state of the city 2012
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
State of the City 2012 Mayor Alvin New & Interim City Manager Michael Dane
TOPICS
• ½ Cent sales tax funded projects• Budget• Streets• Water
½ Cent sales Tax Projects
Producers Park
• Project Began Summer 2010• Completed Fall 2011• Cost: $1,665,000
Meadowcreek Park (renovation)
• Project began Spring 2010• Completed Fall 2011• Cost: $256,000
Love Municipal Pool (renovation)
• Project Began Spring 2011• Completed Spring 2012• Cost: $3,262,000
Rio Vista Park (renovation)
• Project Began Spring 2012• To be completed Fall 2012• Cost: $813,900
River Improvements
• Project Began Fall 2011• Project to be completed Spring 2013• Cost: $9,300,000
Red Arroyo Trail
• Project to begin Summer 2014• Project to be complete Summer 2015• Project Cost: $4,000,000• Funding Sources: • Federal ($3,200,000) • City Half-Cent Sales Taxes and Storm Water Funding ($650,000) • Donations ($150,000)
½ Cent Sales Tax Projects
• Current or Future projects– Airport Terminal Rehab– Fort Concho– 29th Street Sports Complex– Fairgrounds (cattle barn)– Hickory Water Supply– City Auditorium
City Hall
• Construction started August 2010• Employees Moved in June 2012• Open House event early October
2012-2013 Budget
Budget Goals
• Modest employee raises• Street maintenance/Sealcoat• Property Tax Rate reduction
Budget Goals vs. Resources
• Budget Gap of approximately $751,000
• Proposed to close the gap through cuts and targeted fees
Closing the Budget Gap
• Total proposed cuts & reorgs $379,000
• Number of positions cut: 8 full time 1 part time
Closing the Budget Gap
• Fees vs Taxes• Proposing fee increases totaling
$342,000
10 year property tax history
Increased Street Maintenance
• Staff is proposing to triple the street sealcoat budget
• Proposed $1,800,000 in sealcoat
Streets
City Streets
–Total lane miles of streets: 1150 miles
–Major Roadways: 283 lane miles
–Residential Streets: 867 lane miles
Street Useful Life
– Different street types have different useful lives and different routine maintenance needs
– When considering what type of street to construct it is important to consider 1) Initial Capital Cost 2) Overall Useful Life and 3) Long Term Maintenance Needs
Street Life Cycle
–Asphalt vs. concrete–2/3 of the cost of a roadway is what is below the surface; the asphalt surface merely protects the investment below it
–The useful life potential of a street is fully dependent on it being properly maintained
– Impact of reduced maintenance
Street TypesAsphalt Streets
• Useful life of 25 years of properly maintained– Proper maintenance to achieve 25 year useful life
• Sealcoat – every 8 years (maximum)• Mill and Overlay – at 15 years if roadway shows
signs of major distress (* Residential streets are low volume and typically only require sealcoating every 8 years)
• Complete Reconstruction – Approximately every 25-30 years
• Major maintenance costs over 75 year period (1 mile of 40’ wide street) - $8,000,000.00
Street Types
Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Streets(Grape Creek Road and 50th Street)
• Useful life approximately 75-100 years– Initial cost 5-15% greater– Maintenance – no major routine maintenance
required– Major maintenance costs over 75 year period
(1 mile of 40’ wide street)• Asphalt - $8,000,000.00• RCC - $1,500,000.00
(for mill and overlay only if required)
Street Reconstruction
– The City currently has 55 streets listed for reconstruction in its Capital Improvements Plan at a cost of approximately $155M
– Street Construction Methods• Roller Compacted Concrete Reconstruction (RCC)
– Removal of 6 to 8 inches of material and replacement with roller compacted concrete
– Cost per square yard: $175, Useful life: 75-100 years• “Full Depth” Reconstruction (Asphalt)
– Complete removal and replacement of roadway from surface to depth of approximately 22 inches
– Cost per square yard: $150, Useful life: 25 years
Capital Borrowing Capacity
• Current capital budget $ 1,756,529
• LESS $250,000 annually for fire truck replacement
• Could use $1,506,529 capital budget for debt service
– Assuming 20 years at 4% we could borrow approximately $20,475,000 principal
– Budget impact?
San Angelo’s Water Supply
Historical Lake Levels
Ivie Reservoir
123,400
75,820
Twin Buttes Reservoir
Lake Nasworthy
Change in Volume: 1,980 Acre-FeetChange in Elevation: 21 Inches
O H Ivie Reservoir
Projected Water Supply w/o Hickory
Month
Pro
ject
ed S
up
ply
, A
cre-
Fee
t
Twin Buttes South Pool Pumping
Pipelines to Equalization Channel
Flow Through Equalization Channel
Water Flowing Into North Pool
Hickory Project Update
Well Field Collector Pipelines
• Installation of 50,700 feet of pipe to nine wells
• General Contractor: Price Construction
• Pipeline Sub-Contractor: Darnell & Dickson
• Contract Amount: $3.8 million
• Project Substantially Complete: May 2012
Well Field Layout
Transmission Pipeline
• 62 miles of 30” pipe from well field to San Angelo
• Contractor: Oscar Renda
• Sub-Contractor: S J Louis
• Contract Amount: $39 million
• Contract Completion: July 2013
30” Pipeline Installation
Transmission Pipeline Status
WELL FIELD
PUMP STATION
STARTINGPOINT
7 MILESAS OF 8/1/12
4.5 MILESAS OF 8/1/12
30” PIPELINE
TOTAL: 62 MILESCOMPLETED: 11.5 MILES
Well Field-Booster Pump Station
• Equip 9 Existing Wells
• Construct 6 mgd Pump Station
• Construct Two 500,000 gallon Tanks
• Install Microwave Telemetry System
Booster Station-Well Field Contract
• Contractor: Archer Western
• Contract Amount: $12.85 million
• Notice to Proceed: June 18, 2012
• Substantial Completion: June 2013
Treatment Plant
• Treatment Method Selected: June 2012
• 20% Design Status: August 2012
• Advertise for Bids: April 2013
• Notice to Proceed: June 2013
• Substantial Completion: August 2014
9 mgd usage2014 - 2018
Cost Estimate to Expand to 9mgd Capacity
• Well Field: $10,720,000– Five (5) New Wells Drilled, Cased and Equipped– Expanded Well Field Access Roads
• Booster Pump Station: $260,000– Two (2) Additional Pumps and Electrical
• Contingencies: $2,920,000
• Engineering & Construction Mgmt.: $2,160,000
• Total: $16,060,000
Future of Water:
• Hickory Water Supply• Tri-City Water • Reuse of Water • Other options
Keys for the Future:
• Inter-organizational cooperation
• Water supply development• Awareness of
intergovernmental fiscal issues
Mayor Alvin New – [email protected] Interim City Manager Michael Dane – [email protected]
Mayor Alvin New – [email protected] Interim City Manager Michael Dane – [email protected]