The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1987-07-27 Regular Meeting e e MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL JULY 27, 1987 1. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Malone at 6:05 P.M. Members of City Council Present: Mayor Norman Malone, Councilpersons Betty Waters, Ed Matuszak, Alton Porter, Deotis Gay, B. Don Skelton, Jerry Clarke Members of City Council Absent: Councilpersons John Lloyd and Mike Shipp Members of City Staff Present: City Manager Bob Herrera, City Attorney Knox Askins, City Secretary Cherie Black, Assistant City Manager John Joerns, Director of Public Works Steve Gillett, Police Chief Charles Smith, Director of Community Development Joel Albrecht, Purchasing Agent Louis Rigby, Human Resources Manager Doug de la Morena, Finance Manager Robert Stewart Others Present: J. B. Williamson and members and coaches of the National League Mustang All Star Team; Neal Welch, Alta; Norman Radford, Vinson & Elkins; Melissa Doyle, Bayshore Sun; 35 citizens 2. The invocation was given by Councilperson Skelton. 3. Council considered approving the minutes of the Regular Meeting held July 13, 1987. Motion was made by Councilperson Waters to approve the minutes of the July 1~ meeting as presented. Second by Councilperson Gay. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 4. Council considered approving the minutes of the Special Called Workshop held July 20, 1987. e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 2 Motion was made bv Councilperson Skelton to approve the minutes of the July 20 meeting as presented. Second by Councilperson Waters. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 5. There were no citizens wishing to address Council. 6. Receive presentation from City Medical Fund administrators on Section 125 plan and consider implementing plan. This item was delayed at the request of the City Manager, due to the fund administrator having not yet arrived, due to circumstances beyond his control. At this time the Mayor introduced J. B. Williamson, who addressed Council regarding the Mustang National League La Porte Boys' Baseball Association All Star team. This team went all the way to the Sectional tournament. He introduced the manager, who in turn introduced the coaches and members of the team. The 1987 Most Valuable Player, Chris Hayes, presented the City, through the Mayor, the trophy the team won as Sectional finalists. It will be put on display in City Hall. 7. Council considered professional engineering services contract with H. Carlos Smith Engineers for design of East "E" Street improvements (1985 general obligation bond program). Motion was made by Councilperson Skelton to approve the engineering services contract with H. Carlos Smith Engineers in the amount of $65,825. Second by Councilperson Gay. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None Council then adjourned into executive session at 6:20 P.M. to discuss one of the items listed under personnel: Discuss appointment to Port of Houston Commission. Council returned to the table at 7:47 P.M. and continued the regular agenda. e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 3 Council then considered item 6, as Neal Welch, the representative from the Medical Fund, had arrived. Mr. Welch addressed Council regarding the "Section 125 Plan", a copy of which is attached to these minutes as back-up. After Mr. Welch's presentation, motion was made by Councilperson Skelton to aDprove implementing this plan in Januarv of 1988. Second by Councilperson Matuszak. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 8. Council considered approving Change Order #7 for Fairmont Parkway relief trunk sewer contract. After a presentation by Director of Public Works Steve Gillett and questions from Council, motion was made bv Councilperson Skelton to approve Change Order #7 with the specification that the surfaces are properly cleaned with at least a SSPC SP-6 or SP-10, which is a near-white blass, and three mils of inorganic zinc, and 2 to S mils of epoxy coating on top of it. Second by Councilperson Matuszak. After discussion, motion was made by Councilperson table this motion until more information regarding original contract specifications can be received. Councilperson Matuszak. The motion failed, 2 ayes nays. Skelton to the Second by and 5 Ayes: Nays: Councilpersons Skelton and Matuszak Councilpersons Waters, Porter, Gay, Clarke and Mayor Malone Discussion was continued and motion was made by Council person Waters to approve Change Order #7. Second by Councilperson Gay. The City Manager suggested that staff review this item with Councilperson Skelton, and get information as to what is needed to prolong the life of the piping and that if the amount is reasonable within less than $1,000, authorize the City Manager to enter into that contract; and if it is more than $1,000, come back to Council. e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 4 Motion was made by Councilperson Porter to amend the motion to incorporate the suggestion made bY the City Manager. Second by Councilperson Skelton. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None The vote was then taken on the amended motion and carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 9. Council considered an ordinance approving settlement agreements with FMC Corporation and Rohm and Haas Bayport, Inc., protest to the City of La Porte's Sanitary Landfill Application. The City Attorney read: ORDINANCE 1553 - AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE, WITH FMC CORPORATION AND ROHM AND HAAS BAYPORT, INC.; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Motion was made bY Councilperson Skelton to adopt Ordinance 1551 as read by the City Attorney. Second by Councilperson Matuszak. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 10. Council was to consider a resolution for Port of Houston Commission member. Action on this item was postponed until after the resumption of the Executive Session. 11. Council considered a consent agenda: A. Consider awarding bid for hazardous materials incident trailer, and B. Consider awarding bid for commercial solid waste containers. e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 5 Councilperson Porter requested that item A be removed for discussion. Motion was made bv Councilperson Waters to approve item B of the consent agenda. Second by Councilperson Matuszak. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None After discussion of Item A, motion was made by Councilperson Porter to approve said item. Second by Councilperson Clarke. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 12. Administrative Reports: The City Manager requested a Council workshop on August 17 to review the proposed animal ordinance, and also to preview the plans for the proposed new EMS facility. The City Manager reported that Staff is at a point now of being prepared to put together the final stages of the budget, and proposed that the budget me made up of a tax rate of 66 cents. He asked for Council's permission to proceed with the budget using that rate, and asked for permission to pass on to Staff members information regarding the Ralph Anderson study. There was no objection from Council in this regard. He then announced that the Mayor had received correspondence from the Harris County Community Development Agency that the City of La Porte has been granted a Community Development Block Grant of $167,000 for the expansion of the Jenny Riley Community Center, relocation of the Center's playground, and construction of a sidewalk from the Center to the playground. Also received was a Community Development Block Grant in the amount of $10,000 for an unsafe building demolition program. The City is to respond in the affirmative to the Harris County Community Development Agency if they e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 6 wish to receive these monies. Council wholeheartedly agreed that the City wishes these funds. The City Manager read a list of unsafe buildings that will be demolished with the grant money. 13. Council Action: Councilpersons Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton and Clarke brought items to Council's attention. Councilperson Matuszak requested that a Staff Environmental Scientist be considered in the new budget year. Councilperson Skelton requested that Staff see if something could be done about the podium mike to insure that users were being heard. 14. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:40 P.M. to further discuss the personnel items: A. Discuss appointment to Port of Houston Commission and B. Discuss appointment to La Porte Area Water Authority. Council returned to the table at 9:23 P.M. Council then addressed item 10, consider resolution for Port of Houston Commission member. The Mayor read: RESOLUTION 87-12 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE HARRIS COUNTY MAYORS' AND COUNCILS' ASSOCIATION, FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A COMMISSIONER TO THE PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY BOARD; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. Motion was made bv Councilperson Waters to approve Resolution 87-12 as read, with the name of Arthur Kelly being recommended for consideration. Second by Councilperson Matuszak. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None e e Minutes, Regular Meeting, La Porte City Council July 27, 1987, Page 7 (As the City Secretary was reviewing these minutes, she noted that the actual resolution number should have been 87-11. The resolution number has been changed on the resolution andthe copy and certification sent to Harris County Mayors' and Councils' Association.) Motion was made by Councilperson Waters to consider Mike Wadsworth for apoointment to the La Porte Area Water Authoritv. Second by Councilperson Skelton. The motion carried, 7 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Councilpersons Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Gay, Skelton, Clarke and Mayor Malone Nays: None 15. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was duly adjourned at 9:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted: ~U~ Cherie Black, City Secretary Passed & Approved this the 10th day of August, )?87 J/J~tlz?//( if~ ~o~~an L. Malone, Mayor e e R~Q1,J~.S.t .fO.R. .GIrl .GOU.N.GlL. AGE.NUA ITEM :... _.....__*.._..~-.._. _ .._":...~ _-r'O..-.. .... ... ...-"-.-.-;--;___~'_.. .... .!.._......~;,.-.-. ....-.....4-, ....... "..-p. ..~_~ _. _....._. -_-..... ~...' ,,-._~~.,-.........-. "';;" 0-;-........... .. _..-'_~-'. "0 .or ........ -. -; .-.;~.._ ......... ", ..-._....,-~-~..-~-=,;._..~ Agenda Date Requested: ~__..1l~1./...87 Requested By: __RQQ~r.tuH~rr.?L~__ Department: _},-QrrJinistratjon ___xx_____u Report Resolution Ordinance Exhibits: ::-:;;~_~_'!'"_-....---~-~-..:-~-..;:--.-:-~~_-..;..-_~....:w~~~~..;.-..;.~~-~'!"'.;;..~_~~--_'!-_~...~....-~~":,,,"~___~__-..;.'~~~""'~~_-':'~~-:;;'~..;.=o...~"":;;...-=--_ . ~JIMMARL~__R..EC1LI1ME.NDA TION The City of La Porte has owned its employees' group medical insur'ance plan for ,over' 4 years now. Through these years, the City has saved literally thousands of dolJars in premium charges by paying itself these premiums and administering a prudent medical insurance plan document. Tlle Plan has seen rnodificaUorls the past several years dve in large part to medical inflation and a generally tougll reinsurance market. Reinsurance merely is the point where an insurance carrier takes over after the plan has paid out a certain amount. In our case, our stop-loss ceiling is $40,000 per case and any claims above that amount are automatically paid by the reinsurance card er Hartford Insurance Company. In retrospect, key modifications made to the plan in the past three years have been intended to avoid employee contributions by raising employee and family deductibles and by modifying high dollar benefits in the plan document. We are now at a point in the life of the plan where our consultants believe employee contributions can no longer be avo id ed . Al ta Heal th Strateg i es is recommend i ng tha t the City seriously consider a minimal employee contribution towards dependent coverage only. This will mean that employees wishing to cover their dependents under the exisU.ng plan will be deducted $15.56 monthly. This amount is consider'ed fairly minimal by indus tr'y s tanda rd s bu t we would 1 ike the Counc i 1 to consi de r a plan whereby this amount could be somewhat defrayed and by which the City's payroll taxes could be reduced. Many cost conscious organizations have undertaken Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code which allows for' partially employee funded benefits to be discounted on a pre-tax basis from employees' paychecks. In other words, through a "cafeteria style" payroll arrangement, employees might save up to 20% of the cost of put'chasing the benefit fr'om the City. Additionally, the City benefi ts fr'om paying payroll taxes on the net payroll amounts rather than gross payroll totals. This could prove to be a win-win situation for the City and the employees. At least, this option would mini.mize employee out-of-pocket expenses nearly 20% while also saving the City in payroll taxes. v.Ie have asked Neal Welch of Al ta Heal th Strategies to address Council on the necessity of the employee contribution and the positive effects of the cafeteria-style benefit option for ruajor medical jnsur'ance beginning October 1, 1987. We expect to have Mr. Welch present at the July 27, 1987 Regular Council Meeting. Action Required by Council: None ___ ___ _._:..=,": ::::...:.:::...:.:::. =.~-=.=-~:;.:';:'" :...~:.:..:.....:=--:.....:.:..:..~:.. ~."L..:"_~::,'~:.:_:..~:o..-:..-~,~~;..:.:..o~.:"";,,,;:;:,:,~:..::,::=--:;,;,;,,,:,.::.::,::::':=--=-:-~ l\p.p.r9y~.d_ _ f9T_ _G.Jty_ J~QUItc),,:Ll'..&..~ u~O~__.];....~ Robert T. Herrera CIty Manager I - Z3 -() l ... "-'0---___ ....-. .l.. " .- " .. .. " - G... .. " .-.-.- __ 0.... --... .- ....._......_._.- DATE :.......~ _..~... _....;. ._~... !'_~_~':_...;;'~...o.:.~;.-~~.;.~~-~-r~-_-_-_:"..._-~-:""~~-_-__.._..___,..&~"--_-_-_-~_. _' _,_-~~_.._.._.._.-__~_~ ~-=- -=-_-....-_ ~~...~-..:..-.... _ _ _.'" ... .. ___ e e ~ - JlITII " ... .. _ HEAI.'IH 5rrIII..."*5..we. 350 Glenborough Drive. Suite #100 . Houston, Texas 77067 · (713) 873.7509 July 20, 1987 : .,..;: ; ,: . - , . , Mr. Doug de la Morena Ci ty of LaPorte P.O. Box 1115 LaPorte, TX 77571 Re: Premium Only Plan (POP) ~ : . . " ("-,'-\1 r',... L' . ...... {vr 1\ :;:Jr,p-(,': , "'""'I.....~ Dear Doug: Enclosed is some introductory information and financial projections for the POP for the City of LaPorte. ALTA refers to the POP, as the simpliest form of flexible benefit plan. There need not be any change to the benefit plan structure. The employees will simply choose between a pre-tax reduction or an after-tax deduction for dependent health coverage. Obviously, for those employees choosing single coverage there is no effect on take-home pay. There are a number of different ways of communicating the POP to employees. Each employee must be fully aware of the benefits offered and must make a written election at the inception of the plan. ALTA will be happy to provide illustrations of sample employee communications. ALTA will also provide a prototype plan document approved by ,the Internal Revenue Service. This is required when implementing a Flexible Benefit Program. In the future, additional employee paid benefits may be added using this dynamic type document. Considering the City's plan to implement a dependent contribution for the first time, the POP is a well-timed "plus" to an otherwise viewed "minus". We will look forward to discussing this program with the City and to help in its implementation. Very truly yours, /"' ...,:>;.. , , __.,:".C~~, rtL- t,../ Neal W. Welch Assistant Vice President N~JW/ cw Enclosure !"" I,'.. ~ ,.,. !! I' I .\ dOl"" I",!' \ I ", ' e e ......--- Section 125 "Premium Only Plan" Tax Benefit Flexible benefit plans have been a hotly debated concept throughout most of the 1980's. Many consultants (with an appreciation of the effects of "adverse selection") have come to look with suspicion upon the prospect of employee cholce...partlcularly among medical benefits. Flexible benefit plans, however, do not necessarily require the employer offer of complex and cost inefficient "optional benefit plans". Outlined below, therefore, Is a discussion of a possible "flexible benefit plan" that can offer an employer (and his employees) al I the tax benefits of I.R.C. Section 125, but operated In its simplest form... I.e. the "Premium Only Plan" (POP) approach. Adoption of a POP program permits the employee's current payrol I deductions to be made on a pretax basis. This wll I reduce their federal Income tax and Increase their take-home pay. The employer and employee may also save from reduced FICA, FUTA and Workers' Compensation costs as a result of taking advantage of this IRC provision. Note that no complex, or adverse selection generating, offer of multiple plan options Is required for this to be adopted. Definitions: IRC 125 (g) and the proposed regulations define what a "qual ffled" flexible benefit plan must contain. A summary of these requirements follows: 1. Written Plan - A written legal document, summary plan description, or both must exist before any contribution Is made. Documents must describe and explain: a. all benefits b. el Iglbll Ity rules c. election procedures d. basis for making contributions e. maximum contribution f. the plan year 2. Participants - Participants must be employees or former employees such as retirees. Note that self-employed Individuals (e.g. partners) are not employees and may not participate. An employee Is any person currently el igible under any other qualified health and welfare or retirement plan. 3. Choice - The plan must offer choice between two or more benefits. Within the medical premiums options alone, a POP al lows more than two benefits. A participant must also have a choice between a taxable and a nontaxable benefit. Under a POP, the choice is threefold: the participant may pay the premium after tax (I.e. a taxable benefit), through a salary reduction (I.e. nontaxable benefit), or may elect to pay no premiums, thereby taking home more cash (taxable benefit). IIITn - --- . ;;' IfEAUNS'JWIlInQn..c. e e ~ - .' 4. Elections - Elections are Irrevocable once the period of coverage has begun. If the employee has designated a change because of premium Increases during the plan year prior to the beginning of benefits coverage, the change wll I stll I qualify. So the wording In a POP may stipulate automatic salary reduction or premium Increases during 'a plan year. Exceptions to this Include: o marriage or divorce of a participant o death of a spouse or dependent o addition or deletion of dependents o a participant or spouse gains or loses employment 5. Nontaxable Benefits - The fol lowing nontaxable benefits are specifically al lowed or mentioned in the I.R.C.: a. Group term life - Imputed Income would accrue on amounts over $50,000 and would have to be tracked for W2 reporting. b. Accident and health plans: o short-term or long-term disabll ity (if LTD is bought pre-tax,the benefit would be taxable upon receipt) o survivor income premiums o medical o dental o eye care/vision o hearing o prescription drug plans o company sponsored/approved/nondiscriminatory fitness centers, or premiums/dues for health promotion faclt Itles c. Group legal - premiums or dues, and pre-paid fees d. Dependent care - premiums or dues, and pre-paid fees 7. Participation In the POP reduces Social Security benefits. Salary reduction decreases earnings under workers' compensation, federal unemployment compensation, and FICA. Est i mated Sect i on 125 "POP" Say i ngs to City of la Porte The computerized illustration on the fol lowing page estimates the impact on take-home pay after the Implementation of a POP program. Also Illustrated are the estimated savings the City of La Porte can derive from reduced FICA contributions. As a brief example of the savings Involved under current 1987 tax laws and rates, the fol lowing example should clarify the Section 125 advantage to City of La Porte and Its employees. This particular example assumes an employee contribution for dependent coverage (i.e. family) of $15.56 per month. JlITn - -.. . ;? HuDNsm.nan.IIC. e e p - Current Monthly Employee Medical Contribution (i.e. before Section 125 adoption) ... $ 00.00 Proposed Monthly (@ incremental cost) Employee Medical Contributions (i.e. before Section 125 adoption) ... $ 1 5. 56 Monthly Section 125 Tax Savings to Employee (I.e. after Section 125 adoption) ... $ 5.47 Net Effective Proposed Monthly Contribution to Employee (I.e. after Section 125 adoption) $ 10.09 Estimated FICA Savings to City of La Porte after Section 125 Adoption = $2,102.70 per year. JlITn - -.. . 5 HUUH.5"nMnI:In.II1IC. e e r-: SECTION 125 CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS Account Name: City of LaPorte 14-Jul-87 Part A - Effect on Employee Contributions: ===================================================================================== Section 125 Section 125 Current EE Proposed EE Monthly Tax Net Month I y Employee Contributions Contributions Contributions Savings Contribution ------------------ ------- ------- ------- --- A) Employee Only $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 B) EE + Ch II d $0.00 $15.56 $3.45 $12.11 C) EE + Spouse $0.00 $15.56 $3.45 $12.11 D) EE + F am II y $0.00 $15.56 $5.47 $10.09.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Employee Profile: A B C 0 Annual Household Income $15,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 FII ing Status Unmarried Unmarried Married/Joint Marr led/ Jo i nt Number of Exemptions 2 2 4 Medical Plan Coverage EE Only EE/Ch i I d EE/Spouse EE/Fami I y ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Payrol I Deductions for Premiums on After Tax Basis: ------------------------------------------------------- Federal Withholding $1,508 $1,973 $3,240 $5,312 f'ICA (7.15% to $43,800) $1,073 $1,430 $2, 145 $2, 860 After Tax Salary $12,420 $16,598 $24,615 $31,828 Less Annual Benefit Costs $0 $187 $187 $187 , : Net Takehome Pay $12,420 $16,411 $24,428 $31 , 64 1 ===================================================================================== Payrol I Deductions for Premiums on a Pre-Tax Basis: ------------------------------------------------------- Less Annual Benefit Costs $0 $15,000 $1 ,508 $1,073 $187 $19,813 $187 $187 Redirected Salary Federal Witholding FICA (7.15% to $43,800) $1,944 $1,417 $29,813 $3,212 $2, 1 32 $39,813 $5,260 $2,847 Net Takehome Pay $12,420 $16,452 $24,470 $31 ,707 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net Increase in Take Home Pay / Yr... $0 $41 $41 $66 Net Increase in Take Home Pay / Mo... $0.00 $3.45 $3.45 $5.47 e SECTION 125 CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS Part B - Estimated Employer Savings From Section 125 Salary Redirection: e .....--- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- % Employees Earning Under $43,800 = 90.00% Employee Contributions Proposed EE Contribution ------------------ ;;. A) EE On I y Coverage B) EE + Ch t I d C) EE + Spouse D) EE + F am II y $0.00 $15.56 $15.56 $15.56 Vol ume 235 29 15 131 Mo. Salary Redirection $0.00 $451.24 $233.40 $2,038.36 Total Redirected Salary % Appl led Under FICA Limit Net Redirected Salary Employer Savings From FICA Annual Salary Redirection $0.00 $5,414.88 $2,800.80 $24,460.32 --------------- --------------- $32,676.00 90.00% $29,408.40 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- $2,102.70 General Input Assumptions: $1,900 FIT Personal Exemption 1987 Federal Income Tax Tables $2,570 Standard Single Deduction $3,800 Standard Joint Deduction 7.15% FICA Tax Rate $43,800 FICA Cell ing e e ~ ~ CITY OF LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Norman Malone and Members of City Council FROM: Bob Herrera, City Manager DATE: July 13, 1987 RE: State of the Self Funded Medical Fund The City of La Porte has owned its employees' group medical insurance plan for over 4 years now. Through these years, the City has saved literally thousands of dollars in premium charges by paying itself these premiums and administering a prudent medical insurance plan document. The Plan haa seen modifications the past several years due in large part to medical inflation and a generally tough reinsurance market. Reinsurance merely is the point where an insurance carrier takes over after the plan has p3id out a certain amount. In our case, our stop-loss ceiling is $40,000 per case and any claims above that amount are automatically paid by the reinsurance carrier-Hartford Insurance Co. In retrospect, key modifications made to the plan in the past three years have been intended to avoid employee contributions by raising employee and family deductibles and by modifying high dollar benefits in the plan document. We are now at a point in the life of the plan where our consultants believe employee contributions can no longer be avoided. Alta Health Strategies is recommending that the City seriously consider a minimal employee contribution towards dependent coverage only. This will mean that employees wishing to cover their dependents under the existing plan will be deducted $15.56 monthly. This amount is considered fairly minimal by industry standards but we would like the council to consider a plan whereby this amount could be somewhat defrayed and by which the City's payroll taxes could be reduced. Many cost conscious organizations have undertaken Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code which allows for partially employee funded benefits to be discounted on a pre-tax basis from employees' paychecks. In other words, through a "cafeteria style" payroll arrangement, employees might save up to 20% of the . . ~- Pg. 2 cost of purchasing the benefit from the City. Additionally, the City benefits from paying payroll taxes on the net payroll amounts rather than gross payroll totals. This could prove to be a win-win situation for the City and the employees. At least, this option would minimize employee out-of-pocket expenses nearly 20% while also saving the City in payroll taxes. We have asked Neal Welch of Alta Health Strategies to address Council on the necessity of the employee contribution and the positive effects of a cafeteria-style benefit option for major medical insurance beginning October 1, 1987. We expect to have Mr. Welch present at the July 27, 1987 Regular Council Meeting. Should you have any questions or concerns please advise. e e REOUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM xx Department: Administration Agenda Date Requested: Requested By: Report Resolution Ordinance Exhib its: 1. Proposed contrac t for profess ional eng ineer ing services for preliminary report, preliminary design and final design of improvements for East "E" 2. Proposed FY 87-88 CIP Budget for East "E" SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The 1985 General Obligation Bond Sale included $251,000 earmarked for the design of East "E" Street 'from San Jacinto to Park Street. Staff has negotiated a contract based on a proposal submitted by H. Carlos Smith Engineers & Surveyors. Since the construction of "E" Steet is dependent on a future bond sale, this contract contains a provision to update the plans and specifications for a period of three years from the date of the contract (the update does not include special services or conditions caused by natural disasters). The preliminary phase includes a report that will address neighborhood impacts, width of street, utility conflicts, routing during construction and other concerns. The final cost of Engineering Services will be adjusted up or down based on the cost estimate produced in the final design phase and accepted by the City. I CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATES TOTAL $24,000 28,000 13,825 $6'5,825 % of Const. Cost 2.4% 2.8% 1.4% 6.5% Construction Costs $1,01~,qq7 Engineering Costs (this contract) Preliminary Phase Final Design Additional Services Action Required by Council: Author izat ion for the City Manager to execute the attached contrac t for professional engineering services with H. Carlos Smith Engineers & Surveyors, Inc. The estimated costs for these services is $65,82'5 . Availability of Funds: Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing x General Fund Capital Improvement Other Account Number: 011-700-708-1~0 Funds Available: XX YES NO Approved for City Council Agenda 6?okt T ~~ Robert T. Herrera DATE City' Manager 7 ( 'l "1 f ~1 e e CITY OF LA PORTE PROPOSED CIP BUDGET FY 1q87-1q88 EAST "En STREET PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ... - ) t Allocated funds will be used to reconstruct East "E" Street from San Jacinto to Park Street. The construction of curbs, gutters, and necessary dra inage improvements are also included in this project. This project upgrades East "E" Street to a principal street on East La Porte. The projected date for completion of this project is September 1981. REVENUES: ORIGINAL ALLOCATIONS 1985 General Revenue Bonds $2'31~000 S251.000 TOTAL REVENUES PROJECTED APPROPRTATIONS: Administrative Design Services Advance Utility Adjustment Contingency $ 12,000 70,000 159,000 10,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS PROJECTED $251.000 57 1q87-1q88 $1Qq,000 $1QQ.000 $ -0- 35,000 159,000 '3,000 $1QQ.000 :) ~ 2 e e r-_ H. CARLOS SMITH "Tuly 20, 1987 ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS, INC. 718 SOUTH BROADWAY P. O. BOX M LAPORTE. TEXAS 77571 PHONE AIC 713 471-4226 City of La Porte P. O. Box 1115 La Porte, Texas 77571 Attn: Mr. Bob Herrera City Manager Dear Mr. Herrera: We propose to render professional engineering services in connection with the Street Paving and Drainage, and Utility Adjustments on East "E" Street, Our Job No. 2122-87, (hereinafter called the "Project"). You are expected to furnish us with full information as to your requirements including any special or extraordinary consideration for the Project or special services needed, and also to make available pertinent existing data. Our proposal is more fully described as follows: I . SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work involves the Preliminary Engineering Phase, and the Design Phase for the reconstruction of East "E" Street from San Jacinto Avenue to Park Avenue as a reinforced concrete roadway with curbs and all necessary storm drainage improvements. The scope of work shall also include the location and identification of all utilities within the right-of-way and the investigation of these utilities for interference with the proposed improvements. The scope of work will consist of the preparation of a preliminary engineering report outlining recommendations of the Engineer; complete design including preparation of plans and specification for the roadway construction and the replacement, relocation or re-routing of any City utilities; the identification of any public utilities interfering with the proposed improvements and the notification of these utility companies; the identification of all agencies requiring plan review and approvals and assistance to the City in obtaining permits and plan approvals from these agencies. All plans and specifications shall be in complete form ready for public bidding. Page 1 of 16 e e r ' The Construction Phase is not scheduled to occur until such time as additional General Obligation bonds are sold, and therefore is not a part of this contract. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES ENGINEERING AND DESIGN: Project Manager for this project will be Mr. H. Carlos Smith, P.E., assisted by Mr. Curtis L. Muncy, E.I.T. Schedule of work is detailed below. Consultations with City staff, regulatory agencies and utility companies will be on going as the project progresses. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE The purpose of the Preliminary Phase is to define the overall concept and refine the scope of work of the project to be incorporated in the Design Phase. Major questions of design and utility interference will be resolved with an "end product" to be clearly defined. Work to be performed in the preliminary phase will include: 1. Preparation of preliminary drainage design, defining drainage areas, preliminary layouts sizing of conduits, and the placing of appurtenances. Define design criteria used. 2. Establish and recommend the scope of any soil and foundation investigations, which in the opinion of the Engineer may be required; if approved by the City, the Engineer shall assist the City in arranging for such work to be done, for the City's account. 3. Conduct field surveys necessary to identify public and franchise utilities and related structures within or crossing the right-of-way and to determine their interference with the proposed improvements. The City of La Porte will furnish equipment and labor and assist in utility location. The frequency and scheduling of those services shall be determined by the Director of Community Development and approved by The Director of Public Works. 4. Identify and locate by field survey any privately owned facilities or structures within or adjacent to the right-of- way. 5. Identify conflicts or interferences with future planned City Capital Improvement Projects. Page 2 of 16 e e ..... . 6. Identify neighborhood impacts of the proposed improvements and present alternate solutions with associated cost and recommend, with reasoning for recommendation, solutions to the problems. 7. Identify neighborhood impacts during construction and propose recommendations for re-routing and/or detours. 8. Determine and define all regulatory agency requirements such as Harris County Flood Control District, and assemble applicable codes and standards. 9. Identify all problems encountered, present alternate resolutions for each problem, and recommend, with reasoning for recommendation, problem solutions. 10. Outline design criteria for each element of design and standards and methods used for each element. 11. Prepare scope of work, schedule and proposed budget for the Design Phase, including breakdown of all other services required to complete the Design Phase. 12. Prepare Preliminary Plan and Engineering Report with Preliminary Cost Estimate and furnish 15 copies of bound report to City. DESIGN PHASE Upon completion of Preliminary Engineering Phase, and upon written approval of the Preliminary Engineering Report by the City, the Engineer shall proceed with Design Phase. Work to be performed in the Design Phase shall include the following: 1. Conduct field surveys necessary to complete the design of the project. i.e.: Cross-sections and topography. 2. Obtain additional soils and foundation investigations, which in the opinion of the Engineer may be required, if approved by the City and assist the City in arranging for such work to be done, for the City's account. 3. Complete design criteria, establish design standards and methods. 4. Complete design of storm drainage system, establish size and grade of conduit, and inlets. Establish final location of conduit, inlets and manholes. Page 3 of 16 e e ~- 5. Assist the City in obtaining approvals of all regulatory agencies such as Harris County Flood Control District. Approvals shall be obtained prior to submitting Final Design to the City or as required by the regulatory agencies. 6. Complete design of pavement, width as finally selected and req~ired grades. 7. Complete design, sizing, re-routing and adjustment requirements of public utilities (City owned). 8. Notify franchise utilities of any conflicts with proposed improvements. 9. Prepare preliminary construction drawings and specifications for review by the City. 10. After review of preliminary construction drawings and specifications, complete final construction drawings and specifications and prepare contract documents. 11. Submit final contract documents to the City for final review. 12. Upon final approval by the City, furnish City with five copies of final contract documents, final detailed construction cost estimate and mylar reproducibles of the contract drawings. 13. For a period not to exceed three years from the date of an engineering contract for this project with the City, the Engineer will, without charge, except for special services required, update the contract documents to reflect any changes of topography occasioned by private or municipal construction. The Engineer will also update the Construction Cost Estimate and furnish the City five copies of updated contract documents and cost estimate as required. Any changes caused by natural phenomenon, i.e.: hurricanes, storms, earthquakes, etc., will be updated at the City's request and at an agreed fee. 14. The Engineer will not proceed from one phase to the next phase without written approval and authorization to proceed by the City of La Porte. Page 4 of 16 e e ~- CONSTRUCTION PHASE It is understood by the Engineer that the construction of this project will be delayed until such time as the City issues additional General Obligation bonds. Should the City so desire, the Engineer, will perform the Construction Phase items as outlined in the Texas Society of Professional Engineers Manual "General Engineering Services", at such time as the construction of the project is undertaken. These services, if furnished, shall be based on a separate contract agreed to by Owner and Engineer. III. SCHEDULE The Engineer is ready, willing and able to start work immediately upon receipt of a signed contract with the City on this project. Anticipated schedule of completion of each phase is as outlined below, based on working days. A. Preliminary Engineering Phase 1. Field Investigation of Existing Utilities 10 days 2. Preparation of Preliminary design, plan, and report 20 days TOTAL ESTIMATED TIME 30 days B. Final Design Phase 1. Final Field Surveys 5 days 2. Preparation of Preliminary Contract Documents, etc. 10 days 3. Preparation of Final Contract Documents 10 days TOTAL ESTIMATED TIME 25 days Review time by the City is not included in this schedule and any delays occasioned in the review process will necessitate the extension of this schedule. Page 5 of 16 e e ~ IV. COMPENSATION A. Preliminary Engineering Phase: Flat fee of $24,000.00 based on the conceptual cost estimate as attached Exhibit B-1 and B-2 and Curve B of the ASCE Manual No. 45. 45% of 85% of total fee from the Curve. B. Design Phase: Flat fee of $28,000.00 based on the conceptual cost estimate as attached Exhibit B-1 and B-2 and Curve B of the ASCE Manual No. 45. 55% of 85% of total fee from the curve. C. Construction Phase: services. This contract does not include construction phase D. Special Services: As outlined in the T.S.P.E. Manual we would perform at our direct payroll (salary) costs plus 27% for overhead, etc., times a multiplier of 2.5. These special services are limited to the items on the enclosed list of special services from the T. S. P. E. Manual, "General Engineering Services", attached Exhi bi t, A. Field surveys to collect information required for both preliminary and design phases shall be performed at our direct payroll (salary) costs plus 27% times a multiplier of 2.0. Preliminary Cost Estimate of this service is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Soil and foundation investigations including field and laboratory testing and related engineering analysis and recommendations would be contracted for at our cost plus 10% for handling or may be furnished by the City. E. Travel: Travel expenses will not be charged for within the limits of Harris County. Travel outside the County is computed at the rate of 30 cents per mile. F. Terms: Invoices will be submitted monthly based on estimated percentage of completion with net payment due within 30 days of invoice. Late payments will incur a late charge of one and on- half (1 1/2) percent per month from the original invoice date. Page 6 of 16 e e ~ - G. Conditions: If conceptual cost estimate is significantly greater or less than the final cost estimate prepared after final plans and specifications have been accepted, the total fee will be adjusted to meet 85% of Curve B of the A.S.C.E. Manual No. 45. Page 7 of 16 e e ~ ' V. SPECIAL SERVICES: 1. Services of a resident Project Representative, and other field personnel as required. for on-the-site observation of construction. 2. Land surveys, and establishment of boundaries and monuments, and related office computations and drafting. 3. Preparation of property or easement descriptions. 4. Preparation of any special reports required for marketing of bonds. 5. Appearances before regulatory agencies, other than required for routine permitting. 6. Assistance to the Owner as an expert witness in any litigation with third parties, arising from the development of construction of the Project, including preparation of engineering data and reports. 7. Detailed mill, shop and/or laboratory inspection of materials or equipment. 8. Revision of contract drawings after a definite plan has been approved by the owner, re-drawing of plans to show work as actually constructed, other than revisions provided for by Item 13 of the Design Phase. 9. Services after issuance of Certificate of Completion. 10. Services to investigate existing conditions or facilities or to make measured drawings thereof, or to verify accuracy of drawings or other information furnished by Client. 11. Any other special or miscellaneous assignments specifically authorized by Owner. 12. Photogrammet,ry mapping of the project would be invoiced at actual cost plus 10%. EXHIBIT A e e r CITY OF LA PORTE EAST "E" STREET IMPROVEMENTS VI I. CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE 18,000 sq.yds. - 7" Reinforced Concrete Pavement @ $ 20.00 $360,000.00 17,800 l.f. - 6" Concrete Curb @ $ 2.20 $ 39,160.00 19,800 sq.yds. - 6" Li me Stabilized Subgrade @ $ 2.25 $ 44,550.00 20,000 c.y. - Unclassified Excavation @ $ 2.00 $ 40,000.00 540 lof. - 15 RCP Inlet Leads @ $ 17.00 $ 9,180.00 730 lof. - 18 RCP In l.et Leads @ :I; 19.00 $ 13,870.00 670 lof. - 18 RCP 0/6' @ $ 17.50 $ 11,725.00 1,030 l.f. - 24 RCP 0/6' @ :$ 19.00 $ 19,570.00 1,030 l.f. - 30 RCP 6/8' @ $ 24.00 :$ 24,720.00 590 lof. - 36 RCP 6/8' @ $ 31.00 $ 18,290.00 220 lof. - 36 Outfall @ $ 40.00 $ 8,800.00 44 ea. - Type BB Inlets @ :t 800.00 $ 35,200.00 13 ea. - Standard manholes @ $1,000.00 :$ 13,000.00 2,000 tons Cement stabilized Sand I~ $ 17.00 $ 34,000.00 3,000 c. y. - Unclassified Ex cavati on (Transitions) @ $ 2.00 :$ 6,000.00 8,800 s.y. - Li me Stabili?ed Subgrade (Transitions) @ $ 2.25 $ 19,800.00 8,000 s.y. - Base Course (Transitions) @ $ 10.50 $ 84,000.00 6,400 s.y. - 1 1/211 H.M.A.C. (Transi tions) @ $ 7.00 :$ 44,800.00 4,200 s. f. - 411 Concrete Driveways @ $ 2.00 $ 8,400.00 6,400 s. f. - Li mestone Driveways @ $ 1. 20 $ 7,680.00 400 s. f . - Asphalt Driveways @ $ 2.00 $ 800.00 Estimated Construction Cost $843,545.00 Contingencies @ 15% $126.532.00 Total Estimated Cost $970,077.00 EXHIBIT B-1 e CITY OF LA PORTE e ~- EAST "E" STREET - UTILITY ADJUSTMENTS VII. CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE (cont.> WATER LINE REPLACEMENT: 1,650 l.f. 8" P.V.C. water line @ :$ 7.50 3 ea. Wet Connections @ $ 500.00 8 ea. Wet Connections Small @ $ 500.00 160 l.f. 16" Casing - Open Cut @ $ 12.00 180 l.f. 4" P.V.C. water line @ :$ 4.00 9 ea. 4" Gate Valve t< Box @ $ 200.00 3 ea. 8" Gate Valve t< Box @ :$ 400.00 50 tons Cement Stabilized Sand @ $ 17.00 40 l.f. 16" Bore t< Jack @ $ 45.00 Estimated Constructi on Cost SEWER LINE REPLACEMENT: 520 l.f. 6" P.V.C. 0/6' @ :$ 6.00 420 l.f. 8" P.V.C. 6/8' @ :$ 7.50 4 ea. Standard Manholes @ :$ 800.00 1 ea. Cleanout @ :$ 200.00 45 tons Cement Stabilized Sand @ :$ 17.00 Esti mated Construct i on Cost Total Estimated Construction Cost Contingencies @ 20'l. Total Estimated Cost TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST EXHIBIT B-2 $ 12,375.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 4,000.00 :$ 1,920.00 :$ 720.00 :$ 1,800.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 850.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 26,165.00 $ 3,120.00 $ 3,150.00 $ 3,200.00 $ 200.00 $ 765.00 $ 10,435.00 $ 36,600.00 $ 7,320.00 $ 43,920.00 $1,013,997.00 e e r CITY OF LA PORTE EAST "E" STREET IMPROVEMENTS SPECIAL SERVICES COST ESTIMATE ENGINEERING FIELD SURVEYING 1. Horizontal and Vertical Control 84 man hours $ 2,224.60 2. Utility Location and Verification 240 man hours $ 6,356.00 3. Topographic Surveying 120 man hours $ 3,178.00 4. Geophysical Laboratory Services $ 1,500.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $13,258.60 ':',i EXHIBIT C e e p - We would expect to start our services promptly after receipt of your acceptance of this proposal and to complete our services in accordance with Section III, Schedule. If there are protracted delays for reasons beyond our control, we would expect to renegotiate with you the basis for our compensation in order to take into consideration changes in price indices and pay scales applicable to the period when services are in fact being rendered. It is necessary that you advise us in writing at an early date if you have budgetary limitations for the overall Project Cost or Construction Cost. We will endeavor to work within those limitations. If you request we will submit to you periodically during the design phase of our services our opinions as to the probability of completing construction within your budget and, where appropriate, request an adjustment in t.he budget or a revision in the extent or quality of the Project. We do not guarantee that our opinions will not differ materially from negotiated prices or bids. If you wish greater assurance as to probable Construction Costs or if you wish formal estimates, an independent cost estJmator should be employed. Services are to be rendered in the customary phases which, together with the general understandings applicable to our relationship with you, are set forth in the printed General Provisions thereto which are attached to and made a part of this proposal. Your particular responsibilities are also set forth in the General Provisions. This proposal, the Exhibits and the General Provisions consisting of twent~ pages, represent the entire understanding between you and us in respect of the Project and may only be modified in writing signed by both of us. If it satisfactorily sets forth your understanding of the arrangement between us, we would appreciate your signing the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided below and returning it to us. .This proposal will be open for acceptance until August 1, 1987, unless changed by us in writing. Very truly yours, H. Carlos Smith, Engineers & Surveyors, Inc. '~c;l /</ I // .,-r-/' ~I L";-I.~,?- ~~~ /:.~. f '1 H. Carlos Smith. P.E. President ,,.\ I Accepted this___day of City of La Porte 19__ By:_ Bob Herrera, City Manager HCS/kh Page 8 of 16 e e r-_ GENERAL PROVISIONS: Attached to and made a part of LETTER AGREEMENT dated .July 27, 1987, between City of La Porte, Texas (Owner) and H. Carlos Smith, Engineers & Surveyors, Inc., (Engineer) in respect of the project (Project) described therein. SECTION I - BASIC SERVICES OF ENGINEER 1 . 1 GENERAL 1.1.1. ENGINEER shall perform professional services as hereinafter stated which include customary civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineering services and customary architectural services incidental thereto. 1.2. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE After written authorization to proceed with the Preliminary Design Phase I ENGINl~ER shall: 1.2. In consultation with OWNER determine the extent of the Project. 1.2.2. Prepare preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings and outline specifications. 1.2.3. Based on the information contained in the preliminary design documents, submit a revised opinion of probable Project Cost. 1.2.4. Furnish fifteen copies of the above preliminary design documents and present and review them in person with the OWNER. The duties and responsibilities of ENGINEER during the Preliminary 'Engineering Phase are amended and supplemented as indicated in the Scope of Services. 1.3. DESIGN PHASE After written authorization to proceed with the Design Phase ENGINEER shall: 1.3.1. On the basis of the accepted preliminary design documents prepare for incorporation in the Contract Documents, final drawings to show, the character and scope of the work to be performed by Contractors on the Project (hereinafter called "Drawings" ), .:tnctI3pecif ieat,ions . Page 9 of 16 e e r---_ 1.3.2. Furnish to OWNER such documents and design data as may be required for, and assist in the preparation of the required documents so the OWNER may apply for approvals of such . governmental authorities as have jurisdiction over design criteria applicable to the Project, and assist in obtaining such approvals by participating in submissions to and negotiations with appropriate authorities. 1.3.3. Advise OWNER of any adjustments to the latest opinion of probable Project Cost caused by changes in extent or design requirements of the Project or Construction Cost and furnish a revised opinion of probable Project Cost based on the Drawings and Specifications. 1.3.4. Prepare for review and approval by OWNER, his legal counsel and other advisors contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, and (where appropriate) bid forms, invitati6ns to bid and instructions to bidders, and assist in the preparation of other related documents. 1.3.5. Furnish five copies of the above documents and present and review them in person with OWNER. The duties and responsibilities of ENGINEER during the Design Phase are amended and supplemented as indicated in the Scope of Services. SECTION II - SPECIAL SERVICES OF ENGINEER 2.1. Normal and customary engineering services do not include services in respect of the following categories of work which are usually referred to 85 Additional or Special Services. If OWNER wishes ENGINEER to perform any Special Services, he shall 50 instruct ENGINEER in writing, and ENGINEER will be paid therefor as provided in the Letter of Agreement. SECTION III - OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 3.1. OWNER shall provide all criteria and full information as to OWNER's requirements for the Project; designate a person to act with authority on OWNER's behalf in respect of all aspects of the project; examine and respond promptly to ENGINEER's submissions; and give prompt written notice to ENGINEER whenever he observes or otherwise becomes aware of any defect in the work. "~'I , , Page 10 of 16 e e ~ 3.2. OWNER shall also do the following and pay all costs incident thereto: Furnish to ENGINEER core borings, probings and subsurface explorations, hydrographic surveys, laboratory tests and inspections of samples, materials and equipment and similar data; appropriate professional interpretations of all of the foregoing; environment.al assessment and impact statements; property, boundary, easement, right-of-way, topographic and utility surveys; property descriptions; zoning and deed restrictions; all of which ENGINEER may rely upon in performing his services. Guarantee access to and make all provisions for ENGINEER to enter upon public and private property. Provide such legal, accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for the Project, any auditing services required in respect of Contractor(s) applications for payment, and any inspection services to det.ermine if Contract.or(s) are performing the work legally. Provide field control surveys and fix reference points and base lines. Furnish approvals and permit.s from all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 3.3. OWNER shall pay all costs incident. t.o obtaining bids or proposals from Contractor(s). SECTION IV - MEANING OF TERMS 4.1. As used herein the term "this Agreement" refers to the Letter Agreement to which these General Provisions are attached and to these General Provisions and Exhibit A "Further Description of Basic Engineering Services and Related Matters", as if they were part of one and the same document. 4.2. The construction cost of the entire Project (herein referred to as "Const.ruction Cost") means the t.otal cost of t,he entire Project to OWNER, but it will not include ENGINEER's compensation and expenses, the cost of land, right.s-af-way, or compensation for or damages to, properties unless this Agreement so specifies, nor will it include OWNER's legal, accounting, insurance counsQ1.ing or auditing services, or interest and financing charg~e incurred in connection with the project. When Construction Cos,i:;. is used as a basis for payment it will be based on one of the following sources with precedence in the order listed for work'~esigned or specified by ENGINEER. Page 11 of 16 e e ....--- 4.2.1. For completed construction work the total cost of all work performed as designed or specified by ENGINEER. 4.2.2. For work designed or specified but not. constructed, the lowest. bona fide bid received from a qualified bidder for such work; or, if the work is not bid, the lowest. bona fide negotiated proposal for such work. 4.2.3. For work designed or specified but not constructed upon which no such bid or proposal is received, the most recent estimate of Const.ruction Cost, or, if none is available, ENGINEER's most recent opinion of probable Construction Cost. Labor furnished by OWNER for the Project will be included in the Construction Cost at current market rates including a reasonable allowance for overhead and profit.. Materials and equipment furnished by OWNER will be included at current market prices. No deduction is to be made from ENGINEER's compensation on account of any penalty, liquidated damages, or other amounts withheld from payments to Contractor(s). 4.3. The per diem rates used as a basis for payment mean the salaries and wages paid to all personnel engaged directly on the Project, including, but. not. limit.ed to, engineers, architects, surveymen, designers, draftsmen, specification writers, est.imators, other technical personnel, stenographer, typists and clerks; including the cost of customary and st.atut.ory benefits including, but not limited to, social security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes, workmen's compensations, health and retirement benefits, sick leave, vacation and holiday pay applicable thereto. 4.4. The Payroll Costs used as a basis for payment mean salaries and wages (basic and incentive) paid to all personnel engaged directly on the Project, including, but not limited to, engineers, architects, surveyors, designers, draftsmen, specifications writers, estimators, other technical personnel, stenographers, typists and clerks. Additional employees may be added or employees may be terminated during the term of this contract. ":'1,' I"" Page 12 of 16 e e r - 4.5. Reimbursable Expenses mean the actual expenses incurred directly or indirectly in connection with the Project. for; transportation and subsistence incidental thereto; obtaining bids or proposals from Contractor(s); furnishings and maintaining field office facilities; subsistence and transportation of Resident Project Representatives and their assistants; toll telephone calls and telegrams; reproduction of Reports, Drawings, Specifications, and similar Project-related items in addition to those required under Section 1; expenses of photographic product.ion techniques; and, if authorized in advance by OWNER, overtime work requiring higher than regular rates. where compensation for Basic Services is on the basis of Direct Labor Costs or Payroll Costs times a factor, Reimbursable Expenses shall include the amount billed to ENGINEER by special consultants employed by ENGINEER (other than as an authorized Additional Service under Section 2) for such consultants services and Reimbursable Expenses times a factor of 10%, and shall also include expenses incurred for computer time and other highly specialized equipment, including an appropriate charge for previously established programs and expenses of photographic production techniques times a factor of 10%. SECTION V - MISCELLANEOUS 5.1. REUSE OF DOCUMENTS All documents including Drawings and Specifications prepared by ENGINEER pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service in respect of the Project. They are not intended or represented to be suitable tor reuse by OWNER or others on extensions of the Project of or any other project. any reuse without written verification of adaptation by ENGINEER for the specific purposes intended will be at OWNER's sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to ENGINEER; and OWNER shall identify and hold harmless ENGINEER from all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorney's fees arising out of or resulting therefrom. Any such verification or adaptation will entitle ENGINEER to further compensation at rates to be agreed upon by OWNER and ENGINEER. 1'1'\, " :;"1 Page 1.3 of 16 e e ------ 5.2. OPINIONS OF COST Since ENGINEER has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractor(s) methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, his opinions of probable Project Cost and Construction Cost provided for herein are to be made on the basis of his experience and qualifications and represent his best judgement as an experienced and qualified professional engineer, familiar with the construction industry; but ENGINEER cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual Project of Construction Cost will not vary from opinions of probable cost prepared by him. If prior to the Bidding of Negotiating Phase OWNER wishes greater assurance as to Project of Construction Cost he shall employ an independent cost estimator to bring the Construction Cost within any limitation established by OWNER will be considered Additional Services and paid for as such by OWNER. 5.3. LATE PAYMENT If OWNEH fails to make any payment due ENGINEER for services and expenses within sixty days after receipt of ENGINEER's bill therefor, the amounts due ENGINEER shall include a charge at the rate of 1% per month from said sixtieth day, and in addition, ENGINEER may, after giving seven days' written notice to OWNER, suspend services under this Agreement until he has been paid in full all amounts due him for services and expenses. 5.4. TERMINATION The obligation to provide further services under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice in the event of subst.antial failure by other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof through no fault of the terminating party. In the event of any termination, ENGINEER will be paid for all services rendered to the date of termination, all reimbursable expenses and termination expenses. 5.5. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS 5.5.1. OWNER and ENGINEER each binds himself and his partners, successors, executors, administrators, assigns and legal representatives to the other party of this Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party, in respect to all covenants, agreements and obligations of the Agreement. Page 1.4 of 16 e e ~ - 5.5.2. Neither OWNER nor ENGINEER shall assign, sublet or transfer any rights under or interest in (including, but without limitation, monies that may become due or monies that are due) this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except as stated in paragraph 5.5.1. and except to the extent that the effect of this limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall prevent ENGINEER from employing such independent consultants, associates and subcontractors as he may deed appropriate to assist him in the performance of services hereunder. 5.5.3. Nothing herein shall be construed to give any rights or benefits hereunder to anyone other than OWNER and ENGINEER. 5.6. ARBITRATION I 5.6.1. All claims, counterclaims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties hereto arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof will be decided by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then obtaining, subject to the limitations and restrictions stated in paragraphs 5.6.3. and 5.6.4. below. This agreement so to arbitrate and any other agreement or consent to arbitrate entered into in accordance herewith as provided in this paragraph 5.6. will be specifically enforceable under the prevailing arbitration law of any court having jurisdiction. 5.6.2. Notice of demand for arbitration must be filed in writing with the other parties to this Agreement and with the American Arbitration Association. The demand must be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event may the demand for arbitration be made after institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Page 15 of 16 e e r . 5.6.3. All demands for arbitration and all answering statements thereto which include any monetary claim must contain a statement that the total sum or value in controversy as alleged by the party making such demand or answering statement is not more than $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs). The arbitrators will not have jurisdiction, power or authority to consider, or make findings (except in denial of their own jurisdiction) concerning any claim, counterclaim, dispute or other matter in question where the amount in controversy thereof is more that $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs) or to render a monetary award in response thereto against any party which totals more the $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs). 5.6.4. No arbitration arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement may include, by consolidation, joinder or any other manner, any person or ent.i ty who is not a part.y to this Agreement. 5.6.5. By written consent signed by all the parties to the Agreement and containing a specific reference hereto, the limitations and restrictions contained in paragraphs 5.6.3. and 5.6.4. may be waived in whole or in part as to any claim, counterclaim, dispute or other matter specifically described in such consent. No consent to arbitration in respect of a specifically described claim, counterclaim, dispute or other matter in question will constitute consent to arbitrate any other claim, counterclaim, dispute or other matter in question which is not specifically described in such consent or in which the sum or value in controversy exceeds $200,000 (exclusive of interest and costs) which is with any party not specifically described therein. 5.6.6. The award rendered by the arbitrators will be final, not subject to appeal and judgement may be entered upon it in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Page 16 of 16 e e REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: July 27, 1987 Requested By: Steve Gillett~epartment: x Report Resolution Public Works Ordinance Exhibits: 1. Change Order No. 7 2. Quotation from McKey Construction 3. Photographs of piping 4. CIP Budget SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION The piping in the Collegeview Wastewater Treatment Plant Lift Station is in very poor condition. There is severe corrosion and much of the steel has been sacrificed. This lift station will be a permanent facility after the Treatment Plant is abandoned. Failure to replace the piping will result in severe maintenance problems in the future. Approval of this change order will affect the Fairmont Parkway Relief Trunk Sewer contract: TOTAL REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $2,434,291.48 6,855.77 $2,44l,147.25 Current contract amount Change Order No. 7 , / Action Required by Council: Approval of Change Order No. 7 to the Fairmont Parkway Relief Trunk Sewer contract with McKey Construction in the amount of $6,855.77. Availability of Funds: General Fund ~ Capital Improvement Other Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing Account Number: ()O~-"i'{){)-908-S'"OOFunds Available: ~YES NO 1[..1'1 ~,I' , 'I ',1,1' Approved for Cit~~ouncil Agenda _~T;~ Robert T. Herrera City Manager 7/11 LD DATE e e ....-: - ..\ :t ~_... ,.1 ROBERT B. HIGGINS PROJECT DIRECTOR TurnerCollie@Braden Inc. ENGINEERS . PlANNERS p.o. BOX 13089 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77219 5757 WOODWAY 713 780-4100 TELEX 774185 TCB HOU July 20, 1987 Mr. Bob Herrera, City Manager City of La Porte P. O. Box 1115 La Porte, Texas 77571 Attention: Mr. Buddy Jacobs Re: Fairmont Parkway Relief Sanitary Sewer Change Order No. 7 Contractor: McKey Construction & Equipment Co. Contract Amount: $2,278,581.40 Turner Colli~!& Braden Project No. 13-02000-034 , Gentlemen: In accordance with direction by the City of La Porte, Change Order No. 7 has been prepared to accommodate the following mod- ification to the scope of work for the above referenced project: 1. Change the contractual requirements regarding the lift station piping as shown on Plan sheet 31 of 35 and as further noted under notes 5 and 6 of sheet 31. The change is to be composed of installing, where shown, and providing new header piping in lieu of cleaning and relocating the existing header as was originally required. As a result of this change, and with ref- erence to McKey Construction and Equipment Inc. 's pricing proposal of July 17, 1987 (a copy of which is attached hereto and further being made a part of this Change Order), revise the lump sum price for line item 41 from one hundred ninety thousand dollars and no cents ($190,000.00) to one hundred ninety six thousand eight hundred fifty five dollars and seventy seven cents ($196,855.77). The result of this change will increase the contract price by six thousand eight hundred fifty five dollars and seventy seven cents $6,855.77 " ':\ Summary , " Addltions i De,I:et ions Ii' Net Change in Contract Price of Change Order No. 7 $6,855.77 o $6,855.77 Approval of Change Order No. 7 will result in an increase of six thousand eight hundred fifty five dollars and seventy seven cents ($6,855.77), resulting in a total contract price AUSTIN . DAllAS . DENVER . FORT WORTH . HOUSTON · PHOENIX · PORT ARTHUR e e r---_ ~. '" Turner Collie <9Braden Inc. July 20, 1987 Mr. Bob Herrera, City Manager Attention: Mr. Buddy Jacobs Page Two of two million four hundred forty one thousand one hundred forty seven dollars and twenty five cents ($2,441,147.25) as summarized below. Original Contract Price Change Order No. 1 Change Order No. 2 Change Order No. 3 Change Order No. 4 Change Order No. 5 Change Order No. 6 Change Order No. 7 Revised Contract Amount Change Order No. 7 $2,278,581. 40 (138,916.00) 153,302.00 21,000.00 96,013.00 (405.00) 24,716.08 6,855.77 $2,441,147.25 There will be thirty (30) days added to the contract time and no other parts of the contract documents are changed as a re- sult of Change Order No.7, and work affected thereby is subject to all contract stipulations and covenants. Submitted for Approval P.E. RBH:BAB:lf Attachment ACCEPTED: McKey Construction & Equipment Co. APPROVED: City of La Porte By: By: Title: 'II ;\1"1 Title: ,~ " , I ,liri' Date: Date: e e III"""': . - . .' '. PHONE 471.2103 111 NORTH 16TH STREET P. O. Box 9 LA PORTE. TEXAS 77571 SITE WORK . UNDERGROUND UTILITIES McKey Construction & Equipmen~ Inc. "71e EMd ?Ituu .- 1Ue ~ ~" July 17, 1987 'I\n:ner Collie & Braden, Inc 5757 Woodway Hous ton, Texas RE: Fainoont Parkway Relief Sanitary Sewer. Item 41: Rehabilitate existing pump station- College View Sewage treatment plant Attention: Bruce Baumell II Per your request telephone conversation 7/17/87. Please find listed below prices for material and labor for installing new piping at College VifM lift station." Material: 1 each 12 X 8 tee 1 each 12 X 10 X 8 tee 1 each 10 X 8 tee 1 each 10 X 8 reducer 1 each 8-inch 90 degree bend 1 each 10-inch by 23-inch F to F steel pipe 1 each 8-inch by 28-inch F to F steel pipe 3 each 8-inch by 9 foot 2-inch F to F steel pipe All nfM Cadmium. bolt and red rubber gaskets. Material only $ 2,713.14 Labor Price: Extra t:i.ne scaffoling rental Extra t:i.ne by pass pump rental Torch cutting of all existing bolts Extra t:i.ne getting all existing piping out of well Extra t:i.ne bolting up nfM piping Fab of all nfM steel fittings. :1 labor and Fab MaterialOnly $ 2,7l3.l4 labor and Fab $ 5,242~63 TOTAL $ 7,955.77 Deduct for work figured in original bid for cleaning existing fittings and pipe. $ 1,100.00 TOTAL $ 6,855.77 $ 5,242.63 page 1 of 2 e e r_ '., PHONE 471-2103 III NORTH 16TH STREET P. O. Box 9 LA PORTE. TEXAS 77571 SITE WORK . UNDERGROUND UTILITIES McKey CODstructioD & EquipmeD~ loc. "74 ~ ?k-u a.u( 1Ue ~ ~.. Request 30 days be added to contract completion date for additionaly piping college view sewage treatment plant. 'Eja k you ; .' Il I ,: : , , . {/" /( ~-~-jddi~ Jim Wheeler McKey Construction & Equipmenl , ~'\, I' "I .~.",r."":"".,..,.,c , " .' ",.-',.... ,. , - . .t-___ . .. - -'-, . .' -J~: : _,10' .'~' ~!{> ~ ..-;~,. }4 : ;:-~~.. ~~;,:. - \ ,"",. -~~.;..- '.r e C~t:-L-/;! ~ ;);4W, L ~ 6, e:,SJz~ 7-Z-t5/ p2~,e~ " "" ,l'~, 1/ .,,- C-o~t'_/";;r!,/L ;/<~:r.l1/ -. 0, , .7-2-;;;7 /;:::/;/>-y ~-' /){FALJ~--e .~-'~ " "..~., e ..........- !" rf' .\ , ~ .. .; .t .' , ~i"" ' ' ~'. . _" ,. ~ ,_ '~IL <"'.~ t. ~""",'" '\6. ' '. '''i''':4::,j' '''''. ...,..~ .-.....1 ~'.,. ' /t." ,{f,." ... <'.. i'" '., .. !~.t.~'''' ._ ..,." ""VI....~; ~".~', ""'i:',.-#~'" i ",,'~' ' , . ~.g'j Q" ,'" " ". ." ' . . ,~ ~ ~ ' .'t .' .. . ' .. ,'\, '']' 'h ,. ,,'1 ",' } " ' l!;.-' ~'\' , ," I 11",' .J..'", ill'i' .... ~.- ! ' ., '': .,~. ..' .. . '\ 'P' . . .r:' ...... . . .' ' ... '. , ! C~'-t..t.!6-,1E- 0~;J L. 6, 126 aL- 7-2-'6'7 bf~~- , \ COL~L~,& I.---?/.~.:J j.. 6- ~~UL... <""" ~ r ~ ...,./'y~ /-,.:;::- 6'/ ,:l:/..-d/':- L.../ -- . e .....--- C~~L/?b~Z- ~/&.,;J ~~ 6, /~~J.e- /-2-/5'7 #~~. ::::(.">1. .::".':. :.-:. . "') ) .-' '. ,.'. /l! /j.IJ -!r" /e- :.:.... ~- , ;, -->"..-/ ,/ " ~ .~ -::......_........~4"~....,.:: I (1'/',) ./(;;~ J,.) ,., 0-.:- ~ ...:.;; # ))~~1.U. - .::5/ ,/~~f;;R/,~ :::..,./ ~::"-, - ,-~ ,~ k.~~,... \_.:~.:..:t_"'" e ....~~. _ .1;)"r JIo d '/ - - -J'!". b.i::), (:::;O?4,-"-"6/.,.._ //?_W I /7.1S/+A/&.e. 7 :;; -,..;",...., / /:: :/~ - <., c_ / ,-'-'~ /C.. ::::/ .-.:)~ ~.-' _ ,/~/~ ;,) L, 5 , /.,L/.!^1LJ~A!..- --.::.:- .:' ./ ./:'.I,~ ~:y/- --' ~-,'E~~;-'- - ~ tit r: Cou../k--/Z j.-Jp:t:-0 ,,!,.s, /e -5 4L- ;; - z -&-7 dV.:t ..e~ ,) .1'/ i?.r. ~ C",''{'''L.lZd",,/:. /.-I/..!.,;.J ,?.;.;;;,- ....-/c.dk_ ,7-;?-3' l /)a/f/C' ~;O;-;~__.~:':- .---- e e ~ ' CITY OF LA PORTE PROPOSED CIP BUDGET FY 1981-88 WATER/WASTEWATER FAIRMONT PARKWAY RELEF SEWER MAIN SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Allocated funds will be used to expand the City's wastewater treatment plant, and to construct a major sanitary sewer truck line to serve the College View Subdivision and relieve overloaded conditions in the Fairmont Park area, and provide for future growth. The projected dates for completion of these projects is as follows: August 1981 for the Fairmont Parkway Relief Sewer and December 1987 for the Main Sewage Treatment Plant. REVENUES ORIGINAL ALLOCATIONS Colle~e View Bonds (WWTP) College View Bonds (Relief Line) College View Bonds (Contingencies) 1985 Revenue Bonds Kay Homes ContributioA 14th Street General Fund Budget Fairporte Green Contribution TOTAL REVENUES PROJECTED APPROPRIATIONS: $1,188,000 1,069,200 2!14 ,625 6,000,000 246,960 64,000 75,000 $8,887,785 A. Fairmont Parkway Relief Sewer Professional Services Supplies (Hobas Pipe) Construction (original contract) Change Order No. 1 Change Order No.2 Change Order No. 3 Change Order No.4 Change Order No.5 Change Order No.6 Change Order No. 7 Engineering Sub Total $ 22,600 2,451,139 2,278,581 138,916 153,302 21 ,000 96,014 405 24,716 6,856 303,715 *5,218,602 B. Main Sewage Treatment Plant Professional Services Supplies Construction Engineering Sub-Total $ 29,832 8,910 2,968,500 426,916 $3,434,158 $ 235,025 $8,887,785 CONTINGENCY: r TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS PROJECTED: . e e REQUESJ~ _FQK_C.lTJ_J;QU.Rc_rL_.AG~lmA ITEM :-. -.,-. -. -.. -----~---_-_-.;._...... "'. "."00-;"00-;:-;' #."::. #.....~__~__.~~......p "'", .~'..~.-_'-;'-:--'~-_-;'" .'. -. '". ... _.._-__-..~~ -: -;,. -. -. ...--.,;;-.;,;.0--................. "L-. ._,.,;;,!""..oo:-..;-_-:~.._-_...... .'-....:...-~~~..._~ Agenda Date Requested: .___7/_2.7L8.L Requested By: R_._._,[~_Re.r:T~r.a_ _ ___ Department: Ad_n~j n i.fi.J::...t'et:i or, .__....x ____ Report Resolutjon o r' din an c e Exhibits: Letter from S. R. Robinson of Lloyd, Gosselink, Ryan & Fowler, P.C. Letter from N. D. Radford of Vinson & Elkins Attorneys at Law Copy of Settlement Agreement with FMC Corporation and Rohm & Haas Bayport, Inc. Copy of Ordinance 1553 :"-.;;.--'''-:'':~~''''''~'!'"'".;;=:;;..::~:-~-~-..:.~..:-~.:.-;.--:",,~~-~~~..;..--~-~-..;.~~-..;..~..;.'!"'.~.;..~-~~-~--=-- ----~-"":;;--~-..;..-- --------=-.:.-..;.-.;.-....-:.---=-=~ S.UHI1.AJU _&_KECOltMENDATION As you are aware, negotiations to settle the objections of FMC Corporation and Rohm & Haas Bayport to the proposed Sanitary Landfill site have been in progress for' some t.5me. A ~;ettlelr'ent agreement with these two companies has now been reached. Attached for your consideration are the settlement agreements. Mr. Norm Radford will be in attendance at the meeting on July 27 to answer any of your concer'ns or' qu~~;tj ons. Action Requ:I red b:y Council: Approve ~;et.t.J en:ent agr'een1ents wit.h FMC Corporation and Rohm & Haas Bayport, Inc., by adoption of Ordinance 1553 ~~~~.';'~~--'::....~-::-:'~~-"--";;'..;;:.::"'"'"-:'-~~~~-:'"_-_._---"'~~----_.-.~::..'!....~'!_---_...........-..---.;.-_..--.._-~._-...-.. ~~-;;; -.. --.-~-;..-:.-.._-...:_-.... - - -.-.. .. .. '"- Availability of Funds: __.__ Gener-al Fund ____ Capital Improvement ___ Other Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing Account Number': Funds Available: YES NO :;....._-..,~..:_-~_..~ ~.;;.-;;_o;-..;.~..;..~~~_ -..:.-:-.-_~~.::.~..:...":--_-_-_ -~_~ _" _'! _"_~.;.. _"__~_:-,__ ...._..;....___~_..___..... ~.....~....~_~-:"~_...-:_ __-_~..~_...__. _-_-_..... __ _.::-.:.~... _';._"__~~_"..._~ --=.~~~ Ap.p..r:QY ~Jt . f.9.r. .C i ty. _CounG.:U Ag end a ..G?M_. T.. .~_______u_ Robert T. Herrera City fv:anager _.7 --= '?_3_~~! ..___. _. _ . _.. ______ DATE : "'---..---..-......--..- -.. --"- -':'-';~-.. -- --,.....--~_..._-_.._-_..__......... -...-;.--.;..... "... "....-..-':.. "..."_.... -" "... ....._.~ "... ._.,,_.,.;.....--!~_.._-... -;;.~.":";;.:-;. --..--- -~_.....---... -...---_:-.;.;..::....-- - - - .. ... .. e . ....- - LLOYD, GOSSELINK, RYAN & FOWLER, P.c. Attorneys at Law ROBERT H. LLOYD PAUL G. GOSSELINK BRENT W. RYAN ROBERT D. FOWLER CHESLEY N. BLEVINS MARTIN C. ROCHELLE Post Office Box 1725 Austin, Texas 78767 Office (512) 472-4551 Telecopier (512) 472-0532 JIM MATHEWS TERESA B.SALAMONE GEORGE V. BASHAM III LAURIE A. McCLUSKEY S. RHETT ROBINSON ROGER G. WORTHINGTON July 21, 1987 Federal Express Mr. Bob Herrera City of La Porte 604 West Fairmont Parkway La Porte, Texas 77571 Re: FMC/Rohm and Haas Settlement Agreement (47100 - File 1) Dear Mr. Herrera: Pursuant to our conversation early today, enclosed are four originals of the above-referenced agreement. I have also enclosed a copy of Norm Radford's transmittal letter for your information. It is my understanding that the Council will consider approval vf the settlement agreement at next Monday's meeting. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~7?~ S. Rhett Robinson SRR/ry 5L:47100.16 1800 One Congress Pbza 111 Congress Avenue Austin, Texas 78701 e e ......... - " .. .' VINSON & ELKINS ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE WILLARD OF"F"lCE BUILDING 1~55 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, N,W, WASHINGTON, D.C. 200041-1007 TELEPHONE 202 639 ,6500 TELEX 89680 3300 F"IRST CITY TOWER 1001 F"ANNIN F"IRST CITY CENTRE aiEl CONGRESS AVENUE AUSTIN. TEXAS 78701.24196 TELEPHONE 512 495-a400 HOUSTON. TEXAS 77002 - 6760 TELEPHONE 713 651.2222 TELEX 762146 47 CHARLES ST.. BERKELEY SQUARE LONDON W1X 7P8, ENGLAND TELEPHONE 01 441 491 -7236 CABLE VINEL~INS LONCON WI-TELEX 24140 2020 LTV CENTER 2001 ROSS AVENUE DALLAS,TEXAS 75201.2916 TELEPHONE 2'4 979-6600 July 17, 1987 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS Mr. S. Rhett Robinson Lloyd, Gosselink;, Ryan & Fowler, P.C. 1800 One Congress Plaza III Congress Avenue Austin, Texas 78701 RE: City of La Porte Settlement Agreement Dear Rhett: Enclosed for action by the City Council of the City of La Porte at its regular meeting on July 27, 1987, are four originals of the Agreement Regarding Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site which have been executed by FMC Corporation and Rohmand.Baas Bayport'Inc. I understand that Attachment No.2, the stormwater drainage plans, will provide a brief description of the plans and then reference other documents for complete plans and specifications. I plan to be at the July 27, 1987, City Council meeting, but understand that there is no need for other representatives of FMC or Rohm and Haas to be present. I am pleased that we were able to reach agreement on the issues of most concern to FMC and Rohm and Haas. We now need to turn our attention to the methane issue of vi tal concern to The BOC Group, Inc. As I have told you, BOC '. .. " e e ~- Mr. S. Rhett Robinson July 17, 1987 Page 2 would like to have the opportunity to present its concerns directly to the City Council at the July 27 or August 10, 1987, meeting. Very truly yours, VINSON & ELKINS By Norman D. NDR21/009 Enclosure 0281:2150 cc: Frank J. Dux, Airco Industrial Gases Roger C. Threde, FMC Corporation R. D. Gilbert, Rohm and Haas Bayport Inc. Martin M. Brennan, Bayport Industrial Association Paul E. Stolzer, The BOC Group, Inc. Ray Roberts, Airco Industrial Gases Thomas Grady, Rohm and Haas Company John S. Hollyfield, Fulbright & Jaworski (real estate counsel for FMC Corporation) George J. Brown, Friendswood Development Company H. L. Predmore, Airco Industrial Gases Wallace B. Schmidt, BOC Cryoplants . I '. e e Subject to Rule 408, Texas Rules of Evidence THIS AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO ARBITRATION UNDER THE TEXAS GENERAL ARBITRATION ACT STATE OF TEXAS s s s COUNTY OF HARRIS AGREEMENT REGARDING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE WHEREAS, the City of La Porte, a municipal corporation in Harris County, Texas ("La Porte"), has applied for a solid waste disposal permit from th~ Texas Department of Health ("TDH") for a solid waste landfill (the "Landfill"), on property located approximately 0.5 miles south of the intersection of Bay Area Boulevard and Fairmont Parkway and immediately east of Bay Area Boulevard in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of La Porte in Harris County, Texas~ WHEREAS, La forte has obtained a permit for an air curtain destructor from the Texas Air Control Board and in the future La Porte may expand operations at the Landfill to include resource recovery operations (all operations at the Landfill are included within the term "Landfill" for purposes of this Agreement)~ WHEREAS, Rohm and Haas Bayport Inc. ("Rohm and Haas"), a Texas corporation, owns property to the north of the proposed Landfill where it operates a chemical plant~ WHEREAS, FMC Corporation ("FMC"), a Delaware corporation, owns the property that would be the site of the proposed Landfill after acquisition by La Porte, and owns additional property contiguous to the south boundary of the proposed Landfill which is undeveloped on the north portion and which serves as the site of an FMC chemical plant on the south portion~ WHEREAS, Rohm and Haas and FMC, have been individually and jointly opposing La Porte's application for a TOH permit for the Landfill~ and WHEREAS, all Parties hereto have determined that it is in their best interests to enter into this Agreement~ 5L:47100.lj4 -1- e e NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the respecti ve agreements set forth herein, the Parties agree as follows: 1. La Porte shall limit use of the Landfill to the disposal of municipal waste generated in La Porte and the City of Seabrook, Texas, or the disposal of ash from an incinerator used by La Porte or the City of Seabrook or both to incinerate all or part of the municipal waste generated by each. 2. La Porte agrees ~o limit the future use of the property on which the Landfill is located to industrial activities or municipal activities of an industrial nature such as equipment maintenance facilities, warehouses and vehicle storage areas. La Porte further agrees the property shall not be used for residential, commercial, recreational, park, or educational purposes or any use that would be inconsistent with the industrial character of the Bayport Industrial Area in which the Landfill is located. 3. The Parties agree that the entrance to the Landfill should be designed, constructed, and maintained in a way that will minimize the visual impact of the Landfill. La Porte agrees to design, construct, and maintain the entrance in accordance with the plan depicted as Attachment No. 1 labeled "Landfill Access Road at Bay Area Boulevard, n and the Parties agree that such design is adequate to minimize the visual effect of the entrance to the Landfill. 4. La Porte shall require all trucks delivering waste to the Landfill to be properly covered or contained so as to prevent waste from spilling onto roadways and property in the Bayport Industrial Area. La Porte agrees to remove promptly any such spillage, and endeavor to accomplish same by no later than the close of business on the day after such event is reported. 5. La Porte shall minimize traffic congestion by providing waiting and parking areas off of public roads for trucks delivering waste to the Landfill. 5L:47100.1/4 -2- e e 6. La Porte shall take all reasonable measures to prevent vehicles leaving the Landfill from tracking mud onto the access roads to the Landfill. 7. The Parties agree that it is necessary to control stormwater runoff from a municipal landfill. La Porte has prepared plans and specifications of its stormwater control facilities and the same have been submitted to and approved by the Harris County Flood Control District. The Parties agree that stormwater control facilities that are constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications attached hereto as Attachment No.2, constitute reasonable and adequate stormwater control measures, subject to the change in location of the perimeter drainage ditch described in paragraph 10 below. La Porte shall maintain its on-site drainage facilities in a condition so that they function substantially as designed. 8. La Porte agrees that the Landfill will be constructed and operated in accordance with the application as it is currently cast with the TDH. The Landfill shall not exceed a height of approximately 39 feet mean sea level ("msl"). La Porte agrees to maintain vegetation along the north, south and west buffer zones which. will minimize, so far as is practicable, the visual impact (')f the Landf ill from these three directions. In particular, along the north buffer zone, La Porte will plant trees which can be expected to grow to a height of approximately 40 feet msl (approximately 26 feet above grade) and to plant such bushes, shrubs, and the like among the trees to provide visual screening between the ground and the start of the foliage of the taller trees. The naturally occurring vegetation will form the visual screening to the west and south. Should any naturally occurring vegetation or foliage be destroyed along the west and south buffer zones by act of man or nature, La Porte shall replant the disturbed area with tree saplings or shrubbery of a like kind indigenous to the buffer zone areas. La Porte will replant saplings in the areas in the west buffer zone that have been disturbed by entry of equipment on the site, with such replanting to occur prior to the time the landfill first receives municipal was.te. SL:47100.l/4 -3- e e 9. La Porte agrees to increase the width of the north buffer zone area by 10 feet to a total of 18 feet and that of the south buffer zone area by 20 feet to a total of 28 feet. The increased footage on the north will be obtained by reducing the size of the landfill by 10 feet. The increased footage on the south will be acquired from FMC as part of the purchase of the entire site. 10. The original design contemplated that the perimeter drainage ditch was to .be located ~utside the vegetative buffer zone. The Parties agree that such drainage ditch should be located between the vegetative buffer zone and the landfill operations. To relocate the ditch, La Porte must get permission from the Harris County Flood Control District. The Parties agree to cooperate to obtain that permission. 11. La Porte shall implement a groundwater monitoring program that, in addition to the requirements in 25 TAC 325.124, includes analyses for phenol and total organic halogens. The Parties agree to exchange all groundwater monitoring results collected by each, whether done under the requirements of any local, state, or federal statute, regulation, or permit, or whether done at the Parties own behest. This information shall be accumulated and exchanged quarterly, if such information has been generated in the previous three months. 12. La Porte agrees to notify the other Parties hereto wi thin 10 days following the submittal of any applications for permi ts, authorizations, licenses, or the like, including amendments thereto, with respect to this tract of land. 13. La Porte agrees that, wi thin 60 days of acquir ing the site for the construction of the Landfill, to place of record in the Real Property Records of Harris County, Texas, the covenants and restrictions contained in this Agreement restricting (a) La Porte's operation of the Landf ill and (b) future uses of the land. Such recorded restrictions shall be considered and construed to be covenants running with the land, binding upon each successive owner of any part of the land, and shall be for the benef it of and enforceable by the Parties hereto or their successors and assigns. 5L:47100.l/4 -4- e e 14. La Porte shall provide police and fire protection to the Landfill. 15. The Parties hereto agree to allow representatives of the other Parties to enter and inspect each Party's facility during normal daylight business hours Monday through Friday to protect the integr i ty of this Agreement. The representative of each Party shall be' the City Manager and the Plant Managers, or an alternate individual in upper management which has been expressly designated by the authoFized representative. 16. As consideration for La Porte's agreeing to the above conditions, Rohm and Haas and FMC agree to withdraw their opposi tion to La Porte's pending application to the TOH for a solid waste disposal permit for the Landfill and not to oppose same in any other forum. Additionally, these Parties shall not in any way encourage, directly or indirectly, including financial contributions, other than mandatory dues and assessments paid to Bayport Industrial Association, any other person, firm, or entity to oppose or in any other manner attempt to prevent La Porte from operating the Landfill that is the subject of this Agreement. Provided, however, these Parties are in no way limited in exercising whatever rights or remedies which may be available to each to see that the Landfill is operated in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and to enforce the terms of this Agreement. 17. The terms of this Agreement and other restrictions are 40 years, or the longest period permitted by the laws of the State of Texas. 18. The Parties understand and agree that if for any reason La Porte does not receive a permit to operate a landfill at the site contemplated by this Agreement, or for whatever reason does not begin the disposal of waste at the site, all provisions of this agreement are null and void save and except paragraphs 2 and 13. 19. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the respective successors and assigns of the Parties hereto. 5L:47100.l/4 -5- . . 20. The Parties hereto covenant and agree to execute such other and further documents and instruments as are or may become necessary or convenient to effectuate and carry out the objectives of this Agreement. 21. This Agreement was lawfully approved pursuant to City of La Porte Ordinance No. adopted by the City Council of the City of La Porte by the majority vote on Agenda Item No. at the City Council meeting on , 1987. 22. Any notices r,elated to this Agreement must be made in writing and may be given or served by depositing the same in the United States mail postpaid and registered or certified, with return receipt requested. Notices shall be sent to the following designated representatives at the addresses indicated: If to La Porte, to: City Manager City of La Porte P.O. Box 1115 La Porte, Texas 77571 If to Rohm and Haas Bayport Inc., to: President Rohm and Haas Bayport, Inc. P.O. Box 1330 La Porte, Texas 77571 If to FMC, to: Plant Manager FMC Corporation 12000 Bay Area Boulevard Pasadena, Texas 77507 The designated representatives and their addresses can be changed with at least 15 days written notice to the other parties. Executed in multiple originals, this day of , 1987. THE CITY OF LA PORTE By Mayor Attest: City Secretary 5L:47100.1/4 -6- e e ROHM and HAAS BAYPORT INC. By ~~!-E R. rI. Gilbe President FMC CORPORATION BY~r~ ~A Plan Manager STATE OF TEXAS I /! ' r COUNTY OF /./.-' /!/tf~~] /7 ! I' // rl This instrument was acknowledged before me on ,~:~f~; // , 1987, by R. D. Gilbert, President of Rohm and Haas ~aypo(t~ Inc., a Texas corporation, on behalf of said corporation. /'\ /J ~. /, ~ /1. [)().:~_/J I /--t."~/I /v! r/7';i?a Notary Public, IState of Texas Notary's name (printed: s s s Notary's commission ~xpires: / .') _ "!J:; __ ?,C? / .,-?, c....J..:J / COUNTY OF I /, - ../-i // /.--." "~ ._-t:.-- c-- (....~.1" s s s (ii~7/7, Corporation, a STATE OF TEXAS This instrument was acknowledged before me on 1987, by Roger C. Threde, Plan t Manager of FMC Texas corporation, on behalf of said corporation. . -., .....,-/ j /1 L) ;J,r€l (f / kt:/ ./L./ /7c? /2 ( Notary Public~ State of Texas Notary's name (printed: Notary's commission expires: \ / .., - .-, 7 - /'c;. cr- --oJ (;f"' 7 5L:47100.lj4 -7- e e ......-- ~. .._.,....._._. ..............'__.....~..,_~ .....~._ __._ _...... ..a ci ~ m <t w a:: <t ~ m .' . ';. . #. . ... .- . . ,. ,I . :. .. ."': ." ... '. ....,.; . .'. . ~ .. . '., . RAIl-ROAD -I I I 1 I I I I r- I I I )( ~ ...- MAINTENANCE BUILDING )( X SECURITY FENCE XISTlNG TREES ~ ~ TO REMAIN ~.:;:::::=:-- ~ €.p.S€.~€.1't1____________/ ~\..\~~ ~ C;~S ~\ _______ ,------ ~. NORTH LANDFILL ACCESS ROAD AT BAY AREA BLVD. ATTACHMENT NO. I . ......,..~......., .......~ ..~......,...: -:.- '~""'. ....~... . , HDR e e ...-- 1f'D?-oiI- t'~ .... T..... .... A Cent",. Companr Suit, '25 TeIeptlOne: '2701) Helle'"' AMd C2'.) ll00OOO' Oe/Ins. l.... 7S23l).2OM ~ Wut. MaMgtmtntl ..-ource AtcOOltfJ Pulp & Paper U1i1ity & Energy July 18. 1985 Ms. Laura Harmon Harris County Flood Control District 8615 N. Main Houston. Texas 77022 Re: Drainage from proposed Sanitary Landfill site in LaPorte. Texas Dear Ms. Harmon: As per your comments received on July 11. 1985 here is the revised completion plan with ditch elevations along with the design of the structure entering HCFCD ditch AI04-07-00. Please note that we have returned to the original outfall structure alignment which was submitted on April 3. 1985. Also. please find enclosed the revised flow and velocity calculations for the outfall structure and the 100-year flood event calculations along with flow capacity calculations of ditch A104-07-00. Cross- sections of on-site ditches are also provided. In reference to your comment concerning the limits of the HCFCD right- of-way. we do not know the exact boundary of the right-of-way. We are only certain of the limits of our own property. The two monitor wells that you circled are already in place and are not in the HCFCD right- of-way to the best of our knowledge. We' have' submitted 'ail pr'evi'o'usly'received'coomenls"from:HCFCO.Thank' .. you for your timely response in this matter. Very truly yours. William L. Stafford Project Manager " WlS: pp .' .'-'. ...', ...: Enclosure: HCFCD comments. completion plan. ditch design. ditch cross sections. ditch calculation ATIACHMENl' NO. 2* *additional information contained in La Porte's Sanitary Landfill " ~ermit Application ,:,. , '. ,.... .'. '. "'. . . . . .. '. . e e .... - EJr~""/,1 ,,#_ ~A~"k - setA'~ s:..1JIIt,'/'. ~,,.I,.~~I,;,,, ~A~111/ /'1"1#1"/ V. Drainage Outfall into HCFCO Ditch The Harris County Flood Control District requires that flow into an HCFCD ditch be concentrated and have an incoming velocity of 3 ft/s. Upon recommendation by HCFCD, the conduits for outflow into the HCFCD ditch were designed to contain a three-year flood event (three-year flows were calculated in Section III of this attachment and are shown on Attachment No. 9). The overflow ditches were designed to contain overflow, of a 25-year flood event, not contained by the conduit. The following calculations for the outflow conduits are based on the Manning equations for full pipe flow: Of* = 0.463 D 8/3 S 1/2 n Vf* = 0.590 D 2/3 S 1/2 n The flows in the outflow conduits are not considered to be under pressure and therefore the calculations are conservative. '1. 'The" "flow . ("03) into tHe 'HCFCO ditch from .''ditch '2 -is ,,10.2' cfs' (.referto Attachment No. 8C). Given: Q3 = 10.2 cfs Vf = 3 fps n = 0.024 (Texas Hwy. Dept.- Hydraulic Manual, Corrugated Metal Pipe) .......... "".:"'''''". Assume one pipe will be used Minimum pipe size allowed = 24" (HCFCD Specification) Area = 10.2 = 3.4 ft 2 .'- . '. -.;.' ".. , '.~ . ., . .,;.' '. .... '..' D (pipe) = 4 (3.4 ft 2) = 2.08 ft = 25.0 in Use D= 30" CMP Vf = 3 = 0.590 ~2/3 (S) 1/2 0.024 1m -21- ., :', ,'. . ;- t" '. .., ":"'~';.' Vf' e e .....-- S = 0.0044 Of = 0.463 i~Ql 8/3 (0.0044) 1/2 = 14.73 cfs m 1m" Use 1 - 3011 CMP Ditch 7, Overflow from Ditch 2} Section 2-2 Qc = 148 cfs - 14.73 = 133.3 c s Slope = 0.0005 Side Slope = 3:1 Mannings Coefficient = 0.035 Qc = 133.3 cfs Using the nomograph for this channel the flow (Oc) will require a bottom width of 25 feet and a depth of 2.7 feet. The design of the overflow ditch given above is presented on Attachment 8B. 2. The flow (03) into the HCFCD ditch from ditch 4 is 12.9 cfs (refer to Attachment No. 8C). Given: 03 = 12.9 cfs Vf = 3 fps n = 0.024 (THO-Hydraulic Manual, Corrugated Metal Pipe) Assume one pipe will be used Minimum pipe size allowed = 2411 (HCFCD Specifications) A = 12.9 = 4.30 ft2 ..~,.....,. ~ .... :: D (pipe) = 4 (4.30) = 2.34 ft = 28.1 in Use D = 30" CMP Vf = 3 = 0.590 (30)2/3 (S)1/2 m (12) ".-' -':'" '.; , S = 0.0044 Of = 0.463 (21) 8/3 (0.0044)1/2 =' 14.73 cfs .' "u:tr2lf (N)' - - . '''. .. '".''' . Use 1- jO" CMP . Ditch 8, Overflow from Ditch 4J Section 4-4 Qc = 188 cfs - 14.73 = 173.3 c s -22- ,",... . t" '. ..' . ." ..' ........:.. .0... '. ....; . . .' 7-1'-.f~ e e ........- Slope = 0.0005 Side Slope = 2.5:1 Mannings Coefficient = 0.035 Qc = 173.3 Using the nomograph for this channel the flow (Qc) will require a bottom width of 25 feet and a depth of 3.1 feet. The design of the overflow ditch given above is presented in Attachment No. 8B. o.'l !. -.. '.- ..'", ; ~ ," .' -23- :'r . . . '. . :..-.' .... .' .' . '. .; ~ . "7--1'- .r" . e e ~ ......... Flow calculations for 100 year flood event - Drainage Area' A10407A (HCFCD) The following calculations show the increase of flow from a 100 year flood event in the HCFCD ditch A10407 caused by the development of a proposed landfill in LaPorte, Texas. Drainage Area A10407A = 1604.2 acres Q100 (for 100% developed land) = 2800 cfs (refer to area discharge curve) Q100 (for 0% developed land) = 1110 cfs Proposed Landfill - 80 acres (presently undeveloped) In order to be conservative it was assumed that the 80 acres to - be used for a landfill was the only undeveloped land in area A10407A. Before landfill: 80 acres undeveloped (95% developed) Q100 = 0.95 (2800) + 0.05 (1110) = 2716 cfs After landfill: (100% developed) QlOO = 2800 cfs '. "'.. ." . - ~ . . . . ~ ., : .... ,. .', . 6-/0.-:95', e e .---.....-; ,-. '. '.4 It., '00.0'0 AREA DISCHARGE CURVE 100.YEA,R FREQUENCY ~ --- -I' ~;; : . ::1. :'1,'" :1 . J: oj. - ; . .T-. . I". I ' , ; . -j . i . .1 ~; I';' I i I '1 I. : ,!":I i I:! 'I '" I . ;! , I I I . I I '.,' I' I ;.: : ;. :T:' i . i . i. i ;. ," I I 'j: .': . ; I . t t I . 0.1_."... .. f' ! . .1 :' .;, '::.:: ~.: j . f :. I'" --- J.. , '''1, ',' " 1 '::L::L.!.:'.:l.J.., .,,~ .::.' ., Lr_:.: : ~ e., . '. :1. ~: :: ~~ ;j .. J . 4 It..". l . . t, I I ~ -!- "...:~. -":,-,'1', .-: :':'-':." .' ';':.:-. ',-; -. --.,---': i'.': !-:;-:-ri i i'-_:};<i:u: ., , ,; " ,.. _J .. _ , ,- .. .,.... I'-"~--"'" 1...,...........--".. "," 'j" .". ""','' ..-:-:t. _'.::-...1 : '. "':.':.; . ~ . ~ .::: . .: ! : ~'I . :;.,..; . ': ,. ': :. : · ...., : : : 1. ' . ; . · -- I . : --. ,...1 '.. ,'-'- -- '~: _.~..- .1. ...... I ....I... ' t.:.\., . . 'L :--.- ---:~~---: .....;.1 I.l, i:----.---:;::~-r-:;.I II: :..' -....ro._...:'.._.-t...:..~".::.::':,.'!,,' ,:....., ~ . I' . . . t.. - " .f -1 .. .." .. !. . -, ....! .. .. -:. ,. "t. . t 'j' ~ ~ . . .._'.. 0" ")O"'T ......! t1 ,...,....... ..-.J....;. """".,. -: " 10.000.----- "'-l," ..0., ..... i ._.....1..'1-:.11 ...._-j......1 ~----:.. .:' l ..............~__..!........~ . . : . . -. . I . . . . . _. , .. .. eo.! ... . ,_ ~ . . ... I.. . . ... ;. .'. . ; .. .. ., f - ., j' ,. . i :. .. ~ i l-- ..1'. ~ i ., .- --. --- _.. I " l " , I.l " , ~--" , , -- - , i .. ,-1" --- --.----- . -1---..... . t . - . I'''' -. I.. . .. - ;.. - - -...1 _ ..... ~ . : I CI) ~ U Z . .. f . .. ~ . . I . -: ~ ~ i ~ :.. ~ ~ --- --.. .. . I.. ,. w o c:: < ......, :;:; U CI) C ~-..- ., . 1.CC' '. . --~~..... I __ : . .. : ~ ,r i . L--.-_ I .. 'I...;' : ::,1 .., , "::T.:-: --- : j : ':::=J.. . I I : , ., , '! . ::r.:::~:~'!~'~~L~I:~I,:lYl:f. . . .1 i I, t.. . -.-~j-:-..:----.+- I :~ :-.'~;:::: !~"_.~-j ':{ 1'~ i : :--: ~ 1~~ ~.' ~..) ..i ----I.... 'I.I'.I-I.r---... -:i;. :'~:;.: ~~ji"r:~:! ,'~ :(,,:.; .. :.:~. ...:--; -. _I .... . t.. --[ : '1' I , : __' '_':_" _' '. ' -J_ __.__ ___1_..___ --J._..__ __.. .._._. '_. _. " I . ,... ,.j I.. I I j , ". .j '.." I ". ,I . I' I .' . ',' , I "1 ' ..1 .. ---L~.~; !. ...-., . I L....-.;...__ ; i .---: --. '- , . . -.- :..:. - - -~ .---. ~ ...!. . r ..' I. . ,., o. . ., _ 0 ; I 1 I .' . """7'"-:- ~ -- --:,-+-j nh --0. . I I" I 0 l! . .~ ." .-.. I. I IJ... . .! I. I I I : ~ . : .J. : I :.; 1 ~_-.l_. .1_._ ;._ :"-:__i_ ! l I _I : i ! "'1' I :. ! _! .' :u;..+. _-: ... .:j . i , " 100 100 ,.j ., ~._J. "1.000 , --.--- __.A--_\~__ iO.OOO l' .. ... DRAINAGE AREA IN ACRES .J /J =- /b"tJ'I. Z a.cres ry rea.. . O'DD (/OO?' de~jOt!j) :: z~()t'J ch 1). ///oc:::h qltJ~ {O';; d~tle/D~~.I- HAP~I! ~C'L.,"'";"'V ~LO:":" r:. ""Tn-' c.q~L:.- H:~RRIS CO'J~TY !'~coo ;':A~:l. ':0 STL''''''' CLEA~ '.~P.E:;< ':':;:'TF.:- 'L=:::"", ; .~... '--' 'K'-/O~ ~~., , I.- .... ... ",.' . . .' . e e P"'.::; Flow Capacity of HCFCD Ditch A10407 - worst probable case The section of the ditch with the smallest area is located at Station 16 + 00 (refer to Ditch Elevation Detail). Elev. of centerline (sta. 0 + 00) = 3.31 Elev. of centerline (sta. 16 + 00) = 6.11 Avg. slope of HDFCD ditch A10407 = 6.1 - 3.3 = 0.00175 ft/ft. 1600 Cross-section Area = 615.57 ft2 Wetted Perimeter = 96.6 ft. n = 0.035, for natural channels Q = 1.486 A(R)2/3 Sl/2 n R = A = 615.57 = 6.37 P 96.6 Qcapacity = 1.486 (615.57) (6.37)2/3 (0.00175)1/2 0.035 Qcapacity = 3757 cfs .', ,5 -/~-:--8' S- e ." ", .~ .. ." '. . C', e ~- : E = ~(;t'.J C~:TE~I= FJ~ DITCH 1 '..lHE;'= .'! ... .:.:: .... .. .....-, '-' .-. ..-. -.. '-" ., ... - ..... = :.: - :,' ~ .:.: ~: ~'. :: .' 1:: F.:: :; = .....,.................... [::ITCH TyeE = ...... ............. FPEEEO~~D ~F~, ~ = ...... It" 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~.:.~,::~~,~,.~~!".,~.,~",'~~ t,.:=:; ::.::-EE~::7::' ,,...,=."'"""' - = ;: !.).: ~ .. ':- .oe::. .C>~= e-.. ~ -..ETTEC' ?~P:~~-~~ = It at" ~ ".;, [:. J::;~ A ;_~ LIe ~: .;: :. _: -=: i: F ) = .. l>=:LOC:IT\' :,_." ......... [;E~'TH ;: FT ,:; = ................... ~:.I7CH WIC'T~ ~- TQF = ...t _ .-: ~.-' '-"" -- C.7~ 1. eo; ., .:: ..... '-' PPINT-JUT\21?E-RUNI3lDPRWING [) ITCH 1 .., I I :.j ~r\""'H = '-' ... ... lL" ... D = .2 . =.. .. ," ~ 1 , l:~f. .~ t'.~DT _ _ :';~E 'Channel Cross" Sections Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texas HDR HOR TED-tSERV. NC. ..".' ....' . . 'e" e e ~ :'E5:G~J :P:TE~:~ F0P DITCrl ; ..J!':=,...::. :1. . 4..:;~. .:;.... ..;. " - ...... - = ~ Q ~ P )'. - [-.j I,,' ,OF:.: = "",......... ~.:TCH T'Y~E = ".... ..... DITCH EOT, wr~':-~ = ... II ~~ '" ., " .: .....- T~:t:. =~. ~ Ft::EEE;OH~:[:: :: FT .,~ = ...... SIDE-5LOP~ p~-:: = .. I" ':'rir"jNEL E;DT. =_':,I='E .,.,'. !,;:,) = ~: C L; G. H t..~ E ':':5 .:: C E F F= . ( t'.l J = .. ~JET X-SECTION ~PE~ (A~ = ~-jETTES PE~IME-~P = ..... I-i'/C'PP,'_'L..IC ;::PDIU: 1,!=::} = . .OC05 . a.::~5 - -, -- '="..:.: . '=,~ 4..2.7: ~.:L':: ~JELOCIT\. (FP5) ......... 1.53 DEPTH (FT.~ = II ........ DITCH WIDTH ~~ TOP = ... .:.. '-' ...., .: ..... ,_: _ ~PIN7-0jT(2,PE-RUN(3)[PAWrNG [:: I--;::~ 2 '-I - ;.oj .:. '~I - - '+ :_, l..J I~::Th = J.l.e I I ... l~ ... i...JIC1TH = 25 . .. . Co .. J. - ~. '-' 1 ~. .:.- r:jDT' TD "5CRLE ' ,Channel 'Cr,oss,Sections Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texas HDR HOR TED-t3ERV. NC. 7 -/r-I! e e ~- C:.ES:GN CP:~ERI~ FOR D:TC~ _ :.:HE~E o = ~: ~ !' P X_ ., .. .:..:: ., ...... ., ~.*~~ ~/~ ~.~ t..j ;;i CF5) = ...,.......... l;:: DITCH TYPE = ,.. I" I.... FREEBORPD (FT. = ...... SIDE-SLOPE ~R~:O = II I" CHr'.Jt'~E~ E;C!T. 5_::,FE ../a (5) = ;:: C Li:3 H t--~ E '5 5 C C: E ~ F. ( t..J:: = .. JJET X-SECTION PRER (~j = WETTED PE~IMETEP = .. I" H'(DR~ULIC R~DIUS tP) = . ~;ELOCIT'( (FPS) ..... II.. C,EPTH (FT.) = ..... II... DITCH WIDTH AT TOP = ... 10 ..I,... o .-, =. . -:.. "-' ~ .cel . C2"S 10 10.-:'''"' o .~:: 1.2 2 lj=PINT-:UT(2j~E-RUN(3)DP~WING ~)IT;::rl 3 G: = 12 .._\ . I!.! IC'TH = 10 I .. .. ... .. lL.. .. I) = 2.5 . . .~., 1 J . .... ...... ... ! ,-,'I'" !'<l'_' ! TC 5CFiLE Channel Cross Sections Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texas HDR HDR TED-tSERV. "'-'C. " "'~/(?-( e e ~- :E5:GN :R:T~~:= ~O~ DITCh ~ ;,_.i :' =: ;;- E - '.;..: = .. . - - '. .. '--- ~ J '+ _' '_ ..::. ..' .-' ..- oJ,. ~ .:.- ;;~ :.. - N I:' _ _ = r,.,: I . . . . . . . I [ :- C H T ",.., ;:: = = :: I . . . . . . to r [ITCH EDT. ~I:-H = ..... 25 J 1;=;::' Ti=:~~': c>_ FPEESORPD '=7.. = 1,.,.. S:DE-5LGFE ~~-:J = ..... CHNNEi.... E;DT. =L..:~'E .,---. (:;:.! = ~: ':; U ::; H N E ::. 5 ':. C E ;=:' . !. j..J) = .. ~.,~ET j:-5ECTIG~ ~RE~ (A) = ~.iETTED PERI~ETE~ = ..... f-i-'"(':'PHU~:C ~~H[:; IU'=. (;:::) = . !)Ei-:JC:IT"'( \:F;:':=, ..... I . . . .::: . -:. -i.. .CC~5 .02;5 10; . '7':: .' .-, -~ ..lC.. :" . .-. ;- .::.. ,_, i ., -... ~. ... .L C' E P THe FT .:: = ,......... '-'. '-' [.ITCH WIDTH ~T TOP = .,, ~l.S _~RINT-OUT~.::PE-RUN(3JDR~WING ~" T'~ .-. :...& ~ J,..... '_':: lop - .. -- .; - " '-"-' 1~1 _ .,i.'_"_' :,..!I[:,TH 4.' C' = ~ J. . '_' I .~.1 ,- . [.. = '';'' ,,;, .. 1 I .. ... l~ . .:. . --, i.-JI[:.TH = 25 ",,, ,t '." -'0 ,.[-.jDT TD .:,!~:FiLE .... ". Channel Cross Sections Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texa8 HDR HOR TED-5ERV. INC. , . , 7-/f-l~ '". :,: ;, e e .---- :.E3:;~~ :F:7E~I~ =O~ ::~C~ _ ;...::-i=~.= ., . ':.: - . ....- '- :.L = .:.:. - '. - . R t..~ _ :-:F=: = :,.".......,. :':,.=:. ': [: :--CH T-'.. i-~= _ I'......... 7~:~'=:'_ [':~CH E:'::T. LJIC:TH = ..... _, F ;::;=EE:i';PC. , -.,.. ,: ! . ,,,:\ - ...... ~, ~'::'E-5LOPE PATI:~ = ..... ~3~~~~E~~T6o~~~~E~~~ ~~~~ :.i;::-- ':':'-EECTI:::~'.J ~;:;~E~ (t=1) = ,oe: . ~ ~:= 1;=;. -~ i. ="'!"'-=;:"" ~'Et:~ :r"1~T=;:;: = ..... '1 t=. ~. = -.-' , -- - 1.':'';:'' .-, ,,- .:..~ 1. ;=; ., C' .: .... '-~ . '- ,. - -: ~, ~ :-:; !; i .=, 1" ~ " _.--- .,..---- ... i ;::: -.....T- '. . .. . . . " ------ :.:=::~'TH ;::--r.:: = ,......... [':TCH WIDTH ~T TOP = ... =PINT-00T(2!~E-RUN(3)DP~WING [::IT'::M 5 - - - - 'I _ ...._. "_ '::'1 _ _"_:.:...: I - -- "Lr- ... I _.-1 . Co - " - .. '-1 ~.J I[::TH _ .! c: :~ - .... -' . "-" i..Jlf)TH = 5 ,', - ,'., "N::,T'. TO .=C:~LE'.. ' , . &. 0'. 0 . . Channel Cross Sections Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texas HDR HOR TED-tSERV. I\IC. .- .,....'/Q~' e e .........- :.E:: :i;r'.J - - -- - - - - - -, - . - - , -' . .. ;_'~' ~ =,F-, ~_ .- :_!~: :) :; = ;:, :: __._~5 . - - ~ . ....,-"- ., ... - '". = .:.:. _: .:.. -; oJ:, r;: r'.j C: C: F .=: '; = ....: r I . . . . . . .. - [.:-:CH ""T"'\'''~'E = ::......... "i.) FPEE8C~PD ~F-: _. ..... J ~~~~~2Lg~~.P~=~~E~/~ :~;~ ~.CU::;Ht..~E55 :::CE=P. I. t..J) = .. WET X-5ECTIO~j RRER (A~ = WETTED PEPIMETE~ = ..... .::. ."- - .aCl .0'35 .::. '-' . .... ::;. :::.::: ""',:'PHUL.IC ;:::;[:IUE !,!=:,) = . ; i:': .-,,-. T~'.... .. C',,':" '.- .:.....i.-._.,_..J..! . . . . . . . . . . CEFTH ~FT, = :1' II ..... C:TCH WID-H ~T 70P = . II O.7'J.. 1. Cl'; '! .:: ~ . '-' ~1)PPINT-OJT(2 PE-RUN(3)DP~~JING [:: I~C~ c' - - :,,;;.' - .. I :.. .,. ["', ..,.. H = - I .. ... .. . l~e" .. (:. = <:...' . . ... 1 ] t,j':::T 'i_' 5CRLE 'Channel Cross Sections .' Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of La Porte, Texa8 HDR HDR TED-iSERV. I'C. '7 -/~"" ,,' e e ~ ' -,_ c = - ,-. ~, ! ... i- _ _ -~ ! ".. -------- --- '_!,-: ..i. : =.... ~ _ - '-'-' :> ::c~ - :~~~=,i- =. - = ~ . - - ." ~ --"- .,!. .:' "'-"- " - . ~ .-. ~ .,. - r.~ ,-.e: " - ,I I' .:' : .:' . . . . . . . . . l.;:~ . S - c' ::- C H T:" =: : .. . . . . . . . . c' :--CH E:C:T. '..: :::-~ = . I . ., 25 C1 T ;;, P Z ~:' :- ;:-FEEE; CP;::' C> = ...... SIDE-SLOPE Q~T:O = ..... CHt'.lt..~E~ 8::\'7. -=.~C~'E .....-. (::.:; = PDL!GHr-.JE::.5 ::- ::E==. (t'.~:i = . I i_)=~ .:'::-::,ECT:~:~t..~ ;:;~:EH i.AJ = WETTED PE~I~E-E~ = . I... t"'i"{ :> ~~ A U L I!:: ;:' ~ ::' :: Ll '=" ;: ;:;: ) = . .ceos .0:35 al;. -~-~ ~2.C.:: '. ELeC:T' :, F~' =, . . . . . . . . . .-: .~ '-1 .:........::. .: ::,... ... -....., C>E;:'TH i_ FT II ': -, ~ - ....... I .. ~.' .;" .- -+...:. D:TCH wrDTH P- TOP = .,. ,_ PPINT-Ow~ 2,~E-RUN(3)CP~WING ;::: I"T C H ~ -. _ ... t::' '.;.' - ~'_:'" "_: ') I[>~H ~." .-. = ~~.~ I I .. .. J.~_ .. ..;, i.-.!ICTH _.-1 . ..... - '=, .., .- ~, -1" = 25 r.i,-;- ~,-: !....-: , : '-: - .-..-.: - =,t...H~=' . 1 .". ".~ .' '.. ~ ....... Overflow From Ditch 2 Channel Cross Sections Attachment No. 88 , Sanitary Landfill Permit Application City of L. Porte, Tex.. HDR HOR TED-tSERV. NC. . .., , 7-1,-V~ e :-E~:;N :~:TEP!~ ~~; DITCH _ '.aJ ;: :: .... =. e ..........- - . . - - . ." -'- ~2~~'~ _. _ _.- -= '-:"~: :'.- N C. :' :-: F :=, '! = I..:,.......... 1 7;, t =- [., :TCH T\"PE = :,......... 7;:;;~'::-_ [ITCH SOT. wI:~H = . II.. ~~ ""FEE13DRt:::[. : F; , S:~E-5LOPE p~-:c = I.... C~r'.Jt'~EL E:C1T. :=:i.-::,!='E a..... i. 5) = ~~CLiGHNE==5 !::D~==. ". !..J.! = .. WET X-SECTION ~PER (A) = WETTED PEPIME7EF = ..... h'/DR~ULIC PPD:~5 ~Rj = . ; ,~: ,-. ,-, -r~'..'" " =:-..: , . .... ~ ~ '_' ,_" .J..!: '.! ~. ......... [:. E~' T H i FT .:: = .......... DITCH WIDTrl AT TOF = .,. J '-1 :=.'~ .:.. --' ~ . CiOO':' I eL~:5 1Q::' . S2 'l1., =-, ..... . ,_:::" ~.':"4. ."1 _., ~. : . '';'. ~ ". TT.-._=' .;.....! ,-.:; ,_: (1)PRINT-OUT(2;~E-RUN(3)DPAWI~~G 4.0.5 G: = 17:3.5 U!i)TH = 4-2l. 5 I ..... l~ . i::: . :::: I -1 -. . (:0 = :3. ~ .- 1 :....1 Ii)TH = ;2 5 t'.JC!; Te!:=,CALE ", '.. '. Overflow From Ditch 4 Channel Cross Sections , Attachment No. 88 Sanitary Landfill Permit, Application City of L. Porte, Tex.. HDR HQR TED-tSERV. NC. ?_IP- e e UKDINANCE NO. 1553 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION BY THE CITY OF LA PORTE OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE, WITH FMC COPORATION AND ROHM AND HAAS BAYPORT, INC.; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Section 1. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines and declares that Rohm and Haas Bayport, Inc., and FMC Corporation, have each executed a Settlement Agreement Regarding Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site, a copy of which settlement agreement is attached hereto, incorporated by reference herein, and made a part hereof for all purposes. Section 2. The Mayor and the City Secretary of the City of La Porte, Texas, be, and they are hereby authorized, and empowered to execute and deliver on behalf of the City of La Porte, Texas, the Settlement Agreement Regarding Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site with Rohm and Haas Bayport, Inc. and FMC Corporation. section 3. The City Council officially finds, determines, re- cites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the City for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as requried by the Open Meetings Law, Article 6252-17, Texas Revised Civil Statutes Annotated; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and approval. Ordinance No. 1553 e e PASSED AND APPROVED this the 27th day of July, 1987. ATTEST: CITY OF LA PORTE By Norman L. Malone, Mayor Cherie Black, City Secretary APPROVED: ~cJ Knox W. Askins, e e REOUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: 7/27/87 Requested By: R. T. Herrera Department: Administration Report x Resolution Ordinance Exhibits: Resolution 87-12 SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Attached for your consideration is Resolution 87-12, which recommends to the Harris County Mayors' and Councils' Association the City of La Porte's nominee to the Port of Houston Authority Commission. The Council has been reviewing prospective candidates and is still in the process of doing so; therefore, the name to be submitted has been left blank in the Resolution. Action Required by Council: Name City of La Porte's choice of nominee for Port of Houston Authority Commission and approve Resolution 87-12, or table the Resolution for further study. Availability of Funds: N/A General Fund Capital Improvement Other Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing Account Number: Funds Available: __ YES NO Approved for Citv Council Agenda Q~T. ~ Robert T. Herrera City Manager I-'Z.:~ -(Q J DATE e e RESOLUTION NO. 87-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE HARRIS COUNTY MAYORS' AND COUNCILS' ASSOCIATION, FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A COMMISSIONER TO THE PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY BOARD; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE: Association, for its of Commissioners City Council of the City of La Porte hereby Harris County Mayors' and Councils' consideration for appointment to the Board of the Port of Houston Authority, a resident of the City of , Texas. Sec t ion 2. The City Sec retary of the City of La Porte is hereby directed to furnish a certified copy of this Resolution to the Harris County Mayors' and Councils' Association. Sec t ion ~. The City Counc il offic ially find s, determines, rec i tes and declares that a suffic ient wr i t ten not ice of the Section 1. The recommends to the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council was posted at a place convenient to the pUblic at the City Hal~ of the City fo~ the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by the Open Meetings Law, Article 6252-17, Texas , I Revised Civil Statutes Annotated; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this Resolution and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the 1987. day of CITY OF LA PORTE By l'i'I' "I It I " Norman L. Malone, Mayor e e Resolution No. 87- 12 ATTEST: Cherie Black, City Secretary APPROVED: fidxcJ Knox W. Askins, City Attorney ~ FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA~ r" Agenda Date Requested: July 27, 1987 Requested By: J. L. Sease Department: Fire x Report Resolution Ordinance Exhibits: Purchasing Manager's Recommendation SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Funds were allocated ($8,000.00) in this years budget to purchase a Hazardous Materials Incident Trailer. This trailer will carry the necessary items to help control a spill or release of chemicals. As outlined in the Purchasing Manager's Recommendation,six bid packets w~re sent out and only two (2) bids were received. The low bidder, INDUSTRIAL TRAILER, meets all requirements and has a bid within the allocated fund range. I recommend the Council award the bid to INDUSTRIAL TRAILERS in the amount of $7,216.00 Action Required by Council: Award bid to low bidder or reject all bids to rebid. Availability of Funds: x General Fund Capital Improvement Other Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing Account Number: 001-500-501-821 Funds Available: x YES _ NO Approved for Cit~ Council Agenda ~~ Robert T. Herrera"\ City Manager ~ t~ I'D" DATE e e ~- , , /) .' INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM July 13, 1987 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Joe Sease - Fire Chief ~ Louis Rigby - Purchasing Man Sealed Bid #0198 - Hazardous Mater1al Trailer Advertised, Sealed bids #0198 - for a Hazardous Material read in City Council Chambers July 6, 1987, at 4:00 p.m. mailed to the following six manufacturers: Trailer were opened and Bid invitations were 1. Trailer Wheel & Frame Co. 2. Wells Cargo Inc. 3. Katy Trailer 4. Industrial Trailer 5. A.L. Tucker Trailer Inc. 6. Houston Trailer Inc. " Bids were received from two manufacturers: 1. Industrial Trailer 2. Trailer Wheel & Frame Purchasing recommends awarding bid to low bidder meeting specifications submitted by Industrial Trailer in the amount of $7,216.00. Please submit your recommendation along with an agenda request form and all attachments no later than 5:00 p.m. on the Monday preceding the next regular Council meeting. If there is a need to delay bringing this bid to Council, please notify me so that arrangements can be made to extend the quotE;d bid. Attachment: Bid Tabulations ::,(, tl :1' '" , ' e . ~ ~ .( \ Sealed Bid 110198 ,.."- ; I Hazardous Material Industrial Trailer Industrial Trailer Trailer Wheel & Trailer Frame W/Modificat'ons l. Trailer $7,216.00 $8,132.50 $8,180.00 2. Estimated Delivery 40 days 45 days 40 davs 3. Warranty 12 mos. 12 mos 12 mos - I " , :,\ '. '::':( I I , " . . REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM Agenda Date Requested: July 27, 1987 Requested By: S . Gillett ~partment: X Report ~R:Solution Public Works Ordinance Exhibits: Recommendations by Purchasing Agent Bid Tabulation SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATION Sealed bid #0199 (commercial solid waste containers}were received from three (3) vendors on July 6, 1987. Estimated bid quantities were based on the previous year's quantities (67 containers). with the new budget, only 21 containers are scheduled for replacement. Based on original bid quantities, low bid meeting specifications, before discount, was received from May Fabricating, in the amount of $23,162.00, with a 2% discount on net 10 days. Based on new quantities, low bid meeting specification is S & S Welding in the amount of $7,377.00, with a 1% discount on net 10 days. Second low bid, based on new quantities, is May Fabricating in the amount of $7,380.00, with a 2% discount, a differencE of $3.00. In applying the net 10 day discount, which the City takes advantage of, the adjusted low bid of the ,revised quantities is as follows. S & S Welding - $7,377.00 less l% - $7,303.23 May Fabricating-$7,380.00 less 2% - $7,232.40 Based on adjusted quantities and through application of discount, it is recommended that the City award the bid to May Fabricating based on unit prices bid. Action Required by Council: Award bid for purchase of commercial solid waste containers to May Fabricating, based on unit prices. Availability of Funds: X General Fund Capital Improvement Other Water/Wastewater General Revenue Sharing Account Number: OOI-700-703-821 Funds Available: ..lL YES NO "I *Account number w:L.ll change with adoption of proposed FY1987-88 budget. " Approved for Cit~~ouncil Agenda 1a,~ ,-; ~ Robert T. Herrera City Manager -,. (""L~ \ 'hI DATE tp e ..........- ,.. . ,. INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM _/\ --:,\ \ ;; \~,'- \, "J~ ,;;...--' '~ .--- . ..-..--"'" , .--" ",~ \ //--- ',-,.) \\ ". ' ' \' ' ~~ -- Advertised, sealed bids #0199 for Front Load Containers ~e 0 ed and read in City Council Chambers on July 6, 1987. Bid request wer ailed to eleven manufacturers with the following ~hree vendors returning bids: July 15, 1987 FROM: Steve Gillett - Public Works Di~~J.jr . Louis Rigby - Purchasing Manage~~~ Sealed Bid #0199 - Front Load Container4 TO: SUBJECT: 1. Scott & Hill 2. May Fabricating 3. S & S Welding Vendors were asked to submit firm pricing on three (3), four (4), six(6),and eight (8) yard front load containers with plastic lids. The vendor selected will be required to deliver containers as needed to the City of La Porte upon request. ,I The original bid quantities (total of 67) were based on last year's bid. The new budget allows for approximately 21 containers to be bought. The City Attorney advises that"the City reserves the right... to accept any bid or part thereof..." Low bids meeting specifications and May Fabricating, $7,380.00. . invoices paid within (10 days), on the new quantities are S & S Welding, $7,377.00, May Fabricating's terms include a 2% discount on S & S Welding offers a 1% discount for the same. Based on May Fabricating's past service, their ,7 day delivery, and the 2% discount, I recommend the bid be awarded to May Fabricating. Please submit your recommendation along with an agenda request form and all attachment by the prescibed time preceding the next regular Council meeting. If there is a need to delay bringing this bid to Council, please notify me. Attachment: Bid Tabulation xc: Bill Fitzsimmons ";',1, , ':1 . ~ . ~- " .-. . \ \ \ \ \ ~ \ \ " / ,: Sealed Bid 1!0199 Front - Load Containers Scott & May S & S \ Hill Fabricating \ Welding I \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ . I \ Ori"inal Bid Each \ Total Each Total Each \ Total 3 yd. W/Plastic Lids (22) 290.70 6,395.40 289.00 6,358.00 272. 00 5,984. 4 yd. W/ Plastic Lids (30 325.40 9,762.00 327.00 9,810.00 339.00 10,170.( 6 yd. W/ Plastic Lids (8) 427.40 3,419.20 421. 00 3,368.00 434.00 3" 472. ( : . 8 yd. W/ Plastic Lids (7) 515.00 3,605.00 518.00 3,625.00 531. 00 3, 717. OC Total $23,181.60 23,162.00 23,343.( , Delivery 30 days 7 days 15 day . Terms 2% 10/net 3 b 2% 10/net 0 1% lO/ne Based on New Quantities 3 yd. (9) 2,616.30 2,601. 00 2,448.0 4 yd. (6) 1,952.40 1,962.00 2,034.C " 6 yd. (3) 1,282.20 1,263.00 1,302.0 :t _:~ .~. .. ..-.. ". ...., 8 yd. (3) 1,545.00 1,554.00 1,593.0 _. ' ...-.. . Total $7,395.00 $7,380.00 $7,377.C , - -----