HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-1988
k
r
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL
February 2, 1988
V,ork Session of the City of Denton City Council or Tuesday,
February 9, 1988, at 7:00 p.m, in the Civil Defense Room of
City Hall at which the following items will be considered:
7:00 p.m.
1. Consider approval of a resolution approving an
interlocal ambulance agreement between the City of
Denton and Denton County for ambulance services; and
declaring an effective date.
2. Receive an update on the landfill and solid waste
alternatives.
,r
C E R T I F I C A T E
I certify that the above notice of meetinp was posted on the
bulletin bo d at the City H 11 of the City of bnton, Texas,
on the day of 1988 at o'clock i
(A.m,) .m,
2854C
T
't
i
1
I
i
Y+~
` O i
1
I
` JTT
i S.
AGENDA
CITY OF DENTON CITY COUNCIL.
February 2, 1988
1 Work Session of the City of Denton City Counc41 on Tuesday,
II February 9, 1988, at 7:00 p,m. in the Civil Defense Room of
City Nall at which the following items will be conside:J:
7:00 p.m.
1. Consider approval of a resolution approving an
interlocal ambulance agreement between the City of
Denton and Denton County for ambulance services; end
declaring an effective date.
t
2. Receive an update on the landfill and solid waste
alternatives.
C E R T I F I C A T E
I certify that the above notice of meeting was fostod on the
bulletin board at the City Nall of the City of Denton, Texas,
on the day of 1988 at o'clock
(a.m.) p.m.
CITY SkUKHAFY
2$S4C
li
I
~ A4
~F
i
III III
CITY of DENTON, TEXAS MUNICIPAL BUILDING/ DENTON, TEXAS 18201 /TEL EPHONE (917) 386.9307
Office of the City Managor
M E M 0 R A N D U P 4
T0: Lloyd V. Harrell, City Manager 1
Rick Svehla, Deputy City Manager
fROhl
DATE: February 5, 1988
t
SUBJECT: Ambulance Contract '
Attached is the contract from the County for ambulance t
service. The attorne/s have reviewed it. Since the County
sent it over late, the only change Debi has made is that the
County must pay us for the first two quarters of the year in
the first payment. We find the rest of the contract to be in
order and would recommend the Council approve it.
If you have any further questions, we will he sappy to answer
them at the meeting.
ve
Deputy City Manager
RS:bw
I 3864M
Attachment
f
9
r
S
y
1
?j
n
i. 1
T
M
1624L
M
NO.
A RESOLUTION ADENTON PPROVAND DENTONECOUNTY ORUAMBUL~ANCE AGREEMENT SERVICES; AND
THE CITY OF
DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DENTON HEREBY RESOLVES:
SECTION I. That the City Council of the City of Denton here y approvaa an agreement between the City of of Denton and
which is
Denton County for ambulance servic re n ference pherein, and the
attached hereto au~hori ed pototexecute said agreement on behalf
1 Mayor is hereby
of the City.
approval shall become effective
SECTION II. That this resolution
on its passage
e u
at y P
me
im
day of February, 1488.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH, CITY ATTORNEY
BY: 110
1:~
I
f~
r
I
1 '
1624L
4
THE STATE OF TEXAS ~ 1NTERLOCAL AMBULANCE AGREEMENT
I COUNTY OF DENTON
I This Agreement is made and entered by and between herein
County, a political subdivision of d tthe he City of Denton, a home
COUNTY", Texas, hereinafter
after referred to ae
i
i rule municipal corporation of Denton County,
1 referred to as "CITY",
, COUNTY is a duly organized olitical subdivision of
WHEREAS County
the State of Texas engaged anfor hthe ~benefit a Of the of citizens
Government and related 3
` and
of Denton County; duly
al corporation,
! WHEREAS, CITY is a home rule municip n
u relateu
and operating nder the lawh service and e
organized o,, of ambulance , and
io i
4 is engaged in the prov
services for the benefit of the citizens of Denton,
WHEREAS, CITY is the owner and operator of certain ambulance
vehicles and other equipment designed for land h8s sf~rittemploy
infirm, or injured,
perinea who are sick,
trained personnel whose duties are related to the 'ise of such
vehicles and equipment; and
medical services
WHEREAS, COUNTY desires to ob hereinafterncdescribed, for the
1 more fully
rendered by CITY,
i benefit of the resasidents of the unincorporated areas of Denton
County, Texas; and
provision of emergency medical services is a
i WHEREAS the h public health and welfare
governmental function that serves t e arties; and
i and is of mutual concern to the contractd sire to be subject to
WHEREAS, COUNTY and CITY' mutually Vernon
rovisions of Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Art' 4Act `and )~contract
the p 198S), the Interlocal C0°P COUNTY and CITY, for the
Supp. ; NOW, THEREFORE,
pursuant thereto, agree as follow s%
mutual consideration hereinafter stated, I.
e the 1
The effective date of this agreement shall bst day of
October, 19876
II.
The initial term of this Agreement shall be for the period
1987 to and through September 30, 1988, There•
of October agreement shall be renewed for successive additional
after, this 1,
l
I ~
i
1
i
7
t
one year terms commencing on October 1 of each year if the
County and the City agree in writing on or before the first day
of October, to the amount of consideration to be paid hereunder
for each successive term; provided however, that each party may
terminate this agreement by givingg the other party written
notice of intent to terminate sixty (60) days after such notice.
III.
As used herein, the words and phrases hereinafter set forth
shall have the meanings as follows;
A. "Emergency" shall mean any circumstances that calls for
immediate thecsick,awou wounded orchinjthe ured lforn medicalimtreatment nis to health or , but of be limited life of f person or and shall
include
1. The representation by a person requesting ambulance
j service that an immediate reed exists for such from
vice for the purpose of transporting a person
medical treatment aislthereaftereadministeredemergency
2. The representation by a person requesting ambulance
k
i service that uratof ex is ts aorpersuch
son
i service for the e purpose
~ from any location to the closest medical facility.
` B. "Rural area" means any area within the boundaries of
ate imits
Denton Count Texl and without the co=
incorporated c,ities88towns and villages within saidlCOUNTY of all
limits
C. "Urban rata" means any area ror villager withinposaid COUNTY
of an incorporated city,
other than thl City of Denton.
D. "Emergency ambulance call" means a response to a request
for ambulance service by the personnel of CITY''sS Fsire Departme t
in a situation involving an emergency (a is
herainabove vehicle. Within the meaning hereof, ausingle icallfmightminvolve
the transportation of more than one person at a time.
IV.
A. Services to be referred hereunder y CITY a etambulance
services normally rendered by CITY,
emergency as hereinabove defined, to citizens of rural areas of
COUNTY.
AMBULANCE ACREF.MENTIPAGE 2
i
1
I
k
B. The CITY'S Fire Department shall respond to requests for
ambulance services made within designated rural areas of COUNTY
according to Exhibit A attached hereto.
V.
I The COUNTY shall designate the County Judge to act on behalf
of COUNTY and to serve as "Liaison Officer" between COUNTY and
CITY. The County Judge or his designated substitute shall insure
f the performance of all duties and obligations of COUNTY herein
stated; and shell devote sufficient time and attention to the
execution of said duties on behalf of COUNTY in full compliance
with the terms and conditions of this agreement- and, shall
provide immediate and direct supervision of COUNTY1 S employees,
agents, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or laborers, if any,
in the furtherance of the purposes terms and conditions of this
Agreement for the mutual benefit o COUNTY and CITY.
i VI.
CITY shall insure the performance of all duties and obliga-
tions of CITY as herein stated; and, shall devote sufficient
time and attention to the execution of said duties on behalf of
CITY in full compliance with the terms and conditions of this
agreement; and, shall provide immediate and direct supervision
of the CITY employees, agents, contractors, sub -contractors,
and/or laborers, if any, in the furtherance of the purposes
terms and conditions of this Agreement for th3 mutual benefit of
CITY and COUNTY,
VII.
For the services hereinabove stated, COUNTY agrees to pay to
CITY for the full performance of this agreement, the one-time
lump sum of Two Hundred Twenty-Seven Thousand One Hundred and
Two Dollars ($227,102.00) Dollars to be paid in equal quarterly
payments of Fifty-six Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy-five
Dollars and (Fifty Cents ($56,775.50) commencing on October 1,
1987. The remaining payments shall be made on or before January
1, 1988, April 1, 1988, and July 1, 1988. :ayment in the amount
of One Hundred Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred Fifty-one Dollars
($113,551), representing payment for the first two quarters of
the term of this Agreement, shall be paid by COUNTY within two
weeks of execution of this Agreement.
VIII.
COUNTY agrees to and accepts full responsibility for the
acts, negligence, and/or omissions of all COUNTY'S employees,
and agents, COUNTY'S subcontractors, and/or contract laborers,
and for those of all other persons doing work under a contract
or agreement with said COUNTY.
s
AMBULANCE AGREEMENT/PAGE 3
M
i
N
i
i
i
IX.
CITY agrees to and accepts full responsibility for the acts,
i negligence, and/or omissions of all of CITY'S employees, and
agents, CITY'S subcontractors, and/or contract laborers doing
work under a contract or agreement with CITY in performance of
this agreement with said CITY. It is further agreed that if
claim or liability shall arise from the joint or concurring
negligence of both parties hereto, it shall be borne by them
s ceMpnratively in accordance with the laws of the State of
Texas. This paragraph shall not be construed as a waiver by
j either party of any defenses available to it under the laws of
the State of Texas. It is understood that it is not the
intention of the parties hereto to create liability for the
benefit of third parties, but that this agreement shall be for
the benefit of the parties hereto.
I X.
In the event of any default in any of the covenants herein
contained, this agreement may be forfeited and terminated at
CITY'S discretion if such default continues for a period of ten
(10) days after CITY notifies COUNTY in writing of such default
and its intention to declare this agreement terminated. Unless
the default is cured aforesaid, this agreement shall terminate
and come to an end as if that were tho day originally fixed
herein for the expiration of the agreement.
XI.
This agreement may be terminated at any time, by either
( party giving sixty (60) day advance written notice o.o the other
party. In the event of such termination by either party, CITY
shall be compensated pro rate for all services performed to
termination date, together with reimbursable expenseo then due
and as authdrized by this agreement. In the event of such
termination, should CITY be over compensated on a pro rata basis
for all services performed to termination date, and/or he over
compensated for reimbursable expenses as authorized by this
agreement, then COUNTY shall be reimbursed pro rata for all such
overcompensation. Acceptance of said reimbursement shall not
constitute a waiver of any claim that may otherwise arise out of
this Agreement.
XII.
The fact that COUNTY and CITY accept certain responsibilities
relating to the rendition of ambulance services under this agree-
meat as a part of their responsibility for providing protection
AMBULANCE AGREEMENT/PAGE 4
n
I
i
for the public health makes it imperative that the performance of
these vital services be recognized as a overnmental function and
that the doctrine of governmental immunity shall be, and it is
h
CITY nor ereby invoked to the extent possible under the law. Neither
immunity orU defense that would botherwise beebavailable waive, to any
against claims arising from the exercise of governmental powers
and functions,
XIII.
This agreement repreaents the entire and integrated agreement
I between CITY and COUNTY and supersedes all prior negotiations,
representations and/or agreements, either written or oral. This t
agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by
both CITY and COUNTY,
XIV.
This agreement and any of its terms or provisions, as well as
the rights and duties of the parties hereto, shall be governed by
the laws of the State of Texas.
XV.
In the event that any portion of this agreement shall be
found to be contrary to law, it is the intent of the parties
hereto that the remaining portions shall remain valid and in full
force and effect to i extent possible.
I j .
XVI.
The undersigned officer and/or agents of the parties hereto
are the properly authorized officials and have the necessary
authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the parties
hereto, and 41acb party hereby certifies to the other that any
necessary resolutions extending said authority have been duly
passed and are now in full force and effect.
Executed in duplicate originals this the day of February,
1988.
COUNTY OF DENTON CITY OF DENTON
BY.,
VIC BY:
BURG E , J~ RAY T E , A 7T6R
i AMBULANCE AGREEMENT/PAGE 5
It
1
I
i
h 4
k
ATTEST: ATTEST:
BY:
t
COUNTY CLERK CITY SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
ROB MORRIS DEBRA ADAMI DRAYOVITCH
DENTON COUNTY ATTORNEY CITY ATTORNEY
BY: BY:
Law
r
I
{
i
I } r
I
r
•r
AMBULANCE AGREEWIT/PAGE 6
e
~k
s
AI
I
FT:j
i
I
E
r
1
i
I-]A 11
1
I
i
W4 I
i
V
r~
O
CITY of ORNTON / 215 E. McKinney I Denton, Texas 76201
ME:IORANDU N'
TOi Lloyd Harrell, City Manager
FROM$ Bill Angelo, Director of Community Services
j DATES February 4, 1988
SUBJECTt SUMMARY OF SOLID ',)ASTE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES PRESENTATION
j TO THE CITY COUNCIL
I
Shortly after the opening of the Edwards Lane Sanitary Landfill on
March 13, 19851 it became apparent that the 28 year life expectancy of
the facility which was projected by the landfill design engineers was
highly inaccurate, while our review and analysis of the original
estimates revealed some minor discrepancies in the data and methodology
used to calculate the estimate, the primary factors contributing to the
life expectancy shortfall involve the geological conditions at the site
and the dramatic increase in the volume of waste received at the fill
over the last few years.
,
Although the original geological tests conducted on the site indicated .
substantial clay deposits throughout the site, the actual excavation of
the fill revealed that the clay formations were not as plentiful at the
necessary depths. In effect, this lack of clay formations has reduced
the depth to which we may excavate, thus reducing the amount of fill
space available.
A comparison of deposition rates as estimated by the design engineers at
the time of the closing of the Mosely Road Landfill in January, 19840
and the first few months of operation of the Edwards Lane facility
indicate that the volume of waste received more than doubled over that
time period. Additionally, the growth in the deposition rate has
increased at a rate of 22.3% since the opening of the site resulting in
an overall deposition rate which is 2.7 times greater than originally
anticipated.
Thn shortened life expectancy of the landfill which is estimated at an
additions) six years under current conditions creates two distinct
problems for the City. The first problem involves the remaining debt
e lba02018801/1
4
r
ti
Summary of Polid Waste Disposal Alternatives Presentation
To the City Council
February 4, 1988
Page 2
i
i
' owed on the landfill development bonds which will
involves after
problem be
' the closure of the landfill. The second pr
approach to the disposal of trash after the closure.
V In respect to the problem of the outstanding landfill debt, the staff
I feels that immediate action is necessary in order to ensure that ade-
quate funding is available to pay off the debt at the time the landfill
1 1 closes. The recosmended course of action would involve a two-pronged
f approach aimed at reducing the rate of deposition to extend the life of
the fill and .djusting rates to ensure that adequate funding is avail-
able to pay off the landfill debt at closure.
I while each of the specific actions will be discussed in detail at the
February 9, 1988, Council meeting, the specific recommendations include
the following actions
1. Implementation of a voluntary newspaper recycling program to
I III reduce landfill volume.
2. Landfill Disposal Rate Adjustment - Increase the landfill
disposal rate from $1.88 per cubic yard to $2.72 per cubic
yard (44.7% increase) to recover full operating, debt, and
debt payoff costs. This action will also reduce use by larger
contract customers, thus extending life.
3. Commercial Rate Adjustment - Increase in commercial rates for
dumpster service an average of 20% over a two-year period and
roll-off service an average of 39.9% overa two-year share to
ensure that commercial customers pay their fair disposal costs.
4. Residential Rates - No change as residential rates are cur-
rently at a level to recover full disposal costs.
I We would anticipate that the net effect of these actio.. would increase
the life expectancy of the landfill to 8.5 years and generate sufficient t
funds to pay off the landfill debt at closure. Should our projections
on the decrease in deposition rate not hold true and the life expectancy
not, increase, then the disposal rate established will still allow for
the generation of funds in sufficient amounts to pay off the debt.
iseof osignific significant magnitude wbut does nott require e ansimmediate edecision
on the part of the Council. Prior to dealing with the specific question
of what to do with the solid waste after the landfill closure, the staff
would suggest that the Council exaaine and evaluate the City's future
role in the collection and disposal .-if solid waste.
Sba02038807/2
,
a
4
f
Y
I
Summary of Solid Waste Disposal Alternatives Presentation
To the City Council
February 4, 1988
Page 3
I Once the future role of the City is determined in regard to the pro-
vision of solid waste services, it will be necessary to examine in
detail the various disposal alternatives which are available to the
City. The preliminary studies conducted by the staff indicate that the
most feasible alternatives appear to be the development of a new land-
fill site or the establishment of a resource recovery (wate to ener
program in conjunction with the expansion of the existingslandfill. gyl
specific details of both of these alternatives will be presented Tuesday
J evening.
Both of these alternatives will present a set of complex issues with
which the City must deal. The development of a new landfill, for
example, raises very emotional issues relative to siting and environ-
mental concerns, whereas, the establishment of a resource recovery
program raises issues of funding, cost effectiveness, and a new set of
environmental concerns.
Given the magnitude and complexity of these issues and the fact that it
will be necessary to develop public support for the alternative
selected
the staff would recommend that the Council consid,r
establishing a Blue Ribbon Citizens Committee to assist in the
examination of these issues. This committee would have the specific
responsibility of working with the staff to develop a recommended course
of action.
i
c
Respectfully submitted,
8111 Ange o
,a
BA/sc
lba02038807
f
1ba02038807/3
w
t
4
e
i
{
SUMMARY
OF
SOLID WASTE ALTERNATIVES
The City of Denton Sanitary Landfill permit projected a 28 year life expectancy
from its opening. The current estimated closing date is January 1, 1994, or 3
` y 6 years of remaining life.
The $1.8 million Landfill davelopment bond was financed for 20 years. The
earliest call date for the bond is August 1, 1994, at which time a balloon y
r
payment of approximately $1,482,558 would be due. The reduced life expectancy
has substantially increased the debt service requirements because of the z
necessity to make the balloon payment and has also increased the Landfill
oparating cost. To determine what the charges should be at the Landfill for
disposal, the debt service requirements and operating cost should be summed and
4
divided by the volume of waste over a unit of time. The charge for the waste
at the Landfill plus operating cost should be the basis for residential and
commercial rates. Analysis of the rates on this basis shown that residential
is helping to subsidize commercial solid waste colle.tion and disposal, but is ;a
still not sufficient to cover the additional debt service required by the
11 reduced life expectancy of the Landfill
I` f 2sw08078707/2
1 _
i
N
I
°
{
t'Y
EFFECTIVE
CITY EFFECTIVE RE-
OVERALL COMMERCIAL CONTRACT 6 EFFECTIVE MAINING
EFFECTIVE SOLID WASTE PERMIT RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL LIFE OF
TIPPING FEE TIPPING FEE TIPPING RATE TIPPING FEE LAND-
PER PER FEE PER PER PER FILL
ry CU.YD/TON CU.YD/TON CU-YD/TON 30 DAYS CU.YD/TON (YEARS) IMPACT
I
1. 87-88 Budget $1.88/7.52 $1.25/5.00 $1.92/7.64 $9.00 $3.02/12.08 6 Obligated to average
annual debt service of
$213,555 for eleven (11)
years after closure.
I
2. Raise solid $2.76/11.04 $2.72110.88 $2.72/10.88 $9.00 $3.02/12.08 9.6 The probable impact is
N Waste Rates to t
Break Even that the major contract E
by Closure and most permit
Customers discontinue
use of City Landfill.
i
{
II~
I
r
i
1 ,
N
I,
I ~
The following information was extracted from the Landfill Permit and is the
basis for the original 28 year site life expectancys
Based on operating records of the applicant's existing landfill
j operation and projected solid waste delivery rates over the estimated
life of the site, the average rate of disposition will be approximately
3,600 tons per month (T/mo). At an in-place density of 1,000 pounds per
cubic yard (lb/yds), the result is an in-place deposition rate of 54 I
k acre-feet per year (ac-ft./yr.). Accepting an average generation rate of
k it 10-15 ac-ft. per year per 10,000 population, the projected generation
r I
rate is the equivalent to the waste generated by a population of approx -
mately 54,000. Generation rate calculations are included below.
t.
II
GENERATION RATE CALCULATIONS
(3,600 T/mo)(2,000 lb/T)(yds/1,000 Ib)(12 mo/yr) ■ 86,400 yrs/yr
(86,400 yds/yr)(27 ft1/yd3)(ac/43,560 fts) ■ 53.55 ac-ft/yr
Based on the above deposition rate, the site will accommodate waste
for approximately 28 years.
SITE LIFE CALCULATIONS
Site Deposition
(3,600 T/mo)(12 mo/yr)(2,000 lb/T)(yd3/10000 lb) 86,400 yds/yr
Total Waste Volume (at 48 ft. avg. wwe depth)
(48 ft)(31.63 ac)(43,560 ft2/ac)(yds/27 fts) 2,4490427 yds
.,.te Life
(2,449,427 yd3)(yr/86,400 yds) 28 years
i
F
_3_
2sw08078707/13
h
y
I~
Based cpon the current rate of deposition, the Site Life calculation is
as follows:
{ Total Estimated Capacity at Openings 2,400,000 cubic yards*
Estimated Capacity Used including Cover 757,588 cubic yards
i (March, 1985 to January, 1988)
Volume Remaining: 1,642,412 cubic yards
Less 20% for Covers 328,482 cubic yards
Actual Volume Remaining: 1,313,930 cubic yards
14313,930 cubic yards r. 2 = 2,627,860 cubic yards
(Assumes 50% Compaction) Waste Volume
Be'-ore Compaction
)
1
1
1
Site Life
2,627,860 cubic yards 6.2 years
418,000 cubic yards
(received March, 1986 - February, 1987)
The calculation shows that there is 6.2 years of life remaining from
+s
January, 1988 with a deposition rate of 418,000 cubic yards per year.
a
This figure differs from the amount of the capacity in the Permit because
the calculation in the Permit describes a cube instead of a mound.
i
_4
2sw08078707/16
i
y7
9
I
V
I
4 A. What the Solid Waste Rates should be to break even in at closure.
l
Total Estimated Capacity, 2,400,000 cubic yards
Estimated Capacity Used, 757,588 cubic yards
I'
Volume Remaining: 1,642,412 cubic yards
Less Covers -328,482 cubic yards
Actual Volume Remaining: 1,313,930 cubic yards
1,313,930 x 2 2,627,860 Waste Volume
Before Compaction
~ h
I ~
j
Average Annual Operating f
Cost and Transfer $ 623,186• x 6 years ■ $3,739,115
a
Average Annual Debt Service 711,401 x 6 years 1,268,406
Average Annual Revenue
Needed for Lump Sum
s
Payment 247,093 x 6 years ■ 1,482,558
a
$1,081,680 $6,490,080
I
'R
$6,490,080
206270860 $7.47 per cubic yard
J
* Current Landfill operations and transfer costs are held constant to
calculate the Landfill charges.
4
NOTES The Landfill can only accommodate 443,380 cubic yards of waste
each year for the next six (6) years if it is to remain open
until 1994 assuming a 50% compaction.
- 5 -
3sw01228812/1
T
,i
r
i
f
8. What rr)uld the rate need to be if the City of Denton Solid Waste
stem was the only user of the Landfill:
Residential Volume 91,960 cubic yards
Commercial Volume 179,740 cubic yards
{ (Harch 1986 to February 1987) 271,700
~ Year life
Space Available 2,627,860 9.67
271,700 yd.1
h
fR ~
Annual operating
$450,000
& Transfer Coat i
Annual Debt Service 213,555
` Annual Contributions to
144,777 ;
1 Retire Debt at Closure
l $808,332
I X 9.67 years ,
h4 $7,816,570
I '
$7,816,570 $2.97 per cubic yard
2,627.660
E 5 r
i
` r
i
e
-6-
i
3sw02049823
t1
1
V
r
C. What if the City Solid Waste System experiences at 51 increase in
waste volume, contract customers contribute 1000 yd.3 per month and
we retain St of our permit customerar
Total Annual Waste Volume 319,000 cubic yards
I j 2,627,860 8.2 year life
1 319,000
1
Annual Operating
6 Transfer Cost $450,000 `t
Annual Debt Service
I 213,555 ;
Debt Retirement 115,000
$838,555
x
8 years ,
$6,708,440
j
k
i
6,708,440 $2.55 per cubic yard
2,627,860
3~ a
D. Total Annual Waste Volume 295,350 cubic yards
2,627,860 8.89 year life
295,350 t
Annual operation x
a transfer Cost 4500000
Annual Debt Service 2130555
Debt Retirement 157,480
j
$821,035
i
j x 8.89 years
j $7,299,001
j
22991001 S2.78 per cubic yard
2,627,860
i
3swO2048623 7
i
i
I
i
r~
f
1
E. Total Annual waste volume 340,000 cubic yards
t
2,E 27,860 7.7 year life
340,000
Annual Operating
t i Transfer Cost $5000000
Debt Service 213,555
Debt Retirement 192,467
$906,022
l , % 7,7 years
s $6,976,369
1 $6,976,369 $2.65 cubic yard C
I e
2,627,860
s~
w,
n
I
j d .
I ~
i
a
1
I ,
s-
3aw02048623
I
1
1
4
t
i
1
i
ANNUAL
VOLUME DISPOSAL
1 OF REDUCEL RATE WITH
` LIVE DISPOSAL RESIDENTIAL
II WASTE EXPECTANCY RESIDENTIAL
I RATE RAT^ RATE UNCHANGED
271,700 Yd,3 9.67 Years
$2.97 S8.95 $2,95/Yd,3
295,350 Yd,3 8,89 Years 2.78
8,76 2.67/Yd,1
319400 Yd,3 8,2 Years
2.55 8.53
2,37jYd.s
' 3400000 Yd,3 7,7 Years 2.65
8.63 2,52/Yd,3
Hid point 2,76
°x 8.74 Mid point 2.66/Yd.
+
r
I -
I 1c,,,MnA000e
i
a
.
r _
~P
i
2
i
I
COMMERCIAL COST ALLOCATION
f
A. DVMPSTER
j
1987-88 Operations and Transfer Cost $41+1,552
{
1987-88 Monthly operations a Transfer Coat $ 40,962
Monthly Service Level 37,372 Cubic YaxCs
Compaction Ratio 6.815
Landfill Rate Needed $ 2.76 Per Cubic Yard
i
$40,962
37,372 $1.10 Per ribic Yard for Operations and Transfer
j $2,76 Per Cubic Yard f J
6.815 Compaction Ratio $0.40 Per Cubic Yard
Rate Needed per Cubic Yard - $1.50
Current Rate per Cubic Yard - $1.25
Net Increase Needed - 204
8. ROLL-OFF
1987-88 Operations and Transfer Cost $360,396
1987-88 Monthly Operations b Transfer Cost $ 30,033
Monthly Service Level 12,143 Cubic YordA f
Compaction Ratio 1
}
Landfill Rate Needed 5 2.76 Per Cubic Yard
5300033 $2.47 Per Cubic Yard for Operations and Transfer
12,143
$2.76 Per Cubic Yard $2,76 Per Cubic Yard
1 Compaction Ratio
Rate Needed per Cubic Yard - $5.23
Current Rate per Cubic Yard - $3.71
Net Increase Needed - 414
- 10 -
3sw01228812/3
i
a
C.MNERCIAL RATE COMPARISON (DUMPSTERS)
(PROPOSED RATE IS FOR AVERAGE OF $1.50 PER CUBIC YARD OR 201 INCREASE)
1-X WEEK 2-X WEEK 3-X WEEK 4-X WEEK S-X WEEK 6-X WEEK
2 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 15.20 $ 23.20 $ 30.72 $ 40.96 S 51.20 $ 58.08
PROPOSED RATE 15.20 23.84 35.52 47.36 59.20 70.56
LOW 30.00 75.00 110.00 145.00 '.80.00 225.00
HIGH $3.00 92.00 138.00 179.00 220.00 N/A
3 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 22.80 $ 30.72 $ 46.08 $ 58.08 S 72.60 S 87.12
PROPOSED RATE 22.80 35.52 53.28 70.56 68.20 105.84
LOW 40.00 79.00 125.00 165.00 205.00 127.00 d
HIGH 62.00 108.00 157.00 202.00 252.00 288.00
LEWISVILLE 46.71 76.75 101.61 128.70 157.22 186.08
I
4 CUBIC' YARD
c
440.96 7.36 $ 758.08 77.44
PROPOSED RATE $ 223.20 3.84 $
a
0.56 $ 94.08 $1196.80 7.60 $141.12
j LOW 40.00 83.00 87.00 190.00 152.00 285.00
HIGH 68.00 120.00 116.00 230.00 283.00 339.00
6 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 30.72 $ 58.08 $ 87.12 $116.16 $145.20 $174.24
PROPOSED RATE 35.52 70.56 105.84 141.12 176.40 211.68 1
LOW 50.00 69.00 125.00 200.00 240.00 290.00
HIGH 84.00 145.00 206.00 263.00 322.00 405.00 !
LEWISVILLE 76.75 120.33 167.04 216.28 259.87 306.e2 ell
8 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT PATE $ 40.96 $ 77.44 $116.16 $154.88 $193.60 $232.32
PROPOSED RATE 47.36 94.08 141.12 188.:6 235.20 282.24
LOW 50.00 105.00 103.00 100.00 87.00 270.00
RICH 95.00 161.00 226.00 289.00 354.00 430.00
LEWISVILLE 86.73 146.33 205.50 265.47 324.69 384.19
- l1
d
ni ~ f.
t
i
"OBIC '"9DS ::Y.AINe3 +CNTHLY ~,PCPOSEO ?7.98 BASTE
COLLEC-ED RENTAL -MICE FEE MC4 KY 4.VHLY =ERM'TASE ~WGMN7
CUSTOMER CONTAINER PER MONTH FEE i 14,79/Y0 CHARGES :!ARGES ?:FFER?1CE CHARGES
Acne BrICk :/25 come 107.5 115,`.0 1514.93 7630.43 s46r.:2 34.26 !864,23
room 1/30 O.T. 30 92.50 :43.70 196.2C :'0.95 3010% 265.00
;aarewf CCro 1/42 cc10 351.2 176.40 1730.1! :906.55 :338.!6 42.{. :'90100
Bill Utter Ford 1!12 coma l1.d 87,15 247.16 334.31 306.94 9.r6 414.83 +
CBS Mec6taicel 1112 Coma :03.2 97.15 494,33 581.48 `.26.73 0.V.. 715.66 +
Chili's 1/6 coax i:rn'i :33.2 N.1 494133 494,33 321.39 5!.0% 601,66 +
:e'c: 0ew',co :130 ^ T 30 `.2.1C :43.70 :76.20 :50,91 30,0% 365100
Oentor Co. Mfnttl :/30 O.T. 99 52.50 474,2: !26.71 377.38 394 644,53
1 Oentan Sttte Sc401 1/30 O.T. 12d 52.50 603.54 65614 465.98 40.8;: 793.00
Denton Ccn Hospital 1/20 COMO 307 157.50 1853.73 2011.23 :427.48 40.4/, 2542.50
Electric Pale Yard 1!30 O.T. 36 $2.50 172.44 224,94 170.64 31.V. 298.90
EMC Plastics 1125 taro 4215 115.10 203.58 319.08 2'4.91 2S.V. 485.28 +
Flaw 8cscital 1/20 caro 218 115.50 ;235,82 :351..32 794.'7 35.4. 1694.14 + !
Sibbs 1/30 P.T. 129 521!0 $11,91 670.41 475,83 40.4/. HMO
!
Soldan TrI V1 !/42 cam0 30,6 176.40 965.07 :041.47 ?57.48 37.5!, 1037.59
.11-11 orst 1112 como :0312 87.15 44,33 '.81.48 !26.73 10.4;; 711.66 +
57E•Otk ;125 coca :27.5 1151'0 51.4.93 530.43 468.12 24.7. 364.23 +
Htraoois 2130 O,T. 99 1051011 474.2: !79,2: 429.88 34.7. 744.50
:astfns 1/12 cono 51.d 97,15 247.16 334.31 506.94 8.4. 414.83 m
K Msrt 1/42 camp ;80.6 176.40 865.01 :141.47 757,48 37.5. 1037.50
1/40 O.T. 109 57.75 517.32 !75.07 371.16 54,46 127.20 +
WRAP 1/42 ccm0 190,6 176.40 863.07 !741,47 '!7.48 37.5% 1037.50
Mc!itiII'1 1/30 O.T. 30 52.50 :43.70 ;96.20 157,95 3010% MAO
Michele 1/42 comp fawns 42 own 201.18 201.18 135,14 48.4/. 175.00
Moores 1/25 c0oo 215 115.50 :02945 ;:45,35 320.74 3!490.95 +
Marrisons 2/30 emo 258 33540 1235182 :!!0,82 ::d1.6! 331V 2075,00
Chia Rubber 1/15 can0 129 S9,2! 617.91 707.16 !78,50 22, V. 894.57 +
Pivlee :!42 coma :eo,d 176.40 965.07 :741.47 751.48 37,5. :0371!0
PfttrDilt 1/42 coma 2709 !76.40 :2+761: 131!2.!: :592161 +7,9:4 :;572.50
2/30 O.T. ?90 15.00 :36x.10 :973.1: :384.82 42.5'4 :34540
:/10 As1 29 NA 95190 95.90 '3.10 30.3'!, ::0,11 +
a l t.crr :125 CMD 215 :11.50 :029,0 ::45.35 320.74 3916. :49019! ~
sorter Carst ;/30 O.T. 360 !215.1 :724,47 :??6.90 :233.88 4410% 2180,0)
Record 1,11'r,1161 :125 Coca 322,! 1:5150 1544,78 Idd0128 ::73.35 41,°. 2117,69
f
Rcuahafck 1/30 O.T. 30 '.2.50 :43.72 :7620 :50,9! ?9.CY, 265.00
Fussell Ne~mtn 1/25 mono 322.5 :15.50 :544,19 :460.29 ::13.36 41,5. 2!17,68 +
Still euutr 1/42 Cann :Bold 176.40 365.07 :C41.U 757.48 37.5. 1031.!0
itUs 1/42 ccno ;9016 176.40 ?65.07 :141.47 17.49 3715. :037.50
I ruck 11aa !/12 Como ;03.2 97.15 494.33 !31,49 126,73 :7.4. 115.66 s
Shtraty' 'Al coal 14 :57.50 2!3.66 416,:6 334.7; 24,3'. 600.00
Ss+cgs 142 coma ;912 :"d 149 523.77 699.47 527.75 32.5% 140.Oa
'trcu 1142 comp (2wns 75.4 own 562.12 ?62.12 243,24 48.4: 115.90
Te!rt Pt! 114) czo (Cart 462 pun 2212199 :312.93 276,85 49,i. :925.^.0 m
NO 01', :'7d 5715.1 3507,:4 ?644.54 !4x!.43 44,r'. :;9691::
"eau r,vh,re :/30 O.T, 114 !2,n !44.76 !48,!6 436,6) 41.3; 27,09
dnion Coma 1142 Conn 150.6 :74.40 165.:7 .:4:.47 -!7143 27.5/. :n.im:
4ictat1 !/42 cane :8116 :78.40 365,07 :941.47 %57.48 37 V.
::37,50
:;'41 M. 172 51.75 923.95 ?91.62 '.!6.B* 'e.3% 1079120 4
Vintact '/12 cans 5116 91,15 147.14 334,34 :36.94 3.4. 414.93 +
uestctle :/20 Coma 244 :;5,!0 :611,7; :'63126 :2x1.59 31.N.. 2195.!2 +
)Door O+enf :!30 0.01
30 !2,50 :43,79 :Fd,21 :10,95 '0.0% 265101
104f 5 1rf :130 ~2 ~0 :43 .94 , ,on .1 '1 2 n
12'4219 !335.05 V9 144149 663.499,54 145,:24,06 40,7/, 170,259,26
12 -
4
1
:
Try- - T ' ~ !r[1{
i.
I
M
I
i
1
COMMERCIAL COST ALLOCATION
1. DUMPSTER
1987-88 Operations and Transfer cost $491,552
1987-88 Monthly Operations 6 Transfer Cost $ 4009G2
37,372 Cubic Yards
i Monthly Service Level
Compaction Ratio 6.815
Landfill Rate Needed $ 2.66 Per Cubic Yard
$40,962 81,10 Per Cubic Yard for Operations and Transfer
37,372 ;
i
$2.66 Per cubic Yard $0.39 Per Cubic Yard
' 6.815 Compaction Ratio
Rate Needed per cubic Yard $1.49
Current Rate per Cubic Yard - $1.25
Net Increase Needed - 19.21
2. ROLL-OFF
1987-88 Operations and Transfer Cost $360,396
1987-88 Monthly Operations 6 Transfer Cost $ 30,033
` Monthly Service Level 12,143 Cubic Yards
Compaction Ratio 1
Landfill Rate !Seeded $ 2.66 Per Cubic Yard
~M
I
$30,013_ $2.47 Per Cubic Yard for Operations and Transfer
12,143
$2.66 Per Cubic Yard
$2.66 Per Cubic Yard
1 Compaction Ratio
Rate Needed per cubic Yard - $5.13
Current Rate per Cubic Yard - $3.71
Net Increase Needed 38.2%
~I
- 13
3e41228812/4
I
t~
'YV
I y
1i
COMMERCIAL RATE COMPARISON (DUMPST£RS)
(PROPOSED RATE IS FOR AVERAGE OF $1.49 PER CUBIC YARD OR 19.28 INCREASE)
1-X WEEK 2-X WEEK 3•-X WEEK 4-X S'iEEK 5-X WEEK 6-K WEEK
j 2 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 15.20 S 23.20 $ 30.72 $ 40.96 $ 51.20 $ 58.08
k PROPOSED RATE 130.00 5.12 723.66 35.28 47.04 58.80 70.08
5.00 110.00 145.00 180.00 225.0
L~ 53.00 92.00 138.00 179.00 220.00 N/A
HIGH
!
{ 3 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 22.60 $ 30.72 $ 46.08 $ 58.08 $ 72.60 S 87.12
PROPOSED RATE 422.68 35.28 $2.92 70.06 87.60 105.12 0.00 79.00 125.00 165.00 205.00 127.00
LOW 62.00 108.00 157.00 202.00 252.00 288.00
HIGH
LEWISVILLE 46.71 76.75 101.61 128.70 157.22 186.08
4 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 23.20 $ 40.96 S 58.06 S 77.44 S 96.80 $116.IE
PROPOSED RATE 423.68 47.04 0.00 83.00 80.00 190.00 152.00 285. 0
LOW
HIGH 68.00 120.00 176.00 230.00 283.00 339.00 .
6 CUBIC YARD i
CURRENT RATE S 30.72 $ S6.08 S 87.12 $116.16 $145.20 $174.24
PROPOSED RATE 535.28 70.08 105.12 140.16 175.20 210.24
0.00 69.00 125.00 200.00 240.00 290.00
LOW
' HIGH 84.00 145.00 206.00 263.00 322.00 405.00
LEWISViLLE 76.75 120.33 167.04 216.28 259.87 306.42
t
1
8 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE S 40.96 $ 77.44 $116.16 $154.88 $193.60 $232.32
PROPOSED RATE 541.04 93,44 140.16 186.88 0.00 105.00 103.00 100.00 287.00 270.00
LOW
HIGH 95.00 161.00 226.00 289.00 354.00 430.00
LEWISVILLE 86.73 146.33 205.50 265.47 324.69 384.19
- 14 -
4 Yd. .T ,
I
1
N
C'J91C .AADS aXVTAlNER "OW,HLY F96POSFD 97-98 AVE
COLLECTED RENTAL HPJlCE FEE "71THLY '"OMTHLY °EPCEN7AGE wsEyeil
CL'STIMEA COIITAINER PER MaJH -EE l 14 69/YD CHARGES :1iARGES C7FFZ ENE :MRGHS
;m Brick :/25 coop :77.5 :15,80 s504.IE 1619,69 14681:2 31.4% 064.23 •
Air2v,. 1/30 O.T. 30 !1150 :47.77 !93.20 :57.95 18 A% 261,%
Andrews Coro 1/41 cmo 36112 ;74.40 :694.03 :870,43 :338.56 39.71, :790.00
Bill Ltler Fcrd :'12 Como 513 91.15 :42.00 32911! 306.94 7 74 414.83 f
CBS Mechanical 1112 Como 103.2 97.15 494.01 57116 526.73 8.U 715.66 f
Chili's 116 Cmo (own) 103.2 own 484.01 484.01 327.35 47.97. 601.66 f
i 011Co Ofueloo 1130 O.T. 30 52.50 140.70 !93,20 4'50.95 18.0'/. 265.00
01005 Co. Mental !/30 O.T. 99 52.50 464.31 516.91 377.38 3619'!1 644,0
Donlon Stale School 1/30 O.T. 126 52.50 590,94 643.44 465.99 38.1% 793.00
D1ata6 Coe Hospital 1/30 coma 387 157.50 :915.03 1972.53 :427.48 3817/ 2542.5D
Elfctrit Pole Yard 1/30 O.T. 36 52.50 168.34 121.34 170.64 29.7/. 298.00
EMC Plastics 1/25 coma 4215 115.50 199.33 314.83 ?14.91 23.5/ 495.29 •
Flow Hosoi UI 1/20 Cann 258 115.50 1210.92 1325.52 994.51 335! 1694,14
9ibbs 1/30 017. 129 52.50 605.01 657.51 475.93 38.74 809.55
golden TO Mall !142 CMD :80.6 17614J 347.01 :023.41 757.48 35 1% :737.50 I
3TE-Morse 1/12 Cono :9312 97.15 484,0: `71.16 526.73 9,4% 715.66
STE-Oak 1125 CMD 107.5 115.10 104.18 619.69 466.12 32.4% 864.23
Haraool s 2130 C.I. '.9 :11.00 464.31 569.31 429.83 32.4% 744.50
i Jostens 9/12 cros 51.4 97,15 24267 329.:1 3:6.94 J 114.B3
K-Marl 1142 cam 180.6 176.40 94'1(:
1/40 O.T. 109 57.75 96.52 564.27 371.16 l2.CY, 727.20 f
Kolnar 1142 coma 380.6 176.40 E47.01 :123.41 717.48 33.1%1 :937.57
McNeill's 1/30 0.7, 30 52.50 !40.75 :93.20 150.95 29,911. 263.00
Michaels 1142 comb (own) 42 own 1196.99 196,98 :31,14 451/1 171,00
loom 1/25 cone 115 115.50 1708.31 :12335 820,74 36.4/ :490,95 f
Morrism 2/30 Caro 251 315.00 1210.02 1!25.52 1:61.65 3!.7/ 2073.00
Ohio Robber 1/15 Coma 129 99.25 605.01 694.2d 571.50 20,0'/. 394.17 a
aarlfff 1/42 Cana lBo.d 176.49 947,01 :02341 757.49 35,1% !037.50
°etfrb!!t 1/42 cmo 1779 1,76.40 :2705,21 :1381,4: :892.4: 44,91)1 ::57253 f
'✓30 O,T, 309 ;35.07 :?29,17 :924.10 :334.E2 ?9174 1245,0
1/10 Ash 37 xen :3190 03.90 73.!0 37.6% :2.33 f
Pillsbury :/25 CDT: 1:5 :!137 :708135 .:23.85 ?27.74 36.9% .490,95 f
Porter C:nst 1/30 O.T. 360 52.50 ;,91,47 :740.95 .233,88 4!,1% 109040
Record Chronicle 1/25 emo 322.5 115.50 .141253 1628.0 ::73,36 38.7% 2117,48 s
Roughneck t/30 O.T. 30 !2.50 :47,70 :93.20 :50.95 2310% 26510;
RufaflI %nil I/21 Coro 122.! :15.55 :!121!3 :620,03 ::73.36 29.71. 2117,68 f
s111r Bflutf 1/42 Cora :8014 :16.40 474: :123.41 17.43 31,1% :337.50
Sears !142 tom :00.6 :76140 947.01 ;923141 751.41!
31,1% :037,50
76 Track StoD 1/12 Como 19312 97.1! 494.0; !71,:6 "1,73 OX. 415.66 f
Shfratoh 1/30 comb !4 :57.50 353,25 419.76 334.71 22.7'6 :00.'O
4 Skabgf 1/42 Coco :79.2 176.41 !!2,:5 ,69.55 527,% 30.°d '401D3
71rolt 1/42 cam (own) "1,d a.a 154,16 354.56 143,24 45.9'! 315.00
'etel Pal 1/49 Como (m) 162 :4 n 3:66.78 3:46 78 :176,S! 017' 123.0
3/30 O.T. 1176 :51,59 :329,44 9486.74 !995162 41.9% ::"6810
'?)as 5u6fri51 :130 O.W. 14 12,50 '34,61 !87,16 426.60 37,6% 727,00
:11oh Caro 1/42 coca :30.6 :76.40 941,6! 1023.41 1714E 3!11/1 :73743
Viowl 1/42 Corse !sold :16.40 ?47.01 :^23.41 157,48 53,114 :037.!0
:440 O.T1 172 57.75 ?16.69 164,43 !!6189 i5,7L 1079,2; •
vintage 142 tomb !1.4 91.15 :42,:0 329.1! 31.1.94 712/1 4:4193 4
4114ale 1/20 Tana 144 ::!,50 :613.36 :720,86 .287.!9 14,3'1
1:651 Owfns 1/30 O.T. 30 52,!0 +3,70 :03,20 :50.95 29,014 :,5.00
of s me'. :0o OJ, 30 !2.!: :40.7: :9321 :50.9! 191126!1.10
!2142,4 !335,6! 1U.i!7123 662.205.25 145.124,08 38.0% 170,259.26
15
i
i
i
i1
f
i
t.
F'
b
t
1 TWO YEAR PHASED RATE INCREASED
t
Phasing in a $2.66 rate over two years raises the rate needed to $2.72.
DUMPSTER
! lot year $1.36 10.4% increase $0.13 per yard
2nd year 1.50 8.7% increase 0.12 per yard
ROLL-OFF
1st year $4.45 19.9% increase $0.74 1,9r yard
2nd year 5.19 16.6% increase 0.74 per yard
.t
,t
j rp
k,
{
L.
a
t'
C
1.
E
16 -
3sw0122BB12/5
I
7
w
COMMERCIAL RATE COMPARISON (DUMPSTERS)
(PROPOSED RATE IS FOR AVERAGE OF $1.38 PER CUBIC YARD)
1-X WEEK 2-X WEEK 3-X WEEK 4-X WEEK 5-X WEEK 6-X WEEK
2 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 15.20 $ 23.20 $ 30.72 $ 40.96 S 51.20 $ S8.08
PROPOSED RATE 13.64 22.08 32.88 43.84 54.80 65.28
LOW 30.00 75.00 110.00 145.00 180.00 225.00
HIGH 53.00 92.00 138.00 179.00 220.00 N/A
j
1 3 CUBIC YARD j
j CURRENT RATE $ 22.80 S 30.72 $ 46.08 S 58.08 $ 72.60 $ 87.12
PROPOSED RATE 20.76 32.88 49.32 65.28 82.60 97.92
LOW 40.00 79.00 125.00 165.00 205.00 127.00
HIGH 62.00 108.00 157.00 202.00 252.00 288.00
1 LEWISVILLE 46.71 76.75 101.61 228.70 157.22 186.08
k '
4 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 23.20 $ 40.96 $ 58.08 $ 77.44 $ 96.80 $116.16
PROPOSED RATE 22.08 43.84 65.28 87.04 108.80 130.56
LOW 40.00 83.00 87.00 190.00 152.00 285.00
HIGH 68.00 120.00 176.00 230.00 283.00 339.00
6 CUBIC YARD M1
CURRENT RATE S 30.72 S 58.08 87.12 $116.16 $145.20 $174.24
PROPOSED PAVE 32.88 65.26 97.92 130.56 162.00 194.40
LOW 50.00 69.00 125.00 200.00 240.00 290.00
HIGH 84.00 145.00 206.00 263.00 322.00 405.00 r
LEWISVILLE 76.75 120.33 167.04 216.28 259.87 306.42
CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 40.96 $ 77.44 $116.16 $154.88 $193.60 $232.32
PROPOSED RATE 43.84 67.04 130.56 172.80 216.00 259.20
NIWH 50.00 105.00 103.00 100.00 87.00 270.00
95.00 161.00 226.00 289.00 354.00 430.00
LEWISVILLE 86.73 146.33 205.50 265.47 324.69 384.19
17 -
a
1
N
I :;1BIC YARDS ::NTAP0 471THLY 'RCPCSED 37-89 ATE
COLLECTED RENTAL 3ER)ICE FEE 4NTHLY ":MTHLY ~SRCE1'AH 'IWGM-
CXWER CCNTANEa 'ER ":NTH Fit J f4,: ,^D :'-AROES :'-AROES ::F:UVE :'HAROES
------L.----------
ACne 9rfC'd 1/25 come 107.5 Al!) 1430 40 1545..7 1469,12 16,5/ 1864.23 e
Airaort 1/30 O.T, 30 52159 :20.011 :72,6: :50,95 14.3': 265.00
Andrews Cro 1/42 cro 36112 174.40 :444,90 1621.20 :338,'6 3111. :190.Co
Bill Utter Ford :/12 coma 51.6 87,15 236.4) 193,55 306.94 - 4.4% 414.63 1 {
CBS Mechanical 1/12 two :03.2 87.15 412.80 49.95 526.73 -5.1% 715.66 a
Chili's 1/6 coma Town) 1932 own 412.SD 41230 327,35 261% 601.66 0
Deice ofV110D 2/30 0.71 30 52.50 120 40 172.50 !50.95 14.3'% 263.00
Denton Co. Mental 1/39 CIT. R9 52.50 39600 448.50 377.38 1918, 644.50
Denton Stitt School 1136 Olt. 126 52.50 504.00 $56.50 465.99 19.4%, 793.09
Denton Cm Hosoit4l 1139 come 387 157,'.0 !548.00 1705.50 1427.48 19.51 2542.50
Electric Pole Yard 1/30 O.T. 36 `.2.60 144.00 196.50 170.64 1517/ 298.00
PC Plastics 1125 tome 42.5 :15.50 170.00 285.60 254.91 12.04 485.29 1
j Flew dosolial 1/20 taco 250 115,60 1032.00 :147,!0 494.57 15.0/ 1.694,14
0ibbt 1/30 O.T. 129 52.50 516100 ".68.50 475,83 1915': 999,10
` i :olden Trl Mall :/42 cone 180.6 !76.40 722.40 599.80 '57.49 :0.71, 137,!0
01-Morse 1/12 con: 103.2 87.15 412.80 479,95 526.?3 -!.1% 715,66 1
3TE-9ak 1125 come 107,5 HMO +30.00 `.45,10 468.12 16,5'/, 984,23 +
HPaaals 2/30 0,1, 99 105.00 VIA 501.09 429108 1615, 744.50
I Jostens 1/12 Como $1.6 97.15 20640 293.51. 306.94 -4,4% 414.83 +
I K-It rt 1/42 Coma 190.6 176.40 722.40 890,80 157.48 1817/ 1.037,59
{ 1/40 O.T. 100 57.75 432.00 489,15 371.16 32.0, 727,20 1
` KolnP 1142 cone 18016 176.40 722.49 598,89 757.48 18.7%, 1037.50
McNeill's 1/30 O.T. 30 52150 120,110 :72.50 :50.95 :4.38 265.00
Michaels 1/42 cane (own) 42 awn :68.00 :68.00 135,14 24.3/. 175.00
Mom 1/25 torso 235 115,50 360.00 075,50 820,14 10.9'6 1490.95 1
Morrisont 2130 come 258 315.05 432,00 :347,00 :161.65 16,0% 207540
Ohio Rubber 1/15 coma 129 89,25 !1640 6)51:! !10,50 4.91. 994,57 1
Payless !/42 cmo 18016 :76,40 722.40 998.90 -57.49 1.017% 1037.!0
;Ito-tilt 1/42 cent 2709 176.40 :0836.00 :::12.49 ?992161 ?IV, ':51215)
! n
2/35 C... 90 95,0.. !d0,~0 :665,0: :194,9.21 2 7.71 2345.1.
1/10 Ash 39 -4 n 30.00 ?2,00 1330 319'/. :;3.00 ~
Flllsmy :/25 CMD 215 :15.59 940.00 975.53 ?20,74 8.4'/, :490,95
ROrt1r Coast 1/30 O.T. 340 !2,50 :440.00 :492.!0 .233,88 211A 2080.99
Raord Cr4micle ;/25 Como 32215 :15,50 1290.00 1405,!0 :173.36 19,9;1 2:17.60 a
RoapnrecK 1130 Olt. 30 l2.SC :29.00 :72.50 ,50.95 1417/ 265,90
iussell 4twnan 1/25 cmo 3221! 1:5.50 :290,00 14p5,lC ;73.3E :9,8, 2:11,69 1
Sally ofwu 1/42 cmo 1130.6 176.40 722.40 940,80 797.48 1817% :037.60
Start 02 cono 180.6 ;1640 722,40 99080 757.48 18.7% .037.50
76 Track Site 1/12 cmo 10312 97,15 412.00 +99.95 !28,73 -5.1% 115.66 1
Sherttcn !/30 CDmo 54 157,50 2:600 313 !c 334.71 :1.6% 4040
:d,ZS 147.0)
` Ska94s 1/42 C:r.o :09,2 176,40 136.90 413,21 !27,1
I 'Poet 1142 c:mo !C.nr 7514 Ten VIA ?02,4: :4324 31,24 31!.00
'H~a Pak Al caeo Iowa, 462 own :111,11 :348,00 127655 14,71925,:0 1
3/30 017. :774 !7110 1:11MO 26:,1: !995,6: 3:.3'6 :1069..0
Texas Sunth,re 1/30 01T. 114 !2.!0 45630 5J9 .6J 42660 :0,7. 1272
,mars :V..D 1/42 c:mD AM 71,40 22,41 "S.0O -!1.48 :9.7. 1.37,!0
1; ctor1 1.42 cmo :9016 :76.43 1122.40 ?98,80 -51,48 :9A. 1037.!0
1140 O.T. :72 !1.75 689,09 %45,75 !".639 33,96 379,20 1
1Vntu+ 1/12 Cana 5:16 97,15 3:610 297,55 3:4,94 +.4% 114,03 1
1+fotaate 1/20 cmo 344 1151!0 :376.00 :491,56 :291,!9 :1,01: 319!,!2 4
yoke Slnleel AD :130 O.T, 3J !2.511 :20160 :72150 '!9195 4,3:; 36'5,:0
Donna Owens 1/30 01T, 3. 1210 .....3..C7 ......?..0 .....1 99! .4.3%
12142,9 !335.05 449,071,69 1531906,67 ?45,:24,09 :9,56 $77.29.26
IR -
i
1
k?
w
t
COMMERCIAL PATE COMPARISON IDUMPSTERS)
(PROPOSED RATE IS FOR AVERAGE OF $1.50 PER CUBIC YARD OR 201 INCREASE)
I-X WEEK 2-X WEEK 3-X WEEK 4-X WEEK 5-X WEEK 6-X WEEK
2 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 15.20 S 23.20 S 30.72 $ 40.96 $ 51.20 $ 58.08
PROPOSED RATE 15.20 23.84 35.52 47.36 59.20 70.56
LOW 30.00 75.00 110.00 145.00 180.00 225.00
HIGH 53.00 92.00 138.00 179.00 220.00 N/A
i
3 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE S 22.80 S 30.72 S 46.08 $ 58.08 $ 72.60 S 87.12
PROPOSED RATE 22.80 35.52 53.28 70.56 88.20 105.64
LOW 40.00 79.00 125.00 165.00 205.00 127.00
HIGH 62.00 108.00 157.00 202.00 252.00 288.OQ
LEWISVILLE 46.71 76.75 101.61 128.70 157.22 166.08
4 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 23.20 $ 40.96 $ 58.08 $ 77.44 $ 96.80 $116.16
PROPOSED RATE 23.84 47.36 70.56 94.08 117.60 141.12
LOW 40.00 83.00 87.00 190.00 152.00 285.00
HIGH 68.00 120.00 176.00 230.00 283.00 339.00
6 CUBIC YARD
5
CURRENT RATE S 30.72 $ 58.08 S 87.12 $116.16 $145.:0 $174.24
` PROPOSED RATE 35.52 70.56 105.64 141.12 176.40 211.68
LOW 50.00 69.00 125.00 200.00 240.00 290.00
HIGH 84.00 145.00 206.00 263.00 322.00 405.00
LEWISVILLE 76.75 120.33 167.04 216.28 2S9.87 306.42
8 CUBIC YARD
CURRENT RATE $ 40.96 $ 77.44 $116.16 $154.88 $193.60 $232.32
( PROPOSED RATE 47.36 94.08 141.12 188.16 23S.20 282.24
LOW 50.00 105.00 103.00 100.00 87.00 270.00
HIGH 95.00 161.00 226.00 289.00 354.00 430.00
li LVISVILLE 86.73 146.33 205.50 265.47 324.69 384.19
- 19 -
s:
t
~i
asT£
:JBSC YARDS CONTAINER xTTla ?ROPCSEp 37-BB
COLLECTED RENTAL SENICE IS INTO WOL'Y PERCENTAGE ~ ARGE~
MAINER ?ER MCr1TH. + FEE 3 14.75%YO :HARGFS :HARGES D;FF£A@i:E
115.59 1510.63 16261!1 1468.!2 2 .V. 1864. + 23
0... 7.' c :4.74 :55.40
Atm1 BriCM 1/25
' ;130 0.7. 30 52,59 142.59 :43n ..9 O•Rc
Airport 361.2 :71.40 1715.10 :392.10 :339,56
adrlws Coro 2-'42 (CO3 - 41.4?! :]90.00
4
Bill lttlr Ford ','12 cclo 5l .d 87.15 :45,1,, ~3~.25 148.44 9S. V. .66 414715,.1183 11 +
i e89 Nchlniul 1/12 coma 103.2 91.15 490..0 .7,.35 .26.73 49,71. 605.66 4
CA WI 1/6 Como (owl) 103.2 pun 490.23 449.20 327,35
COCO OIv11oa 1/30 D.T. 30 52.10 :42.50 :45.00 ;50.95 29M. 265.00
1 Denton Co. M15111 '10 D.T. 99 $2.50 479.25 522.75 371.39 38.5/ 544.30
126 52.50 598.50 651.99 465.98 3917%. 793.00
Denton Stitt School 1/39 O.T. 367 157150 !838125 1995175 !427.48 39.x1 2542.50
Elm Coo HosVd !/30 Como 87 52,50 ?71100 225.71 170.84 3110'/ 248.0 O.T. 36 E1 Ker i Poll Yud 1/30 42.5 115.50
202-.69 317139 214.91 2415: 495.2e +
I M 4UStiCS 1/2S C MD omo 258 115.50 1225150 1341.00 494157 34186 11594.14 1
Flaw Hosolltl 1/20 camp 124 52150 11%21?S 865.25 175,83
Oibbi oldt 1/30 0171 39,8'/1 809155
oldln TrY 1111 :742 Conn :99.6 176.40 957183 1034,25 157149 395 •)1`.E6 «
3
:0312 97.15 490.29 577.35 5211.73
3TE Mprse 1/12 coma 107.1 115.50 `.19.63 128,1? 469.12 33.86 364.23 1
31E OIp 1/25 comp 33186 744.50
C, 2/30 D.T. 99 105.00 470.25 515.25 419.98 414.83 ►
Nuooofs 51111
NMut 1/42 camp 87.15 245.10 332-25 ?06.44 81 V.
1/12 cone 7 36.5. 1031.50
75.48
Jostlnl 190.6 111149 857185 :93412.
1/49 0.1. 109 51175 513100 570.75 371.16 53.74 727.20
1/42 CMD 16018 176.,0 657.65 1034.25 7^148 29.71 1037 DO
f NDleu 30 .2,50 ;42,50 193100 15. 95 165
I McNelll'1 1/39 O.T. V. 115.00
Mich1111 1/42 Como (own) 42 own 1199.50 149.50 47 1
9. 381V. 171.00 1
1/2S Como 215 115.50 :021.25 :136.75 P a 3216'11 2077.99
No Mparo Rubber ls 1/ 258 315.09 !225.5u 1140.10
sons NarriRubb 2-30 comb 129 89.75 :12.75 792.00 lii1% 4% V. 944157 +
.5: 1037.50
Plylmss 1142 42 Como Como 180.8 174.40 457.65 :034.25 757.48 36 1512.50
Prllrbift t/42 Como 2769 176.40 12861.]! 12044.15 33921111 41 48.75 74 1572.':
390 :C5.OC 1852.17 :957.59 :134.8.
2'30 O i 2,7 Own %5190 '5.00 13159 29.36 :.0.3)
l/IO Ali :!36.75 :27,'4 ?8.51 :490.95
llsburr !/25 Cato 215 15.0 :.2l.:• 23 aL9/. 380100
°arter ;oast 1139 O.T. 360 52.35 :'10.09 :'112.57 : 3.88 ^'11 68 1
40.4'. .
Rlcor: Clronicll 1/25 two 15. 322.5 :15.10 :531.85 :541139 :173.311
10 4 39 50 :5 417. _65.49
.50 '41..0 •
7ougr,rscN 1/30 O'1 m ^39
2.
.•i
Duss11 .1wmlm a25 Como :76.40 37..0
:1745 :914.25 .714; 36.5.
:Illy ?112ty :1142 caTa 8016
100.6 176.40 857.61 :134.25 '57.48 36,55 1037..)
6111 1/42 camp 103.2 87.15
TruC4 Stoo 1/12 Caea 400.2; 577.35 :26.73 9.66 713.1111 1
' ; 711 s 4t4,00 334,1; 23.74 619.03
1/30 C 14 !17.50 6150
SWOOP no 91op a42 m: 109.2 11!.40 `.19.79 595.1; 527.71 4:1 174 1.11'4 °.45.40
t irait 11/42 COMO (ownj 15.1 own 359.13 359.10 43.24
11(r1 P11 1/40 camD (awn) 462 own ?!44,53 2194.5) :276185 7119Y 421.09 1
1)16 157,54 843!,04 6593151 9985.112 43.6': :1.89.99
3/30 . !14 `2.57 '41.50 194.40 424.60 391z5 '21.00
'1IIS Sanse nm 1/30 D.T.
dnian Cleo 1l42 Como 184.8 176.40 551.65 :934.25 '57.48 36.x5 :(37.59
dletors 1/42 wo :80.6 176.43 657.35 :034.25 '51.48 36.5; .031.'.:
1/40 O.T. 172 91.75 ?17.00 9114.75 '16.94 57,1! :979.2:
1
1/12 Comb 51.11 31.:5 :45119 ?32-21 ;76.44 9 174 414.83
71nu:I 344 :15.`.9 :634,C0 :149.1: :297.!9 35.9.~Y../ 3:95.121
%ini 1 Noll :/20 Al CO.amp i9 IV. ?15134
~
e10 1115 "9
:130 0.'. IV 2..0 211. ,e7.
Co " 52 ~0 4!.`.C :75.05 :'.0.95
NI 5imm11
!2142.9 5335.05177.118.78 163.013.83 I45J24.O8 39.11% 1170 259.211
-20-
s
t
,
NO.
OF THE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DENTON ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE USE
SANITARY LANDFILL
I SANITATION
COMMERCIAL SITE AND RESIDENTIAL AND COLLECTION
CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE F O
`
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE O DATE RDINANCESSERY OF ITHE CES CES CI AS CITY OF AUTHHORIORIZEZE;D BY
AND
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP DENTON HEREBY ORDAINS; f
fill SECTTIO-~ 1. That the charges for t
he use of the City's land-
` a autborited by section 12 S of
article 1 of chapter
12 of the Code of Ordinances are hereby established as follows:
A. Individual Usera
I f
t + T e of Vehi_ Charse Per
Vehicle Per Load
11 Automobiles and station wa ons
j than one-half ton, Bronco II's ~and c similarss 3.00 $5.44
~ vehicles
21 One-half ton pickups, single axle trailers,
= 7-SO $13,60
vehicles i t, 'e pi rban$ and cubic yards but
Less than S cubic yards
3. Pickup trucks with side boards and all other
vehicles with a carrying capacity in excess $IS•2S $27,20
of S cable yards but leas than 10 cubic yards
4& 10hcubic YardscbutylesscthanilS cnbjxcess of
yards :26„70 $40,80
S' Vehicles with carrying a aeity In excess
15 cubic Yards but less th of
1.00 $54.40
an 20 cubic yards $3±
60 Vehicles with carrying athaaelty in excess of 03,40 $e1•eo
20 cubic yards but less an 30 cubic yards
7. Vehicles with carrying
30 cubic yards but less in excess of $71.20 $108,80
s tDan 40 cubic yards
g, Vehicles with carryin
Yards or more g capacity of 40 cubic
=89,00 $136,00
90 For the disposal of each
addi vehicle the in
tion to the above charges ' S 2.00
21
;r
1
VOLUME REDUCTION/RECYCLING
Volume reduction technologies including baling,
were reviewed shredding,
and all and incineration
ewed appear to to coat
limited additional life expectancy which would Le obtained. !I'
Recycling Options which
would be the most coat effective are newspaper and
{ aluminum can drop box collection programs. The
and the coat estimates assumed curbside programs are costly
no change in the resources available to the
Solid Waste Division. There appears to be
front-line solid waste collection vehicles to conu to modi
llectynewsprintfy the existing
j
i
1
i
o
ti
r
S ~
r
W
f
i
22 -
2SW00079707/11
f
f
HOW TO REDUCE VOLUME
4
A. Volume Reduction Technology
ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
CAPITAL TIPPING STAFF
COST FEE ASSESSMENT
Baling 56.20+/tone Cost Prohibitive for
Limited Life
Shredding 54.35+/tons Cost Prohibitive for
Limited Life
Incineration Cost Prohibitive for
Limited Life Extension
i
{ ti
aIncludes debt service for capital cost as well as operating and
maintenance cost.
P
-23-
2sw08078707/11
1
v
I
I
RECYCLING OPTIONS
I`` 1
ANTICIPATED ESTIMATED SPACE ESTIMATED
VOLUME ESTIMATED AVOIDED SAVED COLLECTION COLLECTION
MATERIAL PER YEAR MARKET REVENUE COST CU/YDS METHOD COST E
1. Newsprint 1,000 'tons Pioneer Paper $35,000 $10,880 4,000 Curbside $ 63,750a
Company SSS
2. Newsprint 800 Tons Pioneer Paper 28,000 8,704 3,200 Drop-off 4,000 S
Company Collection
Containers
3. Aluminum Cans 16.5 Tons Den E. Keith 8,250 179 66 Curbside 60,750b
Fulton Supply 6,580 179 66 Drop-off 6,000
Collection
i Containers
j; 4. Glass 387 Tons Fulton supply 15,480 4,210 1,548 Curbside 124,750° j
r5. Tin Cans 200 Tons None -0- 2,176 800 N/A N/A {
a !l
6. Tire Disposal 12 Tons Texas Tire 1,229d 452 Container at
& Disposal Landfill
I (
a includes all start up costs (labor, vehicles, advertising, equipment and transportation cost{ for a bi-monthly
i bcollection program.
Supplemental to $63,750 start up cost. Includes collection container for each residence and hauling costs. i
{ cSupplemental to $63,750 start up cost. Includes collection containers for each residence, additional equipment and
' dhauling costs.
Space saved would be equivalent to $113 but additional benefits include time and labor saved by not having to bury the
111 tires as they resurface.
t'
7
i
r' 4
(OFED)y
cirY of DENrON, MUS 215E MCKINNEYI DENTON, TEXAS 762011 TELEPHONE (817)566-820C
i
MEMORANDUM
a
DATE: January 22, 1988
T0: 8111 Angelo, Director of Cemnunity Services
1 FROM: Jul la Moore, Adninlstratlve Analyst i
RE:
IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEWSPAPER DROP BOX
RECYCLING PROGRAM
As an update to my memo dated October 9, 1981, concerning Implementatlon
of a newspaper drop box program.. I have revised the program description
to reflect the basic responsibilities of the parties to be involved. s
The following Is a description of how the City of Denton can set up a
basic, no frills newspaper recycling program using Pioneer Paper Company
as Its purchasing source.
! r:
General Prooram Description
Pioneer Paper Company will deliver a 40 yard container and set it up at
a location designated by the City. The container will be used by
citizens to deposit bundled newspapers only. Pioneer will also deliver
a 30 yard container and set It up at a site designated at the City of
j Denton Service Center property. Thi3 container will be used by the
Solid Waste Comnercial division to deposit newspapers that have been
collected from drop off sites throughout the city. When a container Is
filled up, Pioneer Paper will cane out and remove it and replace It with
an
empty container. The fu)
Icontainer w111 be hauled back to Pioneerrs
facilities where the weight will be recorded. Pioneer will pay the City
a minimum floor price of $35,00 per ton and the price can increase
depending on the market.
-25-
y
v
N
IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEWSPAPER DROP BOX RECYCLING PROGRAM
January 21, 1988
Page 2
The following Is a breakdavn of the major resFOnsibllitles of the two
parties Involved:
l Pioneer Paper will provide the following services to the City of
` Denton at no charge:
` - 1. Provide a 40
f the City. TheacontainernIs to be used byathetgeneeral public
I to deposit newspapers.
2. Provide a 30
r
specified by theCity e totbe used taasa collection center sfor
I newspapers transported by the Commercial Solid Waste division.
iIEE 3. Removal of containers when notified that they are full and
repiacement with empty containers.
4. Provide Proof of Insurance with minimun liability amounts -
this will cover any Injury sustained which is related to the
use of the container by the public, any damage to City proper-
ty that is caused by the container, etc.
5. Pioneer Paper will be responsible for the maintenance of their
containers.
6. Pioneer Paper will weigh the newsprint and provide the City
with a receipt each time a container Is collected.
7. Ploneer will pay the City a minimum of 535.00/ton for the
newsprint and will Issue a payment by the fifth day of each
month for tonnage collected during the previous month.
The City of Denton will be responsible for the following:
1. Designation of a site for placement of containers provided by
Pioneer.
2. Maintenance of the area adjacent to containers provided by
Pioneer.
3. Notification to Pioneer that containers are full and need to
be replaced.
4. Provision of sign explaining procedures for use of containers.
5. The City shall have the rl
notification, 9ht to cancel service with 30 days
26 -
I
II
t IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEWSPAPER DROP 20X RECYCLING PROGRAM
j January 21, 1988
1 Page 3
k
In order to generate citizen involvement, an aggressive promotional
campaign will have to be conducted prior to the start of the program.
Plans for publicity can Include placing Inserts in with the utlllt~
bllls, public service announcements on KDNT, KNTU, and Sammons Cable.
Notices placed In the Denton Record Chronicle and school newspapers are
another source of publicity. Pioneer Paper recommends that the promo-
tional campaign should encourage citizens to participate by tying in the
funds received for recycling to a community service such as city }
beautification.
k COST ASSOCIATED WITH PROGRAM:
There are very few monetary Costs associated with operating this program
I y but the following Is a breakdown of the major ores.
1. Advertising costs - $20000
2. Manpower - overseeing container site 1,500
3. Sigrage 500
Total $4,000
An outline detailing the steps Involved in setting up the program is
attached.
CONCLUSION'
The Implementation of a drop box newspaper collection program for the
City of Denton Is highly feasible and very desirable from a waste
reduction standpoint. The key to a successful program Is the Initial
prmmtlon of the project and motivating citizens to contribute by
designating the revenues for a community service purpose. If the basic
newspaper program i
s successful, It can b
be expanded by setting out
additional
containers and also by branching out to collect other types
of paper such as computer forms and cardboard boxes.
Julia Moore
JM/sc
- 27
I
NEWSPAPER RECYCLING PROGRAM-OUTLINE
I. City Staff Set-Up Program Guldel Ines
A. Determine location of contalners.
S. Allocate staff for management and maintenance.
C. Make arrangements with Pioneer Paper Company - contact
person, cost, payment method.
0. Set up monitoring system to track amount of paper, revenues,
cost to City.
II. Promotion of Recycling Program
A. Methods of Promotion
1. Mail or deliver handout to all homeowners - utility bill {
stuffer.
2. Include Information in other city informational
brochures - Parks and Recreation, Energy Management.
3. Review residential information sheet that is handed out
to new customers and add information on recycling.
E 4. Distribute flyers at community events.
5. Contact other media sources for public service announce-
rents and news articles - KDNT, KNTU, Denton
Record Chronlcle, North Texas Dally and TWU.
6. Contact Sam!nns about Including a stuffer in with their
billing and arrange for Interviews on local access talk
shows.
t
1. Form letter to servlce organizations.
, i
S. Slogan for signs and advertising
C. Tie in promotion to specific use for revenues
Ill. Evaluation of Program
A. Monitor Activity
1. Keep concise records.
2. Analyze program records to determine service or
collection deficiencies.
3. Assess where program can be improved.
B. Disposition of Revenues - Allocation of funds for specific
purposes, i.e., clean-up actlvitles, beautification, demoll-
tion, etc.
28 -
0
1
{ WHAT TO DO BY 1994
i
j Disposal alternatives which appear reasonable to discard are modular
j incineration, RDF, pyrolysis and bioconversion.
ti
i
Expansion of the existing Landfill does not look promising as a long-range
solution because of the poor quality of the geology in and around the site, but
may be a viable option in combination with the use of resource recovery
technology.
A mass burn resource recovery facility appears to be financially feasible and
' probably deserves a more detailed analysis. The cost figures for this type of
disposal facility were based upon building a plant from scratch. There may be
significant capital cost savings by retro-fitting existing equipment at the
City Power Plant. The outcome of proposed air quality standards for Denton
County may affect all resource recovery alternatives.
1
3
t
~s
-29-
2swO90767D7/10
k"
}
9
i
i
WHAT TO DO BY 1994
i
1 R
ESTIMATED ESTIMATED
DISPOSAL CAPITAL TIP STAFF
I ALTERNATIVES COST FEE ASSESSMENT
1
I. RESOURCE RECdOVERY
Mass Burn d $40 million** $9/tons Viable Alternativec
Modular incineration $35-$40 million $9/ton For Smaller Scale
Waste Volume
Refuse Derived Fueld $35-$50 million For Larger Scale
(RDF) Waste Volume
Pyrolysis a Bio- Unproven Technology
conversion
II. TRANSFERd $1.5 million $14.85/tona Viable Alternative
Direct Maul 10.16/ton Viable Alternative
j III. LANDFILLING y
Expansion of Exist- $1.3 million 51.00/ton Feasible in Combina-
ing site tion with Resource
Recovery
New Landfill $3-$5 million $8.56/tons Viable Alternative
r
a Includes debt service for capital cost as well as operating and maintenance
boost.
Capital Cost only.
dAssuming EPA Standards are not imposed on Denton County.
Maximum capacity would be reached approximately 10 years after construction.
eBased on additional vehicles, personnel and disposal charges required to
perform direct haul to Lewisville or Farmers Branch.
*The current tipping fee at the existing Landfill is approximately $6.64/ton.
**Substantial cost savings could be achieved by retrofitting existing
facilities at the City Power Plant.
-30-
2sWOB078707/9
is
Tr Was"
E
RECYCLING OPTIONS
ANTICIPATED ESTIMATED SPACE ESTIMATED
VOLUME ESTIMATED AVOIDED SAVED COLLECTION COLLECTION
MATERIAL PER YEAR MARKET REVENUE COST CU/YDS METNC`-- COST
1. Newsprint 1,200 Tons Pioneer Paper $42,000 $11,328 4,800 Curbside $ b3,750a
Company d
2. Newsprint 10000 Tons Pioneer Paper 35,000 '.',440 4,000 Drop-off 3,000 A
Company Collection
Containers
3. Aluminum Cans 16.5 Tons Hen E. Keith 8,250 155 66 Curbside 60,750b
Fulton Supply 8,580 155 66 Drop-off 6,000
Collection
Containers
4. Glass 387 Tons Fulton Supply 150460 3,653 1,548 Curbside 124,7500
i
Tin Cans 200 Tons None -0- 1,888 800 N/A N/A
i
6. Tire Disposal 12 Tons Texas Tire 1134 452 Container at
Disposal Landfill
aIncludes all start up costs (labor, vehicles, advertising, equipment and transportation cost) for a hi-monthly
collection
bprogram.
Supplemental to $63050 start up cost. Includes collection container for each residence and hauling costs.
Supplemental to $63,750 start u.- cost. Includes collection containers for each residence, additional equipment and
dhauling costs.
Space saved would be equivalent to $113 but additional benefits include time and labor saved by not having to bury the
tires as they resurface.
,
i
VOLUME REDUCTION/RECYCLING
volume reduction technologies including baling, shredding, and incineration
were reviewed and all appear to be cost prohibitive when compared to the
limited additional life expectancy which would be obtained.
Recycling options which would be the most cost effective are newspaper and
aluminum can drop box collection programs. The curbside programs are costly
and the cost estimates assumed no change in the resources available to the
Solid Waste Division. There apptars to be no way to modify the existing
front-line solid waste collection vehicles to collect newsprint.
11
h ' n
J
7
ti 2
i
y
i
-32-
2sw08078707/13
i
{
3
s
t h
f E
i
{
i
Fl LE
{
i
i
I