AGENDA DATE: 10/7/2015
TITLE:
Title
Ivy MUC - Transfer Station Upgrade
BODY
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Report on alternative scenarios to upgrade the Ivy MUC Transfer Station
ITEM TYPE: Regular Information Item
STAFF CONTACT(S): Walker, Davis, Graham, Henry
PRESENTER (S): Doug Walker, Deputy County Executive
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY: Thomas C. Foley
BACKGROUND: Over the past two years, the Board has considered various options regarding the current transfer station facilities and operation at the Ivy Materials Utilization Center (MUC). In part, the evaluation of alternatives for the continued use of the Ivy MUC has been driven by the need to bring the facility into compliance with applicable Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) regulations. Those regulations require that the transfer station operation be covered to prevent the waste material from being exposed to precipitation.
The Ivy MUC is owned and operated by the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (RSWA) pursuant to an operating agreement involving RSWA, the County and the City of Charlottesville. RSWA holds the VDEQ permit governing the transfer station operation and is guided currently by a Letter Agreement with VDEQ to prepare and present by December 31, 2015 a detailed plan for bringing the transfer station into regulatory compliance. The RSWA and the County have been working collaboratively to develop viable alternatives for consideration by the Board and the RSWA that will address the compliance issues and retain its use as a transfer station.
At its meeting on March 11, 2015, the Board received a report from its consultant, Draper Aden Associates (DAA) describing three alternative transfer station upgrade scenarios. The report is attached (Attachment A).
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Critical Infrastructure: Prioritize, plan and invest in critical infrastructure that responds to past and future changes and improves the capacity to serve community needs.
Natural Resources: Thoughtfully protect and manage Albemarle County’s ecosystems and natural resources in both the rural and development areas to safeguard the quality of life of current and future generations
DISCUSSION: Following a discussion of transfer station options at its meeting on March 11, 2015, the Board reached consensus regarding the need to work closely with RSWA to refine the scope and estimated costs for options that involve the modification of the existing facility, as well as options that require the development of a new facility on a portion of the Ivy MUC property referred to as the “western site.” Further, recognizing that the RSWA is the owner of the property and the holder of the VDEQ permit, the Board directed staff to pursue gaining support from RSWA for one or more of these options so that the Board could have that input prior to a final determination. As part of its March 11 discussion, the Board indicated little interest in a larger, 15,000 plus square foot new transfer station facility. Accordingly, staff and RSWA have not evaluated that alternative further.
The most recent report from DAA is attached (Attachment B). This report, prepared in close collaboration with key representatives of RSWA and with Supervisors Palmer and Mallek, provides a comprehensive assessment of four basic options - two of which involve modifications to the existing transfer station facility and two of which involve the construction of a new transfer station facility on the “western site” as previously described. The report includes the identification of key assumptions that inform the assessment of the four options and provides relevant background information regarding the changes in the use of the facility over the last several years. The report also contains summary descriptions of the options under consideration, a comparison of key aspects that may be meaningful in the relative comparison of the options, and detailed cost estimates for each option related to both capital and operating impacts. The report also includes preliminary site plans and building elevations so that the Board can better visualize how the various options will “fit” on Ivy MUC property.
The information was prepared in response to the Board’s interest in this issue and is being presented at this time for information purposes only with the understanding that the RSWA will receive the report and provide specific information regarding its estimate on the annual operating costs for each option prior to the Board’s November 3, 2015 meeting. At that time, it is reasonably expected that the Board will be in a position to make a final determination regarding the preferred option for an upgraded transfer station at the Ivy MUC, which will then inform the RSWA so that it can prepare and provide the necessary documentation to the VDEQ prior to the December 31, 2015 deadline.
BUDGET IMPACT: Planning level capital cost estimates for the four options that are being considered range from $750,650 to $2,587,200 and have been modified from previous reports to reflect new equipment for the options involving the modification of the existing transfer station facility. The County currently has $1.2M in the FY16 Capital Budget for use on this project. Preliminary operating cost estimates vary for each option and are based on key assumptions involving multiple factors including, but not limited to, debt service/amortization and depreciation, compaction and associated haul weights, personnel requirements, tonnage received, and the assumed useful life of the facility. The RSWA FY16 budget includes $351,426.50 in County funding support for the Ivy MUC transfer station operation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
This information is being provided for information only at this time. It is expected that the Board will make a final determination regarding its preferred option for a transfer station upgrade at its meeting on November 3, 2015.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - 3/3/15 DAA Report
B - 9/29/15 DAA Report