HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-09-01 - MinutesMayor Dan Coody
City Attomey Kit Williams
City Clerk Sondra Smith
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 1 of 6
Member Aldermen
aye evi le
AR KA N SA 5
City of Fayetteville Arkansas
City Council Water & Sewer Committee
Meeting Minutes
September 1, 2005
Ward 1 Position 1 - Robert Reynolds
Ward 2 Position 1 - Kyle B. Cook
Ward 3 Position 2 — Robert Ferrell
Ward 4 Position 2 - Lioneld Jordan
A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council Water & Sewer Committee was held on September 1,
at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain
Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Kyle Cook, Alderman Robert Reynolds, Alderman
Robert Ferrell, Alderman Lioneld Jordan
Staff Present: Steve Davis, Gary Dumas, David Jurgens, Kit Williams, and Ron Petrie
Chairman Kyle Cook called the meeting to order.
1. Approval of the Minutes of August 25 Water/Sewer Committee Meeting
Minutes of the previous meeting were approved.
2. WSIP Update
a. West Side Treatment Plant Action Plan
Mayor Dan Coody commended the selection committee, comprised of staff and Alderman
Reynolds, for doing such a fine job of working a parallel track of negotiated procurement &
sealed bid. He felt that they had put together a good program and had come up with an effective
solution to the situation. He felt the selection committee was to be thanked on behalf of the City.
Alderman Reynolds stated that the committee (which consisted of himself, Gary Dumas, Ron
Petrie, Tim Conklin, Peggy Vice, Dave Jurgens and Jeff Richards, a representative from
McGoodwin, Williams & Yates) had worked up until 4:30 this date. He stated that he could
promise the Committee that the project will not be a design -build project. He said that the
selection committee had gone through several proposals and Power Point presentations to get to
the point of selection. He stated that it had been a pleasure working with the selection committee
and that they had worked hard, gone through a lot of paperwork and felt that a good selection has
been made.
Alderman Jordan asked if there was a reason it was decided not to go with a design -build
project.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 2 of 6
Steve Davis stated that the law that the City is using does not allow it.
Gary Dumas stated that there had been a total of eight submittals, all from good firms. They
narrowed the field to five extraordinarily good firms and interviewed each of these. Mr. Dumas
stated that it was a very difficult decision because each of the firms was exceptional. He said
that the selection committee chose the firm they thought would be able to bring the most to the
City and do the job in the quickest timeframe with the best price. Mr. Dumas made the
recommendation to the Committee that the City begin negotiations the following day with
Brassfield & Gorrie out of Birmingham, Alabama.
Chairman Cook asked what would happen if negotiations with Brassfield & Gorrie did not
work out and was told that the committee would then move to the second choice, which was
CDM Cajun Contractors. If that fails, the committee would move to Archer Western. It was
pointed out that nationally prominent firms submitted for the project.
Gary Dumas stated that the City would begin negotiations the following day at 9:00 a.m.
Alderman Ferrell asked how long negotiations were expected to take. Steve Davis stated that
he expected to have a firm number in 21 days on the plans as drawn and another seven days to
look at an alternate membrane solution.
Gary Dumas stated that this would probably move the action before the City Council from
October 4th to October 18th. However, he felt that they would have very firm pricing and have
the information to make a reasonable decision on whether the alternative treatment process is
viable. He pointed out that the MWY benefit cost analysis stated, in essence, that the benefit
cost was a 5%-8% difference in the pricing and at this level of detail he felt that it is essentially
too close to call.
A motion was made that the Committee accept the recommendation to go forward with
negotiations with Brassfield Goree, and being seconded the motion passed.
Jeff Richards, Director of Engineering with McGoodwin, Williams & Yates (MWY) presented
the Committee with a handout of the Fayetteville West Side WWTP Estimate of Probable Cost
and the Estimate of Probable Cost Utilizing Flux Enhancer. He stated that he had helped
develop the cost estimates and he went over the handout with the Committee.
Alderman Jordan asked about odor control, stating that he wanted to be sure that the City was
not scrimping on any of the odor control systems and was assured by Mr. Richards that no
scrimping was being done. Alderman Jordan stressed that he does not want the odor abatement
system to be lessened in any manner Mr. Richards stated that they have used this system in
other cities with no problems.
Alderman Shirley Lucas, who was in attendance, was asked for her input. She stated that she
agrees that no cuts should be made with odor abatement. Some discussion followed concerning
the importance of odor abatement and it was agreed that it was a top priority and the City wishes
to go with a system that will best minimize odor.
Steve Davis stated that this information is important while dealing with the contractor.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 3 of 6
Alderman Ferrell asked if the Committee could have a chart that showed the comparison of one
treatment versus the other in cost per million gallons of treatment, capital cost per million gallons
of treatment, and maintenance and operation cost per million gallons of treatment.
Steve Davis stated that Brassfield & Gorie has committed to have both sets of costs for the
Committee within thirty days and that these would be the construction costs that the City would
have to pay. Gary Dumas stated that this would be the cost of the plant as designed versus the
MBR technology, including both capital and operating & maintenance costs.
Alderman Ferrell asked if the selection committee had been able to glean from the contractors
interviewed whether any of the five had a preference one way or the other about which process
they liked the best. He was told that there was a difference in the comfort level in building one
system versus the other, but that this was from builders who are not involved in the treatment
process itself.
Dave Jurgens stated that there had been discussions about the MBR taking less concrete and
being an easier box to build, and that Brassfield & Gorrie, the selected contractor had stated that
as long as they had the layout it was not hard to build and they were very familiar with both.
Alderman Jordan stated that in working with the selection committee, it was his hope that the
cost would come back to enable the City to build the MBR because it is modern technology and
has less of a footprint.
Chairman Cook asked for a breakdown of exactly what the MBR technology is and what the
difference in water quality is between the two systems.
Jeff Richards gave a detailed answer describing the MBR process and the fact that the MBR
technology gives a much better quality effluent.
Alderman Ferrell asked how often the membranes would have to be replaced and what the cost
is and was informed that they have a yearly replacement cost of $308,000.00.
Alderman Don Marr, who was in attendance, stated that he had understood the MBR
technology would be less costly but in looking at the handout it appeared that it was a more
expensive system. He asked what the advantage was to the MBR technology since the cost
appeared to be higher.
Jeff Richards stated that the handout was an engineer's estimate and that the Committee would
be given the exact cost by the contractor. The Committee could then try to negotiate down as
low as possible. He stated that MBR is an improved technology.
Dave Jurgens stated that the reason parallel paths were pursued was that the cost factors of the
designed plant were more than expected. He also stated that those cost factors were not going to
get any better, considering the impact of the hurricane. Since the cost of steel, concrete, etc., will
only be going up, these costs change the balance of where the monies go. He stated that because
of the increase in demand for those materials, this process may prove itself even more viable
than before. The other thing is that in the future the MBR has a capability of producing the best
effluent in the business. This technology is being used more often in places where they reuse the
water. It has better future capabilities as the City grows.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 4 of 6
Alderman Ferrell asked if Staff had a preference at this point for one process over the other and
was told by Steve Davis that he did not believe so. Mr. Davis stated that they were waiting on
the financial feasibility and operational needs before making any decision about a
recommendation.
Repackaging of Bid
Jeff Richards stated that the repackaging of the bid is now complete and this will go with them
to the negotiations which will begin tomorrow at 9:00 a.m.
Alderman Marr asked if the $1.7 million redesign fee is a cost that will be spent regardless of
which option is chosen.
Gary Dumas stated that all of the contractors indicated that, from the information that MWY has
already generated, they will be able to come up with a firm price on both options.
Dave Jurgens stated that the redesign fee will not be spent if it turns out that the already
designed plant is the best alternative. He stated that the chosen contractor will submit firm costs
on both designs.
Gary Dumas stated that the City is no longer involved in a bid process and that the City would
be negotiating a fee on either the plant as designed or the MBR plant.
Alderman Marr asked for the original design cost of the designed plant and was told it was
close to $4 million.
Chairman Cook asked if permitting with ADEQ would be affected if the City goes with the
MBR technology.
Dave Jurgens stated that Staff plans to meet face to face with ADEQ in the next few weeks to
resolve this issue.
Chairman Cook asked if more time would be needed if a new permit is required or if things
would stay on schedule.
Steve Davis stated that there should be a construction contract for the Committee to review and
forward for full Council approval by the second meeting in October. He stated that in meeting
with ADEQ, if something different is required, Staff would need to come back to the Committee
to discuss the issues.
Gary Dumas pointed out that all of this will be factored into deciding which technology to go
with and that these are things that will be known as they move forward in the next thirty days.
Sewer Line Rerouting
Dave Jurgens stated that he had spoken with the City's environmental consultant and the
proposed rerouting which had been approved at the last meeting will not require any changes to
the permit. Therefore, notice was given to the engineer to identify easement requirements. Mr.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 5 of 6
Jurgens felt that those easements could be defined within a week and property owners could be
contacted with an alternate proposal.
Easement Update
Dave Jurgens presented the Committee with numbers on the progress being made with
easements. He stated that 163 easements were required for the total project, and 99 of those have
been obtained to date. There are 64 remaining, which is 39%. Mr. Jurgens stated that on the
west side, 91 easements are required, 66 of which have been obtained and 25 are remaining. He
stated that, in total, they have obtained 61% of the easements and he felt that excellent progress
was being made on the remainder.
Chairman Cook asked when the Committee would get to see a schedule of the easement costs.
Dave Jurgens stated that because the City's computer server had been down for four days, he
had been hampered in his efforts to have the full schedule for the Committee. He stated that on
the east side a total of approximately $88,000.00 has been spent for easements and damages, but
he was unable at the present time to give numbers for the west side.
Alderman Ferrell asked that the Committee members be given a copy of that as soon as it is
prepared instead of waiting for the next committee meeting and Mr. Jurgens assured him that he
would get that to the members as soon as possible.
Hamstring Update
Gary Dumas stated that the City is still waiting on the RJN information and once that is
obtained they will be in contact with the developers on the west side. He felt that it has been a
positive discussion so far. Mr. Dumas pointed out to the Committee that until the issue is finally
resolved there would be a Bill of Assurance on all issues going before the Planning Commission.
North College Waterline Replacement
Ron Petrie described exactly what the North College Waterline Replacement project entailed.
He stated that the low bid was $1.4 million and that there were two alternate deducts. He stated
that Staff is recommending the use of alternate deduct No. 1, of approximately $90,000.00,
which would mean a cost of $1.3 million with a 10% contingency. Mr. Petrie stated that the plan
is to bring that forward at the September 20th City Council meeting.
Dave Jurgens gave the rationale behind requesting the contingency, stating that some of the
pipes in that area of the City were put in the ground prior to 1907 and there is no real knowledge,
in some cases, of what is there. He stated that with a large number of unknown factors in the
project, it was felt to be better to have the contingency in order to avoid putting the project on
hold by several weeks if they were faced with a change order.
A motion was made to accept the use of alternate deduct No. 1 with the contingency, and being
seconded, the motion passed.
Elkins Contract
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org
City Council Water & Sewer Meeting Minutes
September I, 2005
Page 6 of 6
Steve Davis stated that the City is nearing the completion of contract talks with Elkins. He said
that the method of measuring the volume for wastewater billing needs to be settled with Elkins.
He stated that Elkins prefers the use of a formula based on water purchases and the City of
Fayetteville prefers the use of a meter. Basically it has now been negotiated that a formula based
on water purchases will be used, but a meter will be used as well. If there is a deviation off the
meter by an agreed upon percentage (10% is presently in the contract), and if that deviation
continues for three consecutive months, it would default to the meter method. Mr. Davis also
stated that Elkins has requested rate relief. He said that because the 2003 Rate Study stated that
the City should be collecting about $80,000.00 from Elkins on an annual basis beginning in
2006, it was felt that the City could provide Elkins with a rate of $2.81 per thousand in 2005 and
a 9% increase in 2006 and the Fayetteville rate payers would not see any negative impact. This
would reduce Elkins' billing substantially and would also provide the City of Fayetteville with
more money than the rate study called for in 2003. Mr. Davis stated that Elkins has requested
that the new rate be in effect beginning March 1, 2005, and that if the Committee is agreeable to
these general terms, the negotiations with Elkins could be completed. He pointed out that
another element of this is that the contract calls for new connections in Elkins to pay the
Fayetteville wastewater treatment plant impact fee.
A motion was made to continue with the Elkins negotiations, and being seconded, the motion
passed.
Farmington
Steve Davis stated that a couple of meetings had been held with Farmington and it was now
necessary to go to the respective Councils with several decision points. Farmington is requesting
rate parity and Fayetteville does not want to see any negative impact to the Fayetteville rate
payers. He pointed out that rate parity on operations, maintenance and replacement is an aspect
that is partially governed by the EPA since the City accepted EPA direct grant money for the
Noland Plant, therefore the City must make sure that OM&R is the same for each customer
group. Mr. Davis reviewed several rate structure options with the Committee.
A motion was made to continue to work with Farmington to see what could be agreed upon,
and being seconded, the motion passed.
The next meeting of the Water & Sewer Committee was tentatively set for September 29th
at 5:30 in Room 326 of City Hall.
113 West Mountain 72701 (479) 521-7700 (479) 575-8257 (Fax)
accessfayetteville.org