Loading...
CR 06-132 Award Comprehensive Utility Plan G\TY OF m HOPKINS November 21,2006 Council Report 2006-132 Award Comprehensive Utility Plan ProDosed Action Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move that Council adopt Resolution 2006-78. Resolution Ordering completion of Comprehensive Utility Plan Update. Overview The City of Hopkins last completed a Comprehensive Utility Plan in 1990. Since that time, there have been a number of changes in town such as new developments and piping work. The comprehensive plan is an opportunity to review the current status of the utilities and layout all of the major expenditures need to keep the systems operating in a safe and efficient manor. SEH has provided a proposal to complete this study for $53,016. The scope of work is attached and includes a fire protection review, water quality regulation review, risk management analysis and completion of the water resources management plan. SUDDortine: Information . Resolution 2006-078 . Work Proposal and Scope of services. R. Bradford, P .E. ssistant City Engineer Financial Impact: $53.016.00 Budgeted: Y/N L ERP, etc.): Notes: Source: Utilitv Funds Related Documents (CIP, ~ SEH November 14,2006 RE: City of Hopkins Comprehensive Utility Plan and Water Resources Management Plan SEHNo. PHOPKNS0701.00 10.00 John Bradford, PE Assistant City Engineer City of Hopkins 1010 First Street South Hopkins, MN 55343 Dear Mr. Bradford: The City of Hopkins is committed to enhancing the quality of life for residents and businesses. An important part of following through with this commitment is the ability to provide adequate public utility services. City public utilities include a water supply, treatment, storage, and distribution system; a sanitary sewer collection system; and a network of storm sewer collection and treatment facilities. In a never ending process, the City continues to balance the existing utility capacities and capabilities with new service demands influenced by redevelopment and new construction. Through this process a need to update the City's Comprehensive Utility Plan (1990) and Water Resources Management Plan (2000) was identified. In a meeting with Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) on July 20, 2006, City staff identified several goals and objectives that need to be accomplished through these updates. These goals include: · The Comprehensive Utility Plan will be revised to provide updated system analysis of the City's water and sanitary sewer systems to evaluate existing and future needs. · Key efforts will include evaluation of all the City's lift stations, partial capacity analysis of the water distribution and sanitary sewer collection system and an assessment of the water distribution system facilities. · The Water Resources Management Plan will be revised to include updated GIS figures, incorporate the results of recent hydrologic/hydraulic modeling and drainage studies, and address previous comments from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. · Update Capital Improvement Plan. · Both plans will be completed in accordance with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services 2030 Water Resources Management Policy Plan requirements. SEH is pleased to be a partner with the City on this important work and appreciates the opportunity to submit a proposal for updating your Comprehensive Utility Plan and Water Resources Management Plan. Weare ready to roll up our sleeves and assist you in getting this job completed. We are very familiar with the City, and we look forward to aggressively pursuing your proposed project schedule. More importantly, we have learned over the years how to focus our expertise on the specific needs of the City by working side by side with your staff. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 200, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9301 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com I 952.912.2600 I 800.734.6757 I 952.912.2601 fax John Bradford, PE November 14,2006 Page 2 Project team members have been carefully selected because their special talents specifically relate to the needs of your project. Many of them have worked with you in the past and are familiar with your goals and objectives. The Comprehensive Utility Plan update effort will be lead by Project Manager Jay Murzyn, PE. Project Engineers Greg Johnson, PE and Doug Klamerus, PE will assist with the effort. The update to the Water Resources Management Plan will be lead by Ron Leaf, PE assisted by Brad Woznak, PE and Erin Krueger, PE. Members of our team have worked with the City on past successful projects and have thoroughly enjoyed working with City staff. Dave Halter will continue in his role as Client Service Manager. He has the ability to first and foremost be your advocate. This means that he is working constantly to ensure a seamless delivery of services that meets the City's goals. SCOPE OF WORK The deliverables for this project will be two separate documents, an updated Comprehensive Utility Plan(water and sewer) and an updated Water Resources Management Plan(storm water), and as such this proposal has been divided into two main components. These components and the tasks associated with each are summarized below: I. Comprehensive Utility Plan The following work plan demonstrates how the SEH Team will address the needs of Hopkins to complete a Comprehensive Utility Plan. Task 1. Initial Planning Meeting Selected SEH team members will attend a kick-off meeting with the City staff to discuss the existing water and sanitary sewer system and plans for future redevelopment included in the East Hopkins Land Use and Market Study. Some of the items to be discussed at the meeting are impacts of the redevelopment to the City's utilities including new trunk water mains and sanitary sewer collection system and evaluations and analyses of the City's lift stations. Task 2. Data Collection and Review Review historical records of water pumped and maximum day demands. Also gather as-built drawings of facilities, pump data and layout of the water distribution system for review. Review the water study completed by Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. dated March 30, 1990. Proposed land use, zoning maps and City population projections will also be reviewed to aid in identifying future redevelopment demands on the system. It is our understanding that the city is at or near its ultimate service area boundary pending some redevelopment. SEH will include one (1) day of review to evaluate the current operation of the water system. Evaluate the condition of the sanitary sewer collection system by reviewing recent CCTV inspection tapes provided by the City. The capacity of the collection system will be evaluated in the area planned for future redevelopment as included in the East Hopkins Land Use and Market Study and Downtown Area. Evaluate the physical condition of each lift and pumping station. A visual inspection will identify the structural condition of each station and will recommend whether further testing will be necessary. A John Bradford, PE November 14, 2006 Page 3 visual inspection of piping, valves, heating and ventilation will identify the mechanical condition of each station. Pump records will be reviewed to evaluate the pump cycles at each station. Evaluate existing electrical service to each station and assess its ability to serve the station. SEH will visually inspect electrical gear and compare existing technology to current technology. Amperage readings to determine pump conditions will be obtained. The existing instrumentation and control system will be evaluated. Analyze the sewer system's ability to convey the existing and future sewage flow. The quantity of flow currently received on an annual average, maximum month, peak hour and peak instantaneous will be determined for each lift station in the following manner: Review pump run time records of all lift stations. . Calculate pump capacity for each station by performing a pump down test. . Calculate flow to each lift station by multiplying pump capacity by run times. . Calculate theoretical flow for each service area using development type and water usage. . Compare theoretical flow to measured flow. Apply appropriate theoretical peaking factors to estimate maximum hourly and peak instantaneous flow. The pump-down test will require a joint effort between the City and SEH. SEH will furnish and operate drawdown gauges and timing devices and will perform the calculations. The City will provide access to the stations and furnish staff to operate the pumps. Task 3. PopulationlDemand Projections A future population of Hopkins will be estimated to reach saturation at 18,000. The SEH team will use this projection to determine peaking factors for maximum day, peak hour and how these peaking factors would affect both water and sanitary sewer systems. SEH will establish value for City manhour per unit sanitary sewer flow and compare with similar municipalities. The City will provide manhour data. Task 4. Review Fire Protection Rating Review the City's existing ISO classification and use ISO fireflow data to develop a figure showing the test locations and their ability to meet fire flow requirements. SEH will not determine fire flows/pressures throughout the system since a hydraulic model will not be included as part of this study. This analysis could be added to the scope or completed as part of a separate study. Task 5. Water Quality Regulations The current well water quality will be compared to current and proposed drinking water regulations to determine if additional treatment of the City's water supply will be required other than iron and manganese removal. We understand that currently the water in Hopkins is only treated for iron and manganese to meet the current primary and secondary standards. Recommendations for additional treatment required will be provided and costs included in the capital improvement planning. John Bradford, PE November 14, 2006 Page 4 Task 6. Capital Improvement Planning Assemble a 5 year and 10 year capital improvements plan for the water and sanitary sewer systems. Costs will be estimated in 2006 dollars for planning purposes. The CIP will include improvements to the facilities that were reviewed as part of this study including major maintenance items. Task 7. Risk Management - Water Plan Redundancy Analyses SEH will contact adjoining communities to discuss short and long term interconnection potential. Both instantaneous flow rate they are capable of supplying and also total daily volume that could be available. Existing computer models of adjoining systems that SEH has in-house and could be utilized with their approval include Edina and Minnetonka. Task 8. Water MeterlBattery Replacement Cost Analysis SEH will contact vendors to determine the level of effort needed to replace existing batteries. We will assemble preliminary costs estimates for new meter systems versus cost of replacing existing batteries. Task 9. Final Report A draft of the Comprehensive Utility Plan will be completed and reviewed with City staff. City staff s recommendations and comments will then be incorporated into the final report. The report will incorporate all of the findings from the tasks listed above, and meetings with City staff and more specifically provide: 1. Alternatives and recommendations for improvements to existing water facilities. 2. Updated Capital Improvement Plan with cost estimates. 3. Updated colored graphics depicting water and sanitary sewer system layouts and most recent ISO report results. II. Water Resources Management Plan We understand that the overall goal of this effort is to update and gain agency approval for the City's Draft 2000 Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP). The current plan will be revised into a Microsoft Word and pdf document, include updated GIS figures, incorporate the results of recent hydrologic/hydraulic modeling and drainage studies, and address previous comments from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The specific tasks under this project are described below and correspond to the estimated task-hour budget in Attachment A. City and SEH staff has completed a preliminary review of the Plan and identified a number of items to be included in this update. As the City/SEH project team proceeds with these updates, we anticipate that some additional efforts may be identified and may require additional work beyond the scope identified below. For example, upon submittal of the Draft Plan to MCWD and NMCWD, additional requests may need some formal response or action. As the project moves forward, a list of potential additional items for revisions will be prepared and discussed by the City/SEH project team prior to initiating additional work and to determine if the work can be completed within the original authorized budget. Revisions identified as part of this task include the following: John Bradford, PE November 14, 2006 Page 5 Task 1. Contact MCWD, NMCWD, and Metropolitan Council ConfIrm necessary updates needed to gain Plan approval. Task 2. Update Plan . Update text to Microsoft Word and pdf version. Scan the 2000 WRMP text and covert the text into Microsoft Word. . Update Plan Figures in GIS Format. Plan figures will be created with the most recent a GIS data. . Update HydrologiclHydraulic Modeling Information. Incorporate hydrologic/hydraulic modeling that has been completed since 2000. Update hydrologic summary tables in Appendix A to reflect any changes due to projects completed since 2000. Task 3. Capital Improvement Planning Update Capital Improvement Plan. Add proposed City projects as related to water resources management. Adjust the time line to 2006 - 2016 and add/delete projects that have been completed since 2000. Task 4. Assist With Plan Approval Process Prepare summary of Plan updates and re-submit to MCWD and NMCWD for their review and comment. . Deliver 3 copies of the Draft Plan: City, MCWD, and NMCWD. Task 5. Final Report . Finalize Plan Updates. Send out notification of revisions as needed. · Prepare and deliver updated Plan section inserts in paper and electronic format. . Deliver 3 final printed copies to City and 5 CD copies. MATERIALS AND TASKS PROVIDED BY THE CITY 1. Historical population data and population projections. 2. Maps of City including overall water system, current land use, proposed land use, current zoning, and available topographic mapping provided in AutoCad format if available. 3. GIS/CAD electronic data on existing distribution system. 4. Water main, well, and storage tank plans, age and condition of major utility items, and available pump curves. 5. Current and previous 5 year water usage records including average daily and monthly demand and maximum day demand. 6. Water quality and MN/DOH water supply reports of existing wells. 7. Residential and commercial/industrial connection information. 8. ISO Fire Hydrant Flow Report and hydrant flow information. 9. Provide access to facilities, assist in acquiring field data, fire flow testing as necessary, water quality testing. John Bradford, PE November 14,2006 Page 6 SCHEDULE AND FEE We have the capability to begin the tasks outlined in this proposal immediately following City authorization. We anticipate having a draft submittal of each document to the City for review and comment by Feb 1,2007. The documents will be finalized with the City's comments incorporated and be submitted for final approval by Feb 28, 2007. SEH is pleased to present this fee proposal to the City of Hopkins for the updated Comprehensive Utility Plan and an updated Water Resources Management Plan. The estimate of the cost of our engineering services, as provided on the attached task hour budget, is based on the understanding, approach, and schedule detailed in this proposal. We propose an hourly not-to-exceed fee of $50,997 plus customary reimbursable expenses estimated to be $2,019. We will bill you monthly for these services on an hourly basis plus the cost of expenses based on the attached task hour budget as summarized below: Comprehensive Utility Plan Reimbursable Expenses Subtotal $43,949 1.379 $45,328 $7,048 640 $7,688 Water Resource Management Plan Reimbursable Expenses Subtotal Total Fee Proposal $53,016 We look forward to discussing and clarifying the contents of our proposal with your staff. Let us know how we can be of assistance. Respectfully submitted, SHORT ELLIOT,T ~CKSON INC. ~M~:f~ Project Manager Jcm Enclosures c: Dave Halter, SEH Ron Leaf, SEH GregJohnson,SEH c:\documents and settings~murzyn\desktop\hopkins proposaNlopkms cup proposal fmal.doc CITY OF HOPKINS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2006-078 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE COMPLETION OF A COMPREHENSIVE UTILITY PLAN UPDATE WHEREAS, the City completed completed a comprehensive utility plan in 1990, and WHERAS, the facilities and operation of the water, storm and sanitary sewer systems need to be periodically examined to provided reliable and efficient services, and WHEREAS, an understanding of upcoming major maintenance items for the utility systems is a necessary component of planning for the financial health of the enterprises, and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council is requiring a major utility component in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota, that the proposed comprehensive utility plan updaty be referred to the firm Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. for study and that they be instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed the results of the plan update. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins, Minnesota, this 21 st day of November, 2006. Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, City Clerk