.00) • The purchase of 8 chairs was approved 5-0 in the maintenance of chairs plan. 6 chairs to #2 and 2 chairs to #5.(S4800.00) • The purchase of 5 cardio machines was approved 5-0. Machines will be distributed to all 5 stations. J.Dillon has pamphlet on machine if you would rke to see this. ($20,300.00) • The purchase of 7 hard wired spot lights for all front line engine and trucks Approved 5-0 Chief Wilkinson was contacted and gave approval to have fleet service install these lights when they come in.( $210.00) • Mike Adam presented the idea of all stations receiving a fund around $500.00 for the replacements of dishes, pots, and silverware at stations. The board has no problem with that. We will need a list of items at the next meeting so this can be approved. • Muno presented the purchase of 2 thermal imagers. The board is in 100% support of this equipment. Although in support, the board feels the city should V1 i make a joint effort in supplying this equipment. The Foreign Fire Tax Board has already purchased 3 cameras. We would like to see the city purchase the l$st 2 so that all front line engines are fully equipped. Not approved 5-0, Motion to adjoum Ellis, 2"d by J.Dillon "DRAFT, NOT APPROVED" MINUTES OF FLOOD AND POLLifTION CONTROL COMMISSION Members Present: Members Absent: July 19, 2000 Ned Lauterbach Alderman Dennis Drummer Margaret Wold David Urban Alderman Joe Kent Staff Present: Richard J. Figurelli, Water & Sewer David Stoneback, Water & Sewer David Jennings, Public Works Others Present: Dan Gallagher, Harza Engineering Roger Schiller, Harza Engineering John Velon, Harza Engineering The Flood & Pollution Control Commission met on July 19,2000 in Room 2404 at the Civic Center. In the absence of Alderman Kent, Ned Lauterbach chaired the meeting. The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.. MINUTES The minutes of the January 19, 2000 Flood & Pollution Control Commission meeting were unanimously approved. LONG RANGE SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CONSTRUCTION UPDATES Roger Schiller briefly outlined the construction update information that was provided to the commission. He stated that there are four contracts currently under construction. He indicated that Contract 7E which was a restrictor installation project, is primarily completed. The Illinois Department of Transportation will be doing an inspection for the work that was completed on Ridge Avenue next week. The contractor, George W. Kennedy, is in the process of completing their final paperwork and it looks like, at this time, the final change order on that contract will reduce the cost by roughly S57,000. In addition, the contractor met the requirements of the MBE/WBEIEBE program and employment program. FPCC Minutes July 19, 2000 Page 2 Contract 7G, Glenbrook Excavating & Concrete Company, was alse a restrictor project on the southeast side of Evanston. The work associated with this contract is complete and the final change order has been done. The final cost came out to be approximately 580,000 below she original contract amount. This contractor also met the requirements of the MBE program and exceeded the requirements of the employment program by about 501/16. Closeout documents are currently being prepared on this contract. Roger Schiller began discussion on Contract 8A which was awarded to Jay Dee Contractors on June 5, 2000. It is a 8.9 million dollar project involving a 72" diameter t=inel along Maple Avenue between Main and Davis with shallow dropshafts. The contractor has compaeted the initial stages of the work with some repairs and some lining of the existing combined sewers. The water main installation has also begun. Shaft construction at Maple and Main will begin at the end of July. The tunneling is scheduled to be completed in November or December of 2000. The shallow open cut relief sewer work will begin in 2001 and completion of the project is scheduled for January, 20GS. Roger Schiller began discussion on Contract 6A with McNally Tur-neling Corp. The project is along Noyes Street from the Ladd Arboretum to Orrington and is approximately 34% complete. The mining is approximately 50 % done and is anticipated to be completed about mid September. The contract is currently about 6 months behind schedule. Their MBE status is consistent with contract requirements. Their training program has produced three trainees that have graduated and are now working full time on the contract. Richard FigureIli informed the Commission that there have been problems associated with the McNally contract for 6A. McNally has made claims in the amount of roughly S5 million on the basis of "changed conditions". These involve a myriad of claims for delays. The initial problem began with the discovery of rock during the tunneling process. The contractor has been difficult to work with since that point and has made numerous claims. The contractor has been given perr:zission to work at night as long as they do not break the noise ordinance. The matter is now before the Law Department. The Law Department has hired an outside legal firm who in turn has hired an outside engineering firm to analyze the situation and make a report. Mr. Figurelli stated that he felt it is important that the Commission be aware that there have been problems associated with this contract z_-)d as a result there will be change orders. Staff and legal are working to determine if a settlement can be reached, He then went over the change orders that occur as a direct result of these conflicts and Bela •s in the contract. The engineering firm, Harza, incurs numerous costs in preparing documentation ?--id responding to both our legal department and consultants. FPCC Minutes July 19, 2000 Page 3 LONG RANGE SFWER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAItI DESIGN UPDATES Mr. Figurelli introduced Dan Gallagher, Harza Engineering, to provide the Commission with an update - of the design of the remaining phases of the program. He indicated that there has been little ac&. ty on the design of the contracts associated with the remainder of the work in Phases VIII, IX and X The next portion of the design wiII not be submitted to the IEPA ura this time next year. Contract VII H is the last contract in Phase VII and in the process of being bid. Bid opening is in August. The value is 2.5 to 3 million dollars and consists primarily of restrictor wank in the northwest section of the City_ This contract also includes two short sections of relief sewer insztallation, one on Crawford and one in the McDaniel area. It is likely that IEPA funding will be available for this project in the fall of this year_ Mr. Gallagher informed the Commission design of Phases VI B &. C is nearing completion and that we anticipate preparing the projects for bid this fall to prepare for available IEPA funding in the if quarter of 200I . Each project is in the order of $5 to Sb milIion. OTHER BUSINESS Harza Pronosal to Undate the Facilities Plan Ned Lauterbach noted that the proposal to update the Facilities Plan is in the amount of $35,000 and that staff had asked Harza to present this proposal. He asked why the Facilities Plan needed to be updated_ Mr. Figurelli responded stating that the [EPA requires that the Facilities Plan be updated every five (5) years. This will be the last Facilities Plan that is necessary to complete the project. The other reason for doing it is the specific changes that take place in the project development. It is due in 2002 and we should be able to have it to the [EPA by the end of 2001. Mr. Lauterbach stressed the need to point out the requirement to Council when submitting the proposal. Margaret Wold made a motion to approve the proposal. David Urban seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Amendment to Phase VI Field Services Contract Mr. Stoneback discussed the proposed amendment to the Phase VI field services contract with Harza and the Phase VII H Field Services Contract. He pointed out that when we bid the Phase VI project, 'AV bid the field services for both Phase VI A and VI B at the same time assuming that these two project would be awarded together. However, due to the contract prices for construction, Phase VI B was not awarded with VI A. In addition, the project time schedule was also delayed. As a result, Ham's prices for field services for the two projects had assumed sharing resources which could no longer be done and costs changed. Mr. Stoneback explained that staff felt it important to share with the Commission the details of the changes in the contracts and the reason for the adjustments. FPCC Minutes July 19, 2000 Page a Dan Gallagher introduced a number of spreadsheets depicting the time schedule for the projects in conjunction with the individual jobs associated with them. In order to prepare a proposal for field services, some assumptions must be made as to w}ratt projects are going to be occurring simuhanecusly with the proposed project. He pointed out that personnel are shared between projects. For VI A and VI B, personnel were assumed to be shared between those two projects. Mr. Velon, pointed out that when Harza prepares the proposals for field senlc-cs they could make the assumption that each project stands alone. However, if that was done the total price of the project would be impacted by 15 to 200/6 and one of the advantages of the way things have been done, is that Evanston has been able to realize an economy of multiple projects under one supervision team. This does sometimes end up with the need for a change order to reflect the change in project timing and the impact that has on the cost of field services. Mr. Gallagher stated that the original contract duration for Phase V1 A & VI B contract was 26 months. The proposal before the commission is to eliminate VI B from the field services contract This will require an additional contract for Phase VI B in the future. Margaret Wold moved approval of the amendment to the Phase VI Field Services contract. Alderman Drummer seconded the motion. Ms. Wold clarified that as a result, the money that we would have spent to have two contracts overseen, would now be used for only one of those contracts. David Stoneback also clarified for the Commission that the additional time spent for the McNally dispute is being tracked separately and not included in this change order. There will be another amendment for Phase VI A as a result of the McNally dispute. The Commission unanimously approved the motion to amend the Phase VI Field Services Contract by deleting Phase VI B from the scope of work. Ms. Wold made a motion to approve the amendment to Harza's contract for Field Services for Phase VII of the Long Range Sewer Improvement Program. Alderman Drummer seconded the motion. Dan Gallagher briefly outlined the amendment. He stated that the Phase VII construction services contract was originally prepared for Phase VII contracts A through G (7 contracts). Since that time an additional contract has been added to Phase VI1, Contract H. This restrictor project was not included in the original scope of work. The IEPA is requiring that reference to this work be added to the Phase VII Contract for Field Services in order to be eligible for funding. John Velon noted that the restrictor installation projects are very labor intensive and require a greater percentage of field services. The restrictor installations occur throughout the city with several locations happening at once. Restoration is also a critical part to the successful contract and the field engineer must oversee it all to ensure that the work is performed correctly and in a timely manner. The Commission unanimously approved the amendment No. 7 to the Phase VII Contract with Harza for Field Services. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.. Res ectfully SubY, and J. ig EACCMEMORANDUM March S, 2000 TO: Chair and Members Flood and Pollution Control Commission FROM: Richard J. Figurelli Superintendent of Water & Sewers SUBJECT: CANCELLATION OF MAY 17, 2000 MEETING The Chair, in accordance with the Commission's desire to meet on as needed basis, has canceled the May 15, 2000 FPCC meeting. The packet of information enclosed includes the status updates on both the construction and design of the Long Range Sewer Improvement Program. In light of the engineering and design issues that are currently underway, it may be necessary to call a meeting in June when these topics can be formulated for your recommendations prior to being brought before Council. If you should have any questions or comments regarding any of the enclosed information, please give us a call. Sincerely, F.P. C. C MEMORAAD UM March 8, 2000 TO: Chair and Members Flood and Pollution Control Commission FROM: Richard J. Figurelli Superintendent of Water & Sewers SUBJECT: CANCEL MARCH 15, 2000 MEETING The Chair, in accordance with the Commission's desire to meet on as needed basis, has canceled the March 15, 2000 FPCC meeting. The packet of information includes the status updates on both the construction and design of the Long Range Sewer Improvement Program. If you should have any questions or comments regarding any of the enclosed information, please give us a call. Sincerely, "DRAFT, NOT APPROVED" MINUTES OF FLOOD AND POLLUTION CONTROL C01MMISSION January 19, 2000 Members Present: Alderman Joe Kent Alderman Dennis Drummer Margaret Wald David Urban Members Absent: Ned Lauterbach Staff' Present: Richard J. Figurelli, Water & Sewer David Stoneback, Water & Sewer Regina Lookis, Water & Sewer William Stafford, Finance Others Present: Dan Gallagher, Harza Engineering Roger Schiller, Harza Engineering John Velon, Harza Engineering Rita Zimmerman, Evanston Resident The Flood & Pollution Control Commission met on January 19, 2000 in the City Council Chambers at the Civic Center. The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.. MINUTES The minutes of the September 15, 1999 Flood & Pollution Control Commission meeting were unanimously approved. LONG RANGE SEWER IN1PR0VE1%1ENT PROGRAM PRESENTATION Alderman Kent informed those present that the emphasis of the meeting would be a presentation on the Long Range Sewer Improvement program to respond to questions that have been asked by various citizens in regards to the sewer rates. The presentation would review where we have come from in this program to the point of where we are -now. He commented that this presentation is timely due to the pending budget session on Saturday in whkch the sewer rates will be a primary topic. The presentation is being taped to allow it to be run many times as questions arise. FPCC MINUTES January I9, 2000 Page 2 Alderman Kent commented that the sever project is tremendously complex. He added that many different efforts have been made to communicate the project to the public through special mailings, articles in highlights, public meetings, etc. and this presentation will add to our agenda of different items and ways to enhance communication with citizens. Alderman Kent introduced Richard FigureIli, Superintendent of Water & Sewer, to begin the Long Range Sewer Improvement Program presentation. Mr. Figurelli introduced the members of the Flood and Pollution Control Commission to the audience. He summarized the intent of the presentation and the subject and speakers that would be included. He stated that he would be discussing the sewer problem and some of its history, John Velon from Harza Engineering would be discussing the various alternatives to the sewer problem that had been considered and Evanston's chosen solution, David Stoneback, Water &- Sewer Department, would bring us up to date on the current status of the program, and Bill Stafford, Finance Director, would discuss the financing of the plan. Mr. Figurelli commented that Evanston's sewer problem has a long history. A report done in 1938 indicates that as far back as 1902 the City's sewer system was declared inadequate in size and depth to serve demands. The most severe result of this problem has been basement back-ups of sewage causing property loss, health hazards and extreme public annoyance. Mr. Figurelli explained the existing sewer system prior to launching the sewer improvement program including the combined sever system and how it works, its age and resulting structural failures, its inability to provide the necessary hydraulic capacity and the resulting basement backups averaging three to six times per year. Mr.Figurelli provided an overview of the traditional engineering approaches that had been investigated between 1932 and 1988. All of these reports called for the replacement or auementation of all pipes in the system at a cost of $250 to $300 million dollars (1990 dollars) to achieve a 5 to 10 year level of protection against basement backup, All of these solutions had been rejected as being too expensive. In 1989, the City of Evanston formed a team to study the problem and develop an acceptable, affordable, and approvable plan to address the sewer issues. The team was given the title of the S%V1M team which stood for Storm Water Inundation and Mitigation. A request for proposal was made and an engineering firm, Harza Engineering, was selected to assist in the process. Other members of the team included the City Engineer, Water & Sewer Department operation and maintenance staff, concerned citizens, finance staff and the Municipal Arborist. The SWIM team worked together during a development process to document the existing system conditions and determine a plan for the city. Mr. Figurelli introduced John Velon, Harza Engineering, to discuss the plan that resulted from the efforts of the SW11M team. Mr. Velon informed the audience that the solution that had ultimately been selected by Evanston was partial sewer separation with inlet control. He then explained how this system operated by installing new relief sewers on a portion of the streets, but not all. On those streets where relief sewers are not installed, storm flow is restricted from entering the existing combined sewer by placing vortex restrictors into the drainage basins. This water is then directed along the curb line to high capacity inlets connecting to the new retie( sewers, The result is a substantially Iess expensive system providing protection against basement backups up to a 100 year storm level_ i FPCC NIlNUTES January 19, 2000 Page 3 Mr. Velon went through a number of slides depicting the engineering concept of partial sewer separation with inlet control. He emphasized the incredible savings that resulted from this process. While the project is extremely expensive, its cost represents less than half the dollars it would cost for other available solutions. The project involves the installation of 230,000 linear feet of relief sewers ranging in size from 24" diameter to 108" diameter. While this is a lot of sewers, it is less than 50% of what is required by other solutions and as a result less disruptive. He discussed overland flow and the criteria that was used to determine the acceptability of the concept of using the curb to direct the flow to the relief sewer system. He also discussed the restrictors used in the drainage basins to the existing combined sewer system and illustrated how they function. In summary, Mr. Velon stated that in selecting the concept of partial sewer separation with overland flow, Evanston has been a pioneer in the industry. He noted that since the inception of Evanston's project, Arlington Heights has installed a similar system and the City of Chicago has began pilot studies adopting the system. He then introduced David Stoneback, Assistant Superintendent of Water & Sewer, to discuss the current status of the project. Mr. Stoneback explained how the project was implemented by dividing it into ten phases of construction estimated to take approximately twelve years. Construction began in 1990 and as of 1999 the project is more than 60% complete. He noted the extensive citizen involvement that has taken place in both the design phase of the project as well as during construction. He used the example of the construction on Main Street that took place, incorporating the business communities thoughts in the design and inclusion of the brick pavers, as well as meeting with the businesses throughout the construction to reduce the disruption as much as possible. He discussed the couple of areas of the city that are complete with both new relief sewers and restrictors. He emphasized the two stages of construction that is done in each area. The first stage is the installation of the new relief sewers. The next stage is the installation of the restrictors in the drainage basins connected to the existing combined sewer system. He stressed that until both of these stages are complete within a drainage area, full relief from basement backups cannot be realized. He used visual aids depicting areas of the City of Evanston that have relief sewers installed or under construction and areas of the city that have restrictors installed. The current construction area is along Noyes Street. We are reaching the point where most areas west of Ridge Avenue will be complete with both the relief sewers installed as well as restrictors. Mr. Stoneback explained the evaluation process that was done to determine the success of the reduction of basement backups , the degree of surface ponding resulting from the overland now concept, the operation and maintenance concerns and cost tracking. The result of this evaluation process was extremely favorable in all areas. Basement backups were eliminated (except those caused by private sewer fine problems), surface ponding met the criteria of being off the streets in 30 minutes and was not a public concern, maintenance increases were minimum, and costs stayed within a 2% inflation factor. Mr. Stoneback introduced Bill Stafford, Finance Director, to discuss the City's method of paying for the project. FPCC MINUTES January 19, 2000 Page 4 Mr. Stafford reviewed the development of the sewer user charge to cover the cost of the Long Range Sewer Improvement Program. The bulk of the funding for the program comes from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Revolving Loan Fund. The user charge was developed to meet IEPA requirements for loan eligibility. The user charge must be determined to be equitable for all users of the system. The user charge is based on water consumption and is directly related to the cost of the project. He reviewed the formula for the user charge in which the three components of costs; operation and maintenance, capital and debt service, are divided by the estimated water usage to determine the user charge necessary to cover the costs. He referred to slides depicting the current breakdown of the sewer user charge of 52.77 per unit of water usage. The bull; of the sewer charge ($2.04) is to pay for the debt service to repay loans that have been taken out to pay for the sewer improvements. Mr. Stafford emphasized the importance of IEPA funding to the sewer program and the amount of money it has saved compared to costs if the program had been financed with bond funds. He illustrated that for every S20 million dollars borrowed from the IEPA vs. bond funding, it is estimated to save the City nearly S9 million dollars in interest. Mr. Stafford informed the audience that to date the City has incurred over 82 million dollars in outstanding 1EPA loan debt with an additional S52 million dollars in debt required to complete the project. He noted that by the time the project is complete we will have issued 5 city bond issues and about 201EPA loans. He emphasized that while we are planning to finance the bulk of the remaining costs of the project with IEPA loans, we cannot be assured of these monies until loan agreements are signed. We do need to be aware that should these monies not become available, we will need to use City funds to pay for the completion of the project. Mr. Stafford outlined the proposed rate structure recommended to City Council at this time. He emphasized that their will be other alternative rate scenarios introduced at Saturday's budget review session. The proposal calls for a 25% increase in the sewer rate this year followed by a 12% increase the following year. The 25% increase would result in a rate of 53.46 per 100 cubic feet of water consumed. One of the concerns is that if we just raise the rates the minimum amount necessary to meet legal requirements, we would be required to make 9 rate increases in the next eleven years averaging 3.5% per year. This amount would not be sufficient to provide the cash flow necessary to pay our bills. The proposal for the two rate increases up front alleviates the cash flow problem and will be sufficient as to not require any additional increases to finance the sewer fund in future years. Mr. Stafford discussed the option of charging a portion of the sewer costs to the property tax bill. He provided illustrations of the amount of increase that would be required on the tar bill. One of the primary problems with this solution is that in addition to further increasing the property tax rate, the people who then do not pay the costs, are those who are exempt from paying property taxes. He also brought up programs that have been utilized in other communities whereby rate payers have the option of paying into a pool to help offset the charges to indigent users of the system. ! .'� FPCC NUM TES January 19, 3000 Page S Mr. Figurelh stated the formal presentation was concluded and asked if there were any questions. Mrs_ Rita Zimmerman, a resident, expressed her concern over the sewer rates and her feeling that the costs should be paid for from public works funded from property taxes. Air. Figurelli explained that if the program were to be funded from the tax revenues, tax exempt entities such as North«vtern University, would not be charged for the system He assured leis. Zimmerman that Northwestern, as the largest water consumer in the City, pays the highest amount to the sewer program. Alderman Drummer brought up sc%xral of the residual benefits that have resulted from the sewer program. In addition to the sewers being improved, the program has incorporated an excellent employment component providing jobs and training. Other improvements have also been realized such as street improvements, sidewalks and water mains. He emphasized that water is no longer cheap and that we need to be aware that when we turn on the faucet, you are opening your wallet. He emphasized to citizens that water consumption can be reduced and it does reduce your bill. Alderman Kent indicated the conclusion of the sewer improvement program presentation. He referred to the remaining items on the agenda, which consisted of updates on the construction projects underway_ It was decided that the construction updates provided in the commission packets did not require review. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m Respectfully Submitted, Regina R. Lo kis