HomeMy WebLinkAboutID-2557-aCity of Palo Alto (ID # 2557)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 7/2/2012
July 02, 2012 Page 1 of 8
(ID # 2557)
Summary Title: Energy/Compost Facility Action Plan
Title: Energy/Compost Facility Action Plan Presentation; and Approval of
Amendment No. 2 to Contract C11136602 with Alternative Resources, Inc. in the
Amount of $290,224 for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $517,682 for
Assistance with the Energy/Compost Facility Action Plan Implementation and
Adoption of Budget Amendment Ordinance
From:City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1.Accept the Action Plan and Timeline for Consideration of an
Energy/Compost Facility (Attachment A).
2.Adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment D) in the amount of
$174,157 to provide an additional appropriation for Amendment No. 2 to
Contract No. C11136602 with Alternative Resources Incorporated.
3.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the
attached contract amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C11136602
(Attachment C) with Alternative Resources, Inc. in the amount of $290,224
for assisting the City in implementation of the Action Plan and Timeline for
Consideration of an Energy/Compost Facility, for a total not to exceed
contract amount of $517,682.
4.Direct staff to prepare an Organics Resource Recovery Strategy (ORRS).
Executive Summary
July 02, 2012 Page 2 of 8
(ID # 2557)
This staff report transmits the Action Plan and Timeline for Consideration of an
Energy/Compost Facility. On February 6, 2012, Council directed staff to work with
Alternative Resources, Inc. (ARI)to develop the Action Plan and Timeline and to
return to Council to present it. The Action Plan and Timeline describes the
necessary steps and schedule to obtain and analyze vendor proposals for an
Energy/Compost Facility through a Request for Proposals process that would
allow Council to make a decision on the Facility in February 2014. It also includes
coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Plant’s (RWQCP) efforts to
retire the existing biosolids incinerators, and development of an Organics
Resource Recovery Strategy.
Staff recommends that 1) the Action Plan and Timeline for Consideration of an
Energy/Compost Facility be accepted; 2) a contract amendment in the amount of
$290,224 be approved, 3) a related Budget Amendment Ordinance be approved
to allow ARI to assist staff with implementation of the Action Plan and Timeline;
and 4) staff be directed to prepare an Organics Resource Recovery Strategy.
Background
On April 5, 2010, Council directed staff to initiate a feasiblity study for an
Energy/Compost Facility in Palo Alto. Council approved a contract with ARI to
conduct the study (CMR:333:10) in August 2010. In September 2011, a Final
Feasibility Report was presented to Council. The Feasibility Report recommended
that if the site at Byxbee Park becomes available through the passage of Measure
E, the City should take further actions to consider anaerobic digestion and other
technologies for managing the City’s food scraps, yard trimmings, and biosolids at
the site.
In November 2011, Palo Alto voters passed Measure E, which removes a 10-acre
parcel of land adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant from dedication as
parkland for the limited use as an Energy/Compost Facility. Approximately 8
acres of this 10-acre parcel are on the uncapped portion of the Palo Alto Landfill.
On February 6, 2012, Council approved Amendment No. 1 to ARI’s contract to
allow ARI to assist the City in developing an Action Plan and Timeline for
Consideration of an Energy/Compost Facility on the 10-acre parcel or a portion
thereof. Staff was also directed to continue working with regulatory agencies to
obtain approval for postponing the final capping of the landfill for one
construction season, and to cease the existing composting operation at the
July 02, 2012 Page 3 of 8
(ID # 2557)
landfill as soon as possible.
Discussion
Action Plan and Timeline
The Action Plan and Timeline for Consideration of an Energy/Compost Facility
were developed with the assistance of ARI. The Action Plan and Timeline is
focused on a Request For Proposals (RFP) process that will allow the City to obtain
firm pricing from vendors interested in providing technologies to manage the
City’s food scraps, yard trimmings, and biosolids. The proposed RFP process also
includes soliciting pricing for export options to allow comparison with the City’s
current export pricing for food scraps and yard trimmings. A public meeting to
review the Action Plan and Timeline and to obtain community feedback was held
on April 25, 2012.
Table 1 presents the key components of the Action Plan and Timeline. The
Timeline is also presented separately as Attachment B, detailing the tasks and
timeframes associated with each of the key steps.
Table 1: Key components of the Action Plan and Timeline
Step Description
1 Preparation of the Action Plan (complete)
2 Long Range Facilities Plan for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant
(complete)
3 Organics Resource Recovery Strategy
4 Landfill Capping
5 Project Concept and RFP Process to obtain pricing for Energy/Compost
Facility and export options/Analysis of economic and environmental
impacts
6 Implementation of Selected Strategy
Preparation of Action Plan and Long Range Facilities Plan
Preparation of the Action Plan and the Long Range Facilities Plan for the RWQCP
is complete and is scheduled concurrently with this item for Council review and
approval.
Organics Resource Recovery Strategy
Preparation of an Organics Resource Recovery Strategy (ORRS) is recommended
July 02, 2012 Page 4 of 8
(ID # 2557)
to take place along with RFP preparation. The ORRS will describe the amounts
and types of organic materials that are available for Energy/Compost and export
options, evaluate the current and potential future programs for collecting and
conveying organic materials, define the process that will be used for comparing
current organics management with the options provided by vendor proposals,
and develop the City’s strategy for encouraging or discouraging alternative
organics management options such as food waste disposers and home
composting.
Landfill Capping
On February 6, 2012,Council directed City staff to obtain approval from the
appropriate regulatory agencies for a one year postponement on capping of the
Palo Alto Landfill while the Energy/Compost Facility is being considered. The Palo
Alto Landfill is located on Byxbee Park, and the remaining uncapped area is
scheduled to be opened to the public once the capping process is completed.
Staff has obtained conceptual approvals to postpone capping until the 2013
construction season from the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental
Health (Local Enforcement Agency), the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB), and the California Department of Resources Recycling and
Recovery (CalRecycle). The respective staffs are working cooperatively to
formalize this extension. The Action Plan and Timeline includes a Council decision
on landfill capping in January 2013. The composting operation at the landfill
accepted the final load of yard trimming materials on March 31, 2012, and
processing and screening of the final composted materials was completed on June
6, 2012.
Project Concept and RFP Process to Obtain Pricing for Energy/Compost and Export
Options
The Action Plan and Timeline include a number of tasks that are necessary to
complete the RFP process. A key initial task is finalizing project concepts, project
goals, and performance specifications. The performance specifications, which
include factors such as size limits, acceptable technologies, business
arrangements, and preferences for energy production and compost quality,will
be used in the RFP to define the scope of a potential project. A comprehensive
list of performance specification considerations is provided in the “Discussion
Points” section of the Action Plan and Timeline. Upon finalization of the
performance specifications and Council authorization, the RFP will be released.
July 02, 2012 Page 5 of 8
(ID # 2557)
Proposals received from vendors will be evaluated, and a Council decision to 1.)
move forward with an Energy/Compost Facility, 2.) utilize a vendor-provided
export option, 3.) continue with current programs for organics management, or 4)
a combination of two or more strategies will be made.
The environmental review process is expected to be run concurrently with the
RFP process. An Environmental Checklist will be performed for the range of
expected options. The bulk of the foundational work for the environmental
review process can be completed before the proposals are received, but to
ensure that all possible environmental impacts (and benefits) are fully evaluated,
the environmental process will be finalized after the proposals are received. The
Action Plan Timeline includes a Council decision in February 2014.
The Project Concept and RFP process includes multiple points for Council and
public input and Council approval. Public meetings are included in the Action Plan
and Timeline for review of project concepts, project goals, and performance
specifications, and for review of the draft RFP. Council review of the draft RFP is
provided for, as is Council authorization to release the final RFP. The public will
also have the opportunity to comment on the environmental assessment which
will include a full environmental analysis of the proposals.
Implementation of Selected Strategy
Following Council’s decision in February 2014,the City will implement either an
Energy/Compost Facility option or an export option. Export options may be those
provided by vendors through the RFP process or the current programs that are in
place. Biosolids may be managed as part of an Energy/Compost Facility, through
an export option, or through an on-site management option at the RWQCP.
Action Plan Timeline Summary
Table 2 provides a summary of the timeline for the major action items in the
Action Plan and Timeline that lead up to Council’s decision on an Energy/Compost
Facility. A more detailed timeline is included as Attachment B.
Action Item Approximate Start Date Approximate End Date
Develop Organics Resource
Recovery Strategy July 2012 April 2013
Develop performance July 2012 January 2013
July 02, 2012 Page 6 of 8
(ID # 2557)
specifications
Develop an RFP July 2012 December 2012
Companies prepare
proposals February 2013 July 2013
Proposal evaluation and
financial and
environmental analysis
July 2013 January 2014
Council decision on
Energy/Compost Facility or
Export
February 2014 February 2014
ARI Contract Amendment No. 2
Staff recommends that a contract amendment with ARI be approved to allow ARI
to assist the City in implementing the Action Plan and Timeline for Consideration
of an Energy/Compost Facility. The initial ARI contract funding of $197,758 was
used to complete the Energy/Compost Feasibility Study. Amendment No. 1 for
$29,700 was used to develop the Action Plan and Timeline. An additional
$290,224 is being proposed to complete the following tasks:
·Finalize project concept, goals, and performance specifications
·Public review of project concept, goals, and performance specifications
·Prepare CEQA checklist
·Request for Proposals for Energy/Compost and export options
·Public review of Request for Proposals
·Presentation of draft and final Request for Proposals to City Council
·Release final Request for Proposals, answer proposer questions
·Proposal review and evaluation, financial analysis of alternatives
·Public review of proposal evaluation and financial analysis
·Presentation of proposal evaluation and financial analysis to City Council
Coordination with RWQCP Long Range Facilities Plan process
The Action Plan and Timeline have been carefully coordinated with the RWQCP’s
schedule for developing a Biosolids Facility Plan as recommended by the Long
Range Facilities Plan. The RWQCP will provide performance specifications for
biosolids management in September 2012 that will be incorporated into the
Energy/Compost Facility RFP process along with the performance specifications
for food scraps and yard trimmings. Vendor proposals in response to the RFP are
July 02, 2012 Page 7 of 8
(ID # 2557)
scheduled to be received in July 2013, allowing time for the information to be
considered in the preparation of the Biosolids Facility Plan. Staff
recommendations to Council on an Energy/Compost Facility and on biosolids
management solutions are both scheduled for February 2014.
Timeline
Following Council acceptance of the Action Plan and Timeline and approval of the
Alternative Resources, Inc. contract amendment, staff will immediately begin
implementing the Action Plan and Timeline. Staff will return next to Council in
January 2013 for review and approval of the Energy/Compost Facility RFP, and for
a decision on landfill capping.
Resource Impact
The $290,224 for Alternative Resources, Inc. contract Amendment No. 2 will be
funded by the Refuse Fund,the Wastewater Treatment Fund,and the Electric
Fund The attached Budget Amendment Ordinance increases the budgeted
expeditures for the Refuse Fund in FY 2013 by $174,157. The remaining $116,067
is available in the Wastewater Treatment Fund ($87,067) and the Electric Fund
($29,000) operating budgets for FY 2013. No additional appropriation for the
Wastewater Treatment Fund or the Electric Fund is needed.
Policy Implications
Recommendations of this staff report are consistent with existing City policies
including the Zero Waste Plan, Baylands Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan as
amended by Measure E on November 8, 2011.
Environmental Review
Following Council’s approval of ARI Contract Amendment No. 2, a CEQA checklist
will be prepared in October 2012 for the purpose of providing information about
potential environmental concerns that will be considered in the Request for
Proposals/environmental review process.
Attachments:
·A: Action Plan and Timeline (DOC)
·B: Combined Energy Compost Facility Action Plan and Biosolids Facility Plan Timeline (PDF)
·C: ARI Contract C11136602 Amendment No. 2 (PDF)
·D: Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOC)
July 02, 2012 Page 8 of 8
(ID # 2557)
·Public Letter to Council (DOC)
·Public Letter to Council (PDF)
Prepared By:Charles Muir,
Department Head:J. Michael Sartor, Director
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
1784-12
Attachment A
ACTION PLAN
CONSIDERATION
OF
ENERGY/COMPOST (E/C)FACILITY
Alternative Resources, Inc.
July 2, 2012
1
SUMMARY OF ACTION PLAN
Following passage of Measure E in November 2011, City staff and Alternative Resources,
Inc. (ARI) have prepared this Action Plan to set out steps for the City to further consider
implementation of an Energy/Compost Facility and/or export of food scraps, yard trimmings
and biosolids. The Action Plan presented herein includes a list of further steps and a
schedule for those steps, considering other related ongoing activities that must be
integrated with the Action Plan, such as closure of the landfill and integraton of biosolids
management as addressed in the Long Range Facilities Plan for the Regional Water
Quality Control Plant.
Public Review of Action Plan
Preparation of the Action Plan included public review and comment on a draft plan posted
on the City’s web site on or about April 15th and presented by City Staff at a public meeting
on April 25th.
Key Steps and Schedule
As shown in Table 1, there are six (6) key activities included in the Action Plan. These
include:
1.Preparation of the Action Plan
2.Long Range Facilities Plan for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, particularly
the Biosolids Plan
3.Organics Resource Recovery Strategy
4.Landfill Closure
5.Project Concept/Request for Proposal (RFP) Process for Consideration of E/C
Facility and Export for Food Scraps, Yard Trimmings and Biosolids
6.Implementation of Selected Strategy
2
City Milestones
As shown in Table 1, key decision points for City Council include:
·Acceptance of the Action Plan: July 2, 2012
·Acceptance of the Long Range Facilities Plan for the RWQCP: July 2, 2012
·Decision on Landfill Capping Design: January 2013
·Approval of the Organics Resource Recovery Strategy: April 2013
·Approval of the Final RFP for release: January 2013
·Consideration of and a decision as to whether to proceed with negotiation of a
contract for an E/C Facility or Export for food scraps, yard trimmings and biosolids,
and the Preferred Proposer with whom to enter into contract negotiations or to
pursue a separate project for biosolids: February 2014
·Acceptance of a Biosolids Facility Plan: July 2014
·Consideration of approval of a contract for an Export Option or E/C Facility: August
2014 (Export Option) or May 2015 (E/C Facility)
Public Participation, Review and Meetings
Also, as shown in Table 1, public participation has occurred or is scheduled throughout the
process to include review of the:
·Draft of Action Plan,Initial Review of Project Concepts, Goals, Performance
Specifications: April 25, 2012
·Continued Review of Project Concepts, Goals , Performance Specifications:
September 2012
·Review of Draft RFP: November 2012
·Review of Draft Organics Resource Recovery Strategy: February 2013
·Review of Proposal Evaluation and Financial Analyses: December 2013
3
Table 1
4
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
Project Concept/RFP Process/Performance Specifications
1.Project Concept : E/C Facility
·Type/Quantity of Feedstock –Food Scraps, Yard Trimmings, Biosolids, Update
Quantities/Projections from RFI
·Type of Technology Acceptable by Feedstock –Dry AD for Food Scraps and
Yard Trimmings, Wet AD for Biosolids in Separate Cells; Other ?(e.g.,Wet AD
for Food Scraps and Yard Trimmings;Dry AD for Biosolids, Combined
Treatment of Food Scraps, Yard Trimmings and Biosolids by AD; Gasification of
Biosolids)
·Site for Food Scraps/Yard Trimmings –Landfill, possibly RWQCP if Wet AD
·Site for Biosolids –RWQCP, possibly Landfill if Dry AD
2.Project Concept : Export
·Type/Quantity of Feedstock-Food Scraps, Yard Trimmings, Biosolids, Update
Quantities/Projections from RFI
·Food Scraps and Yard Trimmings-Collection and Direct Haul
·Storage/Loading Area for Dewatered Biosolids at RWQCP before export
3.RFP Considerations/Performance Specifications for E/C Facility and Export (as
appropriate):
·Combined Procurement for Food Scraps, Yard Trimmings and Biosolids (allow
for separate biosolids project, if City finds it advantageous to pursue that course )
·Scope of Service –Permitting (CEQA-likely by the City, Permits-by the selected
Company or the City), Company to Design/Build/Operate and Market Products
(Possibly Design/Build for Wet AD or Gasification of Biosolids), City to buy
power)
·Site Location (see Item 1 above)
·Size Limits or Size Goals for Landfill Site
·Definition of Acceptable Technologies (see Item 1 above)
·Compost Digestate On or Off Site, or Flexible
·Facility Sized for Palo Alto Only, or Regional
·Preference for Energy Production (Electricity, Gas, Fuel?); Use-in the City or
export
·Use of Landfill Gas, if beneficial
5
·Preferences for Compost Quality,Use
·Environmental Controls (e.g.,Enclosed operations,Noise, Odor,Process Water
Reuse, Stormwater,Air )
·Aesthetic Preference (e.g., Building Design, Buffer Zones)
·Performance Guarantees during Facility operation
o Throughput
o Environmental Compliance
o Energy/Product Output, Quality
o Residuals Quantity
o Other, e.g. Recyclables Recovery and Reuse
·Preferences for Business Arrangements/Risk Allocation
o Facility Ownership/Financing (e.g., Public, Private)
o Term of Contract Operations, e.g. 20 years, options for renewal
o Market Risk for Products –Energy, Compost; Profit Share
o Contractor Compensation Basis (Unit Pricing? Annual Service Fee? City
Put-or-Pay Obligation?)
o “Local Content” Purchasing (Construction and Long-Term Operations)
·Preferences for Contract Principles/Risk Allocation
o Single Point of Responsibility by Company
o Permitting (Permitability, Schedule)
o Development Schedule (Pre-Financing, Post-Financing)
o Site Conditions (Surface, Subsurface)
o Construction-Related Contractor Guarantees (Cost, Schedule, Design
Standards/Quality,Acceptance,Guarantee Enforcement)
o Operations-Related Contractor Guarantees (Cost/Service Fees,
Performance Standards, Asset Management, Guarantee Enforcement)
o Alternative Disposal Sites and Arrangements, if Facility not operating
o Capital Improvements over time (Implementation, Cost Increases, Cost
Savings)
o Project Security (Insurance, Bonds, Company Guarantee, Letter of Credit
(LOC), Maintenance of Financial Capability)
o Uncontrollable Circumstances/Changes-in-Law Affecting Costs and
Performance
o Contractor Financial Penalties/Damages for Non-Performance
6
o Convenience Termination and DefaultTermination (Pre-and Post-
Financing)
o City Step-In Rights (Including Access to Technology Licenses)
o Dispute Resolution
o Facility Removal/Site Restoration
·Proposal Evaluation
o Key Evaluation Criteria to include: Company and Staff Qualifications,
Demonstrated Use of Technology , Viability of Technical Approach,
Environmental Mitigation, Conformance to City Business and Contract
Terms, Price
o Process allows choice of other than Lowest Priced Proposal
·Proposal Process does not commit the City to any action
ID EC Facility& Biosolids Facility Plan Timeline
1 1. Action Plan Development.
2 A. Develop draft action plan.
3 B. Public review.
4 C. Revised draft.
5 D. City Council presentation.
6 E. Prepare Final Action Plan.
78 2. Develop biosolids performance specifications for E/C Facility RFP (RWQCP/Consultant).
7 3. LRFP-RWQCP.
8 A. Public Final draft.
9 B. City Council meeting (acceptance of LRFP).
10 C. Prepare final LRFP.
11 D. Financing Plan.
14 4. Organics Resource Recovery Strategy (ORRS).
15 A. Prepare RFP for waste characterization & ORRS consultant; select consultant.
16 B. Consultant prepares ORRS.
17 C. Pilot residential food waste collection.
18 D. Public review of ORRS.
19 E. Forward strategy to City Council.
24 5. Combined Project Concept/Vendor RFP Process for E/C Facility and Export Option.
25 A. Finalize project concepts and goals;performance specifications; vendor survey.
26 B. Receive biosolids performance specifications from RWQCP/consultant.
27 C. Public review of project concept, goal, and performance specifications.
28 D. Draft CEQA checklist & initial study (informational only to be used for performance specifications).
29 E. Prepare Vendor RFP.
30 F. Public review of draft Vendor RFP.
31 G. City Council presentation of final Vendor RFP/Authorize release.
32 H. Companies prepare proposals.
33 I. Proposal evaluation & financial analysis.
34 J. Public review of proposal evaluation & financial analysis.
35 K. City Council decision on E/C Facility or Export & Biosolids recommendations/Provide results of
biosolids management solutions to RWQCP.
36 L. Contract negotiation.
37 1. If City Council selects E/C Facility option.
38 i. E/C Facility contract negotiation.
39 ii. Contract consideration by City Council withholding contract award until after CEQA iscompleted.
40 iii. Contract approval by City Council.
41 2. If City Council selects Export option.
42 i. Export contract renegotiation and biosolids contract negotiation.
43 ii. Contract approval by City Council.
62 6. Biosolids Facility Planning.
63 A. Additional Option Development.
64 1. Gasification: Monitor San Jose Pilot Study.
65 2. Gasification: Contact Owners & Vendors of Exist. Gasification Systems.
66 3. Potential Option to Contract with San Jose - Discussion with SJ Staff.
67 4. Monitor BAB2E Project Development.
68 B. Consultant Procurement.
69 1. Prepare & advertise RFP.
70 2. Consultant Selection, Award & Contract Negotiation.
71 3. Consultant evaluates options.
72 C. Prepare Biosolids Facility Plan (Consultant).
73 1. Prepare biosolids facility plan.
74 a. E/C Facility provides results of proposal evaluations to Biosolids Facility Plan.
75 b. Present biosolids management solutions to City Council.
76 c. Finalize biosolids facility plan.
77 d. City Council accepts Biosolids Facility Plan.
20 7. Landfill Capping.
21 A. City Council decision on capping design.
22 B. Design closure.
23 C. Construct closure.
44 8. Project Implementation.
45 A. If E/C facility then (combined):
46 1. EIR/permitting.
47 2. City Council approval of CEQA.
48 2. Design/construction.
49 3. Operations.
50 B. If export (combined):
51 1. Continue service with Green Waste or Modify organics management.
52 2. Transition/Handling/Startup of biosolids.
53 3. Service commences for biosolids.
54 C. If Biosolids Project Implementation (separate).
55 1. CEQA EIR.
56 2. City Council accepts CEQA document.
57 3. Bid and Award.
58 4. Design Development and Final Design.
59 5. Construction.
60 6. Testing, Performance Verification and Startup.
61 7. Full Operation (retire incinerators when ready).
F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N DHalf 1, 2012 Half 2, 2012 Half 1, 2013 Half 2, 2013 Half 1, 2014 Half 2, 2014 Half 1, 2015 Half 2, 2015 Half 1, 2016 Half 2, 2016 Half 1, 2017 Half 2, 2017 Half 1, 2018 Half 2, 2018 Half 1, 2019 Half 2, 2019
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Energy-Compost Facility & Biosolids Facility Plan TimelineJuly 2, 2012
1
120625 sm 010
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C11136602
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
Alternative Resources, Inc.
This Amendment No.2 to Contract No. C11136602
(“Contract”) is entered into ________________, by and between the
CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of
the State of California (“CITY”), and Alternative Resources, Inc.,
a corporation in the State of Massachusetts, located at 1732 Main
Street, Concord, Massachusetts, 01742-3837 (“CONTRACTOR”).
R E C I T A L S:
WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the
parties for the provision of preparation of a Feasibility Study for
a Dry Anaerobic Digestion Facility; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms,
conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
SECTION 1. Section 4 of the Contract is hereby amended
to read as follows:
“Section 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The
compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of
the Services described in Exhibit “A” (Amendment No. 2),
including both payment for professional services,
reimbursable expenses, and additional services shall not
exceed two hundred ninety thousand two hundred twenty-
four dollars $290,224 for a not to exceed contract total
of $517,682.”
SECTION 2. The following exhibit to the Contract is
hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment to this
Amendment, which is incorporated in full by this reference:
a. Exhibit “A” entitled “Scope of Services”.
b. Exhibit “B” entitled “Schedule of Performance”.
c. Exhibit “C” entitles “Compensation”.
SECTION 3. Except as herein modified, all other
provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent
amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly
authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date
first above written.
2
120625 sm 010
APPROVED :
Ci ty Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
Senior As s t . City Attorney
Tit 1e , __ ~+---,-,-,,-,-,.l_---,' ?<-'-f'._'--___ _
Attachments :
EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES
EXHIBIT "B": SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
EXHIBIT "c ": COMPENSATION
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
3
120625 sm 010
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK
The project is to carry out Energy/Compost Facility Action Plan
recommendations. The project site includes a 10 acre area of
Byxbee Park. Back in November 2011 Measure E was passed which
undedicated 10 acres of parkland for consideration of an
energy/compost facility. In addition area inside the Palo Alto
Regional Water Quality Control Plant will also be considered.
These recommendations include moving forward with developing
performance specifications for the processing of the various
organic materials including food waste, green waste, and
biosolids. In addition, the Consultant will prepare a draft
Request for Proposal to be reviewed by the public, staff, and
council. Upon approval from Council the Consultant will send the
RFP out to various vendors. The RFPs will be evaluated and
financial analysis performed on the proposals to compare costs of
the each proposal and export options so Council can make an
informed decision on whether to move forward with the
consideration of the energy/compost facility or export option.
BACKGROUND
In February 2012 Council directed staff to prepare an action plan
for the consideration of an energy compost facility to be
considered on the 10 acre section of undedicated parkland located
in Byxbee Park. The 10 acres of parkland were undedicated in
November of 2011 by the passage of measure E.
Since this time a draft action plan has been prepared by the
City’s consultant ARI. A public meeting has been held in April
2012 to get input from the public about the action plan. Staff
will go to council in July 2012 to present the draft action plan
to Council and seek further direction from council. Staff will
propose moving forward with the action plan recommendation of
preparing performance specifications, surveying prospective
companies in the industry, preparing an RFP, evaluating Proposals
and doing a financial analysis of the Proposals.
PROJECT APPROACH
The Consultant will assist the City in developing performance
specifications, survey prospective companies in the industry,
develop an RFP for an energy/compost facility, evaluate the
Proposals, and provide financial analysis of the Proposals.
CONSULTANT SERVICES
TASK 13a:Finalize Project Concepts, Goals and Performance
Specifications
The Consultant shall complete and prepare a description of
Project Concepts, Goals and Performance Specifications as
initially put forth in the Action Plan. The Consultant shall
review the project concepts, goals and performance specifications
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
4
120625 sm 010
as outlined in the Action Plan and assist the City in
establishing positions relative to these parameters. As part of
this task, a survey of prominent companies in the industry shall
be conducted by the Consultant. The survey shall included
updated market positions (from those obtained during the RFI
Process used during the Feasibility Study) regarding company
interest, appropriate technology, performance requirements, site
space needs, project delivery methods/constraints, and business
terms/risk allocation, including the potential for private
financing and ownership. This information shall be used to help
formulate the project concepts, goals and performance
specifications that shall be incorporated into the Request for
Proposal (RFP) described in Task 13d). The Consultant shall have
two meetings with City staff to review project concepts, goals
and performance specifications, the first meeting shall establish
an updated list of such parameters prior to the industry survey,
and the second meeting shall include review of the survey results
and discussion of the impacts on these parameters. A memorandum
shall be prepared to describe the results of this task.
TASK 13b:Public Review of Project Concepts, Goals and Performance
Specifications
The Consultant shall provide an electronic copy of the memorandum
from Task 13a) to be made available to the public via the City’s
web site and conduct a public meeting to discuss the memorandum
and take public comments. The Consultant shall incorporate
public comments into the Draft RFP to be prepared in Task 13d).
TASK 13c:Prepare CEQA Checklist
The Consultant shall prepare the CEQA Environmental Checklist
Form. Mitigation measures shall be considered based on the
project concept, goals and performance specifications developed
in Task 13a), the proposed site, and the Program Environmental
Impact Report recently prepared by the California Department of
Recycling and Recovery “Statewide Anaerobic Digester Facilities
for the Treatment of Municipal Organic Solid Waste”. Mitigation
measures identified shall be included as design and/or operating
performance standards in the Draft RFP to be prepared in
Task 13d). The Consultant shall provide a copy of the draft CEQA
Checklist for staff review. Public comment on the CEQA checklist
shall be included as part of the public review of the Draft RFP.
Following public review, a final CEQA checklist and work plan
for the preparation of needed CEQA review documents shall be
prepared.
TASK 13d: Request for Proposals (RFP) for In-City and Export
Options
The Consultant shall prepare a Draft RFP and a Final RFP based on
comments on the Draft RFP received from the public and City
Council in Task 13e) and Task 13f). The Consultant shall prepare
a single RFP for processing food scraps, yard trimmings and
biosolids. The RFP shall seek firm technical and price proposals
for both In-City and Export options.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
5
120625 sm 010
Using input on project concepts, goals and performance
specifications and on environmental mitigation from Tasks 13a),
13b) and 13c), a Draft RFP shall be prepared for City staff,
public and City Council review. The RFP shall include the
following sections:
Introduction and Statement of City Goals and Objectives
Project and Site(s) Information, including estimates of the
quantity and a description of food scraps, yard trimmings
and biosolids, site information, and City proposed pricing
for purchase of electricity, gas or fuel.
Scope of Services, including performance specifications
Terms and Conditions of Contract (to be prepared by City
legal Counsel)
Procurement Process and Schedule
Proposal Evaluation Process and Evaluation Criteria
Instructions to Proposers for submitting a Proposal,
including process for and content of the Proposal
Appendices to provide background information on food scraps,
yard trimmings and biosolids, the site, etc.
The City or its designee shall provide background information
about the site, the RWQCP, food scraps, yard trimmings, and
biosolids, and energy purchase. Information regarding acceptable
biosolids processes and performance; i.e., anaerobic digestion,
gasification or export will be provided by the City and/or other
consultants and advisors. The Consultant shall review said
information, consult with the City and its designee as needed,
integrate and include the information in the Draft RFP. The
Consultant shall meet with City Staff to present the Draft RFP.
Staff comments shall be incorporated into the Draft RFP.
TASK 13e: Public Review of Draft RFP
The Consultant shall prepare a summary power point presentation
of the Draft RFP and the CEQA Checklist, participate in a public
meeting to present the Draft RFP and CEQA Checklist, and take
public comment on the Draft RFP and CEQA Checklist. The Draft
RFP and CEQA Checklist shall be made available for public review
through the City’s web site.
TASK 13f: Presentation of Draft and Final RFP to City Council
Following public review in Task 13e), the Consultant shall
provide a power point presentation of the Draft RFP to City
Council. The Consultant shall incorporate any public and Council
comments of the draft RFP and prepare a Final RFP. The Final RFP
shall be presented to Council for consideration for authorization
to release the RFP to companies for proposal preparation.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
6
120625 sm 010
TASK 13g: Release Final RFP, Respond to Proposer Question
Upon release of the Final RFP by the City, the Consultant shall
prepare Addenda to the RFP to respond to Proposer questions, and
prepare for and participate in a Pre-Proposal Information Meeting
and Site Visit. Up to five (5) Addenda shall be prepared to
respond to Proposer questions.
TASK 13h: Proposal Review and Evaluation, Financial Analysis of
Alternatives
The Consultant shall review and evaluate the technical and price
proposals for In-City and Export options in accordance with the
Proposal review process and evaluation criteria described in the
Final RFP. The Consultant shall meet with City staff to discuss
the preliminary review of Proposals, participate in interviews
with the Proposers over a two day period, seek clarification to
Proposals as needed from the Proposers, and complete a final
review and recommend ranking of Proposals. In addition, the
Consultant shall complete a financial analysis to compare the
cost of the Proposals for In-City and Export options and compare
the costs to continuing current practices or modified management
practices with Green Waste for food scraps and yard trimmings.
The results of the ARI review shall be summarized in a power
point presentation. For purposes of this Work Scope, it has been
assumed that up to six (6) Proposals will be received by the
City.
TASK 13i: Public Review of Proposal Evaluation and Financial
Analysis
The Consultant shall present a summary of the Proposals received
and their evaluation at a public meeting. Information of a
confidential nature, or that which may negatively impact contract
negotiations, will not be presented. The summary presentation
shall be made available for public review on the City’s web site.
TASK 13j: Presentation of Proposal Evaluation and Financial
Analysis to City Council
The Consultant shall present to City Council a summary of the
Proposal evaluation and financial analysis. The intent of this
meeting is to seek City Council guidance regarding the selection
of a preferred approach for management of food scraps, yard
trimmings and biosolids, and a Preferred Proposer with whom to
enter into contract negotiations. The summary presentation
shall be posted on the City’s web site for public review.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
7
120625 sm 010
EXHIBIT “B”
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE FOR ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY ACTION PLAN
RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCLUDE PREPARING PERFORMANCE SPECIFICAITONS,
SURVEYING VENDORS, PREPARTION OF DRAFT AND FINAL RFP, RFP
EVALUTAION, AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF PROPOSALS
TASK MILESTONE DESRIPTION
COMPLETION NO OF
WORKING MONTHS FROM
NTP
13a
Finalize Project
Concepts, Goals and
Performance
Specifications
6
13b
Public Review of
Project Concepts,
Goals and Performance
Specifications
3-4
13c Prepare CEQA
Checklist 4
13d
Request for Proposals
(RFP) for In-City and
Export Options
7
13e Public Review of
Draft RFP 5
13f Presentation of Final
RFP to City Council 7
13g
Release Final RFP,
Respond to Proposer
Question
7-Release RFP
13-Last Response
13h
Proposal Review and
Evaluation, Financial
Analysis of
Alternatives
14-Start
19-Finish
13i
Public Review of
Proposal Evaluation
and Financial
Analysis
18
13j
Presentation of
Proposal Evaluation
and Financial
Analysis to City
Council
20
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
8
120625 sm 010
EXHIBIT “C” (Page 1 of 2)
COMPENSATION
The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for
professional services performed in accordance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the
budget schedule below. Compensation shall be paid to the
CONSULTANT on a Not To Exceed basis for preparing
performance specifications, surveying vendors, preparing a
draft and final RFPs for an Energy/Compost Facility,
evaluating the RFPs, and performing a financial analysis of
the RFP costs.
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this
Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A”
(Amendment No. 2) including the reimbursable expenses shall
not exceed $263,840 for a total contract total not to exceed
$517,682. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Tasks, including
reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY
authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation
shall not exceed $290,224 or ten percent (10%) of the total
contract amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for
which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum
amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost
to the CITY.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
9
120625 sm 010
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as
outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s project manager may
approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between
any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the
total compensation for the tasks, including reimbursable
expenses and add alternates, does not exceed $263,840 and
the total compensation for Additional Services does not
exceed $290,224 for Amendment No. 2 and $517,682 for the
total contract.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
10
120625 sm 010
EXHIBIT “C” (Page 2 of 2)
FEES
RESPOND TO PUBLIC QUESTIONS/INQUIRIES ON FINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY;
ASSIST CITY IN DETERMINING AN ACTION PLAN FOR AN AD FACILITY
FOLLOWING THE PASSAGE OF MEASURE E
TASK DESCRIPTION NOT TO EXCEED FEE
ORIGINAL CONTRACT FEES – AUGUST 5, 2010
1 - 9
Workplan,
Feasibility Study,
Environmental
Review, Project
Management
$171,858
10 Additional Services
(Not to Exceed) $18,000
Reimbursable expenses $7,900
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE – ORIGINAL
CONTRACT $197,758
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 FEES – DECEMBER 2011
11 - 12
Respond to public
comments from final
feasibility study
and revise
PowerPoint
Presentation;
Develop Action Plan
$22,750
Estimated reimbursable expenses $4,250
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE for all Tasks $27,000
Additional Services (10% of all Tasks) $2,700
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE (Contract
Amendment No.1) $29,700
CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2 FEES – May 2012
13a
Finalize Project
Concepts, Goals and
Performance
Specifications
$23,808
13b
Public Review of
Project Concepts,
Goals and
Performance
Specifications
$4,140
13c Prepare CEQA
Checklist $25,256
13d Request for
Proposals (RFP) for $93,366
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO.: C11136602
11
120625 sm 010
In-City and Export
Options
13e Public Review of
Draft RFP $4,320
13f
Presentation of
Draft and Final RFP
to City Council
$5,960
13g
Release Final RFP,
Respond to Proposer
Question
$18,824
13h
Proposal Review and
Evaluation,
Financial Analysis
of Alternatives
$62,378
13i
Public Review of
Proposal Evaluation
and Financial
Analysis
$6,552
13j
Presentation of
Proposal Evaluation
and Financial
Analysis to City
Council
$5,096
Estimated reimbursable expenses $14,140
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE for all Tasks $263,840
Additional Services (10% of all Tasks) $26,384
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE (Contract
Amendment No. 2) $290,224
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE (Contract
Amendment No. 1) $29,700
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE – ORIGINAL
CONTRACT Additional Services – ORIGINAL
CONTRACT
$197,758
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED FEE for all Tasks and
Additional Services $517,682
Attachment D
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE REFUSE FUND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR
2013 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF
$174,157 FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ACTION PLAN AND
TIMELINE FOR CONSIDERATION OF AN ENERGY/COMPOST
FACILITY
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and
determines as follows:
A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article
III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on
June 18, 2012 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2013; and
B.On August 5, 2010, the Council authorized the City
Manager to enter into a contract for $197,758 with Alternative
Resources, Inc.to conduct a feasibility study for an
energy/compost facility (CMR 333:10); and
C. On February 6,2012 the Council authorized the City
Manager to amend the contract with Alternative Resources, Inc.
for $29,700 for development of an action plan and timeline for
an energy/compost facility (Staff Report 2361);and
D. An additional contract amendment is authorized in the
amount of $290,224 with the Refuse Fund, Wastewater Treatment
Fund, and Electric Fund each funding the amendment
proportionally; and
E. The Refuse Fund’s portion is sixty percent or
$174,157; and
F. The Electric Fund’s portion is ten percent or
$29,000; and
G. The Wastewater Treatment Fund’s portion is thirty
percent or $87,067; and
H. No budget action is needed for the Electric Fund or
Wastewater Treatment Fund. City Council authorization is
needed to amend the 2013 Refuse Fund operating budget as
hereinafter set forth.
SECTION 2.The sum of One Hundred Seventy-Four Thousand
One Hundred Fifty-Seven Dollars ($174,157) is hereby
appropriated to Contract Services in the Public Works
Department and the Refuse Fund Operating Reserve is
correspondingly reduced.
SECTION 3. The Refuse Fund Operating Reserve is hereby
reduced to One Million One Hundred Forty-Five Thousand Eight
Hundred Forty-Three Dollars ($1,145,843).
SECTION 4. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the
Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two-thirds vote of the City
Council is required to adopt this ordinance.
SECTION 5. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective
upon adoption.
SECTION 6. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby
finds that this is not a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental
impact assessment is necessary.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Manager
Director of Public Works
Director of Administrative
Services
To: Mayor Yeh and Members of the Palo Alto City Council
Date: June 26, 2012
Re: Another ARI Anaerobic Digester Study
Dear Mayor Yeh and Council Members:
I urge you to postpone the funding of another $230,000 ARI study for a possible
anaerobic digester.
As you are all aware, the fate of Measure E is still not decided. A lawsuit was
filed questioning the validity of Measure E. The judgment is not expected until the
middle of September,2012.
To date the city has spent almost $2,000,000 in an attempt to find a feasible anaerobic
digester process.The last ARI study showed that it would cost more than $200,000,000
to construct and operate this unproven facility for the next 20 years. Funding for such an
risky process with such little result is also probably unlikely.
The City ought to do everything it can to meet its obligation to the State to close
the landfill operation as quickly as possible and to prepare the resulting land to
become the park and open space that was promised to both the State and
the public. What Measure E has done is create a totally chaotic situation wherein the
City’s staff has to guess what needs to be done, to which part of the park,and when.
It is imprudent to continue pouring money into a project that might prove to be
illegal. The City does not have to act now and can wait a minimum time to make such
a critical decision.
Sincerely,
Enid Pearson, former City Council Member and Chair of Save the Baylands Committee
Herb Borock
P. O. Box 632
Palo Alto, CA 94302
~lJNt5 r@jjh 26, 2012
Palo Alto City Council
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
JULY 2, 2012, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
~:~;~l ~f !:I~L ~ At;j)-;til ~rj Y GlcftK'$ tF;'F1
12 JUN 26 PH 4: 43
ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY
Dear City Council:
I urge you to continue this agenda item until after the court makes a
decision in the lawsuit filed by Tom Jordan to invalidate the
election for Measure E that appeared on last November's ballot.
(Santa Clara County Court Case No. 1-11-214483).
The court case will be fully briefed no later than August 23, 2012; a
hearing will be held shortly after that; and the court's decision
will be made no later than sixty days after the hearing and,
possibly, as early as the hearing date.
I believe it makes sense to wait the few months until the court
rules, before authorizing additional expenses to pursue a project
that is estimated to cost $100,000,000.
Should the trial court uphold the validity of Measure E, I see no
reason to ask for any further delay while any appeals of the trial
court's decision are pending.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
D------~"
Herb Borock
8
Gonsalves, Ronna
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Emily Renzel <marshmama2@att.net>
Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:49 PM
Council, City
Don't vote for ARI $ and timeline
7212 city council letter. pages; ATT00001.htm; Measure E Options Maps.pdf;
A TT00002.htm .
Pasted in below and also attached are my comments. Emily
1
Page 1 of 1
June 27, 2012
Dear Mayor Yeh and Members of the City Council:
The passage of Measure E has created a very complicated situation for the proper closure of the landfill and creation of Byxbee Park. The
strategic plan and timeline that you are being asked to approve on July 2 shows that you will have to make a determination in January 2013
about excavating all or part of the 10 acre site and dumping it on the remaining unopened 51 acres ofByxbee Park. This is long before
you have the results of the Request for Proposals.
This is a travesty! As far as I can tell, the plans for dumping on Byxbee Park meet minimum requirements of the State for landfills, but do
not address impacts on the design of the Park. No time is in the schedule for Site and Design Review by the Planning and Transportation
Commission or the Parks Commission. .
This is all being done to try to make the Anaerobic Digester Project more feasible. It costs about $5 million to dump the excavated
garbage on the park and $10 million to haul it to another approved landfill. Not only should the 10 acre parcel excavations be taken to
another landfill, but the transition from the Park to the 10 acre site should be done within the 10 acre site, NOT on the Park. A 20 foot
cliff is not appropriate adjacent to the Park.
During the election, I was accused by Peter Drekmeier of using Karl Rove tactics when I said that almost 3.5 million cubic feet (122,000
cubic yards) of old garbage would have to be disposed of on the remaining Park. Well. I was wrong! It is over 6.5 million cubic feet
(242,600 cubic yards) that will be dumped on the Park. Attached are the various disposal scenarios that use the 51 acre Park. You can
readily see that these have massive impacts--either creating more inaccessible slopes or raising the Park elevation to 80' from its current
60' maximum height.
file:1 1 IC:/U sers/rgonsal/ AppDataILocallMicrosoftlWindowslTemporary%20Intemet%20Fil... 6/27/2012
Page 1 of 1
I do not yet have the complete Staff Report, but it is clear that you are being asked to spend another $290,224 to pursue a Request for
Proposals on the 10 acre site and to make other significant deCisions related to the site before you have any true cost figures, before the
lawsuit is resolved, and before you know how much land vendors actually need. The Feasibility Study used for the election assumed:
1. That 20,000 tpy of food waste would be processed here. We don't even have a residential food waste collection system at the
present time.
1. That there is a $30/ton carbon offset. That is a comparison method, but it is not real dollars to pay for the project. Those dollars
will have to be charged to the ratepayers.
1. Grants for 15% of the capital costs.
I. That nearby markets exist for food waste compost and biosolids compost. They do not. Noone will buy biosolids compost
without extensive and expensive heat treatment. Faimers will not use Food waste compost.
1. No rent for land previously valued at over $100,000/acre rent. That is contrary to the Enterprise Fund policy of recovering
fair market value rent for use of General
Fund assets.
The source of the money for this budget amendment has not been identified but presumably it will ultimately come from Palo Alto
ratepayers. It's not coinCidental that this budget amendment is coming to you in the 2012-13 fy. Otherwise you would have had to raise
refuse rates even higher this year.
By approving the Budget amendment, the strategic plan, and the timeline, you are setting yourselves up for all sorts of crazy decision
making with inadequate information, inadequate environmental review, and novel technologies.
Please defer a decision on this matter until the questions raised above have been resolved.
Sincerely,
Emily M. Renzel, Coordinator
Baylands Conservation Committee
P.S. I'm sure I'll have more to say once I see the Staff Report.
file:1 1 IC:/U sers/rgonsal/ AppDatalLocallMicrosoftlWindowsrr emporary%20Intemet%20Fil... 6/27/2012
f"/
\
I:
l
~~
~
V"
LEGEND'
- -• -LIMIT OF LANDFILL
- - -LIMIT OF PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
-----20-----FINAL COVER GRADING
NOTES
load
Grntlill!! Iiem
~~ttttrlt:tif
~"""Va'!Iim \loL(G\!Ic
ThttaYsroittrr\pDrt
.. MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXIMATE AREA OF BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDFILL
COVER GRADES HIGHER THAN
2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN
1. BASED ON MERGED SURFACE OF 2009 FINAL GRAOING PLAN AND MAY J. 2010 TOPOGRAPHY SURVEYED
BY HJW GEOSPATIAL. INC.
2. ADDITIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOVE 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 242.400 CY.
Ie An aptkui
FIll Vol. 1M ~
I",..;li'."..tk ·-IT.B .... ""tind~<l<>
200 a 200
SCALE FEET
FIGURE 1
REVISED FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
10-AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "E" ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL
' ... ,/
" . "''''~ ", /
;;,,!
\~,
//
/
; ,-I'T'\'" \\\\\\\\\.
\ \ \ \ ~\ \ \ 1\\\\\\'\'
'\\\\\\ " \ \\\\~\>~"" "<\
\ \ \ \ ~, '\." \ \ \\\\'\~'\\'\ \ \ \ ... \ \ \ \ \ ,,',.... \ \ \ \ \, , ............ J \ \
" '-''-......_ -'-' I \ "'-' ............ '-_. ___ .J J
.... .....-. "'" ,...... -_._--_.-
............. _--
\"l '-, ' ~ ' .... , .{t "-
--'Il1o.. --r a=. Sacromento. CA
PROJECT No. OB397260 FILE No. WS~PSACE
.~ ... >"".'" '-<,j ''\' ~'~ '''', '\:.:, ,-.. ,;.
vi'
LEGEND
..~::.': :: ....
- -• -LIMIT OF LANDFILL
- - -LIMIT OF PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
-----20-----FINAL COVER GRADING
NOTES --MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXIMATE AREA OF BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDFILL
COVER GRADES HIGHER THAN
2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN
1. BASED ON MERGED SURFACE OF MAY. .5 2010 TOPOGRAPHY AND 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN.
2. ADDmONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOVE 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 245.700 CY.
200 o
SCALE'
200 ~ FEE.
FIGURE 2
ALTERNATIVE FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
10-AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "E" ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL
D
~
--'III. --,.
~
·.6l!;5!lO.
! lUotiH :;UH t%'ipUrt. SQilOO
. \. ....
\ ......•
',<~, "'~" "'~;
LEGEND
- - . -LIMIT OF LANDFILL
- - -LIMIT OF PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
-----20-----FINAL COYER GRADING
NOTES l1li
MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXlt,lATE AREA OF BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDFILL
COYER GRADES HIGHER THAN
2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN
1. BASED ON MERGED SURFACE OF MAY. 3 2010 TOPOGRAPHY AND 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN.
2. ADDITIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOYE 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 71.000 CY.
200 o 200
SCALE FEET
FIGURE 3
REVISED FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
7 -AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "E" ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL
~
~
L. {/
.,,;" "
.. _jtf./ .
'\~ ....•
·/
----1
, ..... .
~
.... ,
"i-.
"~ .. . ..... -
,.,.,
/ .... ".,'
/ / /
/
"i 'i""\', "\\< \ "'1
\
\
! .... \ i '\\ \ \ '\ \ \ \ \, \ \ \
. \ \ \ "\\ \ , " \ \ \ \ \ '\" ", "
\ \,
\ \
\ , \ \ 1&\ \ \ \
\ , '\' ~\ ''\ '" " \ \ \ \.\ ", \ \ \ \\\\\,~\\\\
\ \
\ \ '\ ~ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ " '\ \ \\ \\", '\\.
\ '"'' "",_.J , \ \ \ ""-, )1\
" "-. -----I \ "... ......---_._._-_._-'" j '... --/ ..... ..... _-----
\ \ \ \
\ \
\ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
! \ _-J J ""-----5&-----.-_/ / ---_/
\..
"\ (~
, \.:'''' . ~.~ ... ~~" \~,/ "
--<III..
~ a:t:. Sacramento. CA
'<,~ .... ' '\.'~" ',."", ~'<~~~~~£ :~::~;~ ...
LEGEND
- -• -LIMIT OF LANDFILL
- - -LIMIT OF PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
-----20-----FINAL COVER GRADING
NOTES --MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXIMATE AREA OF BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDFILL
COVER GRADES HIGHER THAN
2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN
1. BASED ON MERGED SURFACE OF MAY, J 2010 TOPOGRAPHY AND 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN.
2. ADDITIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOVE 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 70,000 CY.
200 I!!!
"CALE
o 200
FEET
FIGURE 4
ALTERNATIVE FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
7 -AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "E" ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL
~ "i
~
\~-
',~C
RETAINING WALL
(10.5-FEET HIGH)
..... ---r
~
---. -LIMIT OF LANDFILL
- - -LIMIT OF PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
·----20-----FINAL COVER GRADING
NOTES
Gta I"""
.. __ ~hl~L ___ -I-
Padl'fhRn over'-eteavatktn iij!;!l!I!l
f//
(I 1--' I ',"'j ,', .-"" , I \ , ,\ \ , \ \' \
\ \ \ \ \\ \. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \. \ \ " \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ "\ " " \ \ \ \ \' \ \ \," \ \ \ \ \ r.s\ ',,-\, \ \ \ \ \ \\ '" " ", \ \ \ \\\\'\~''\_'\\\ \ ,\\"~,,,,,\\
'\ ' \ " " '. \ \ \ \ \
\ '\ \, "'-..,,""-..... -...... --\ \ \ \ "
'\',,"'-'-...... .... _, __ 1 \ \\'
" '\ '-... "_..... J \ \ ' " ,,-..... , -,--j , \ \\
" ' ..... , ---------___ ._/1 \ \ ""'~==~~=~:====~-)
200
MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXIMATE AREA OF BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDFILL
COVER GRADES HIGHER THAN
2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN
SCALE
o 200
FEET
1. BASED ON MERGED SURFACE OF MAY. 3 2010 TOPOGRAPHY AND 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN.
FIGURE 5
REVISED FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
5.4-AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "En ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL 2. ADDITIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOVE 2009 FINAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 33.300 CY.
-A.. --r
.~ Sacramento, CA
PROJECT Nil. 06397260 filE No. W5-AlRPSACE CAnD JDR DATE
- -• -LIMIT Of LANDfiLL
- - -LIMIT Of PROPOSED BUILDING PAD
-----20-----fiNAL COVER GRADING
NOTES
MERGED TOPOGRAPHY (NOTE 1)
APPROXIMATE AREA Of BUILDING
PAD LOCATED OVER LANDfiLL
1. BASED ON MERGED SURfACE OF MAY. 3 2010 TOPOGRAPHY AND 2009 fiNAL GRADING PLAN.
2. ADDITIONAL REFUSE DISPOSAL ABOVE 2009 fiNAL GRADING PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 0 CY.
SCALE fEET
FIGURE 6
REVISED FINAL COVER GRADING PLAN
3.8-AC DEVELOPMENT AREA
MEASURE "En ENERGY/COMPOST FACILITY OPTIONS
PALO ALTO LANDFILL