HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP 35 Mm W EFM m; 1JV o mxmw
NPAr
=t���A
POLICY PROPOSAL
DATE FILE NUMBER SUBJECT Proposal to Acquire Property on PAGE 1 OF 3
11/1/77 CP-35 East 1st Street for Sanitary Landfill
PROPOSAL PROPOSED BY: Councilman CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW
Woodie W. Woods
The City Council has been aware of an urgent need for additional sanitary landfill
facilities for some time. Numerous studies have been prepared by the staff and
City Council committees which urged the acquisition of land at an early date. I
propose that the City Council act at this time to execute an option of twenty-four
months on the W. 0. Kelly property located on East 1st Street between Haltom Road
and Oakland Boulevard.
Background
The location of sanitary landfill sites has been studied on numerous occasions by
both City staff and City Council committees. The initial staff report prepared in
April 1966, indicated a sanitary landfill site on East 1st Street between Haltom
Road and Oakland Boulevard. The land was not acquired at that time because it was
occupied by the Bowen Bus Company and the White Lake Dairy and could not be easily
acquired without condemnation. An alternate site was selected on Randol Mill Road
east of IH-820 at that time. Again in 1974 the City staff study indicated a land-
fill would be required in the north central portion of the community to replace the
current North Central and Northeast landfills. Then in 1976 a site selection sub-
committee of the City Council on which I served recommended the acquisition of the
W. 0. Kelly property for use as a sanitary landfill with numerous cost-benefit and
land reclamation assets. The City Council at that time earmarked approximately
$1 million from the general fund reserves for that land acquisition at an appro-
priate date. Finally, an ad hoc committee on solid waste on which I also served
in 1977 studied extensively numerous sites across Tarrant County. The East 1st
Street location was again predominant in the cost-benefit solutions.
Cost Benefit
The most recent study performed to assess the cost benefit of various landfill sites
using the North Central Texas Council of Governments computer model indicated that
the optimum solution for the City at this time was to acquire two additional land-
fills and construct one transfer station. The East 1st Street property was one of the
two locations selected by the computer as most cost beneficial. The ad hoc committee
also asked in the event one and only site were to be acquired, which site would be
recommended. The computer once again selected the East 1st Street location at a
weekly cost of operation projected at $146,608 and a 20-year life operating cost of
$152.472 million, over a 20-year life cycle. The ad hoc committee also utilized this
computer model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the site to be proposed to the
electorate in the upcoming CIP election. Weekly cost estimate for that site was
LEGALITY
FISCAL NOTE
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
POLICY PROPOSAL (cont'd) PAGE_OF
$175,428 and a 20-year operating cost of $182.445 million. The comparison of these
two solutions shows a definite cost benefit to the taxpaying public of nearly
$29,000 per week, or $30 million over the 20-year period of the system. In order
to finance this $30 million differential it would necessitate at least a $1.10
increase in the monthly service cost for residential customers and would drive
the actual monthly service cost for sanitation collection to a projected $5.05
per month from the present $3.75 figure (service fee charged to public is currently
$2.50 per month) .
Citizens would also derive a benefit by reclaiming land from the floodway for use
as a park, a location for a future refuse recycling plant, or other uses for which
it is now unsatisfactory. The central location of the facility on East 1st Street
which has made it a choice selected time and time again for sanitary landfill opera-
tions is keyed on the transportation efficiency for trucks and/or people to get to
that location. It would therefore be an ideal site for use as a riverfront park
and a future resource recovery plant when it becomes feasible.
The City of Fort Worth can very definitely utilize the capital savings of $3 to $4
million to be derived by acquiring this site rather than the more remote site and
the interest on the debt service coupled with the $30 million projected system
savings over the 20-year life to fund other unmet community needs. In the event
construction of a refuse recycling plant becomes technically and economically
feasible, this savings could be used to finance that cost. Finally, we are all
well aware that the additional $5 million in funds freed by removing this item
from the bond election can be used in the immediate future to deal with many of
the unmet community needs for street improvements and public safety.
Proposal
It is proposed that the City Council:
1) Proceed immediately to execute a 24-month option on the W. 0.
Kelly property for a maximum consideration of $119,917.46. This
represents approximately 61 percent per annum of the total purchase
price of acquiring the property, 368.977 acres at $2,500 per acre,
$922,442.
2) That the City Council instruct City staff to proceed immediately
with the retention of an appropriate engineering firm to develop
plans and prepare the application for submission to the Texas
Department of Health Resources to obtain a sanitary landfill
permit.
3) Appropriate monies from the general fund reserves for the payment
of both the option and engineering costs.
Legality
No legal issues involved.
Fiscal Note
Funds are available in the general fund reserve to finance this project at the
Council's discretion.
CITY OF FORT WORTH
POLICY PROPOSAL (cont'd) PAGE—OF
eJTy MA 40A GC25 C%nM Mi NTS
The East 1st Street location for a sanitary landfill has been considered numerous
times because of its projected cost benefit and was' submitted to City Council
for approval in M&C L-5471 on May 31, 1977. City Council referred the landfill
proposition to an ad hoc committee on that date.
The Kelly property is unquestionably the most cost effective site.
However, there might be an advantage in giving the voters an opportunity to
determine whether or not they want a sanitary landfill within the inner city, or
would be willing to pay the higher cost of a more long range solution outside the
city limits. A $4.3 million sanitary landfill proposal was approved on October 25th
by the voters of Arlington.
c
Woo-die W. Woods, councilman
CITY OF
tis . p. 'UL L U
UJL�_
f � f
City Secretary
CITY OF FORT WORTH