i9 Og~ov~~ I ~
~~
COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST
PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST
AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT.
MADE BY: Commissioner Williams OFFICE: Precinct 2
MEETING DATE: September 10, 2007 TIME PREFERRED:
SUBJECT: (Please be specific). Consider, discuss and take appropriate action to amend
the Kerr County EDAP Application, requesting only Planning Activities Funding.
EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED:
NAME OF PERSON(S) ADDRESSING THE COURT: Commissioners Williams.
ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION.
IF PERSONNEL MATTER-NAME OF EMPLOYEE:
Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in
accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows:
Meeting scheduled for Mondays: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY:
THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON:
All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate
information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court
meetings. Your cooperation is appreciated and contributes toward your request being addressed
at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rule adopted by Commissioners Court.
August 17, 2007
The Honorable Bill Williams, Commissioner
Kerr County
700 Main
Kerrville, TX 78028
Ref: Kerr County
Economically Distressed Areas Program Application
Dear Commissioner Williams:
We received Kerr County's (County) application for financial assistance through the Texas Water
Development Board's (Board) Economically Distressed Areas Program (EDAP) on June 1, 2007.
Board staff has completed its preliminary review of the application and have compiled the attached
documentation which includes comments and requests for additional information.
The financial assistance application indicates that the County is applying for Planning, Acquisition
and Design funding for its wastewater collection project.
Application amount: $12,670,000
General project description: To construct a wastewater collection system for the Center Point
area.
Please be advised that under the current EDAP rules in Title 31 Tex. Admin. Code 363 only 50%
grant funding for Planning, Acquisition and Design can be approved without a nuisance finding from
the Texas Department of State Health Services (TDSHS). Currently the County does not have a
nuisance survey determination, and therefore, would be limited to 50% of the Planning, Acquisition
and Design costs being requested. Based on the information submitted, it appears that the most
expedient way to provide assistance to the County is to implement a schedule that will allow you to
complete the necessary Planning activities first, before an application is submitted for the other
project costs. Under this scenario, the Board may be able to approve a 75% grant for the Planning
costs. In some instances, the Board may be able to approve in excess of 75% grant for this portion
of the project.
Once the EDAP Planning activities are completed and approved by Board staff, a separate request
for Acquisition and Design funding may be presented to the Board for additional financial
assistance. This approach will allow the County the opportunity to obtain a nuisance finding
(lacr Missioia
leaderslrit~, platzning, financial assistance, infor ,oration, and education for the conservation and responsible development of water for Texas.
P.O. Box 13231 • 1700 N. Congress Avenue • Austin, Texas 787] 1-3231
Telephone (512) 463-7847 • Fax (512) 475-2053 • I-800-RELAYTX {for the hearing impured)
~~~ww.twdb.state.tx.us • info@twdb.state.tx.us ~ ~L/
INRIS -Texas Natural Resources Irfortration System ^ www.tnris.state.tx.us
~ Mernber of the Texas Geographic Inforrranrian Council (TGICj
`'~Irrr~,. G. Rod Putman. l'i2:tir=nary hack Huai. [/ice Cheri,!;ucn
William W. meadows. Prlc-rnber J. Kevin Ward Theiz~as Weir Labate HI, NlernUer
Dario Vidat GueTa, ~r., Me.%nber ~xect_ti.~e rte=ninistrcr.or James E. Her:ina, Mc-,~2her
Commissioner Williams
August 16, 2007
Page 2
from the TDSHS to potentially qualify for up to 100% grant funding for Acquisition and Design
Phases.
It will be necessary for you to decide whether you would like to proceed with a funding application
as described above before we can complete the review of your application. Please advise us as soon
as possible. Also, you will need to address the specific comments detailed in Attachment #1, before
we can complete our review. The resolution of these issues will be necessary before staff can
submit a recommendation to the Board for consideration and approval of financial assistance.
The team assigned to your project includes:
Team Lead: Francia Harutunian, 512/463-8271; francia.harutunian(a~twdb.state.tx.us
Financial Analyst: Jessica Zuba, 512/475-3734; jessica.zuba(a~twdb.state.tx.us
Engineer: Darrell Nichols, 512/463-8491; Jarrell.nichols(a~twdb.state.tx.us
Environmental: Ray Mathews, 512/936-0822; ra~mathews(a,twdb.state.tx.us
Legal: Joe Reynolds, 512/936-2414; joe.Reynolds(c~twdb.state.tx.us
We have attached six documents to this letter for your use and/or information. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mrs. Harutunian or any of the team members at the
telephone numbers or e-mail addresses shown above. We look forward to working with you.
'ncerely,
a . Lavi
Associate Deputy Executive Administrator
Office of Project Finance and Construction Assistance
ADL:FCH: mfr
Attachments: # 1 Financial Assistance Application -Outstanding Information
#2 WRD 006 B - TWDB-EDAP Application Procedures (Planning Phase)
#3 Project Budget
#4 WRD 023 -EDAP 2 Planning Phase
#5 Model Subdivision Rule §364.12
#6 Environmental Assessment - ED 001
cc: Mr. Al Groves, P.E., Tetra Tech, 501 Soledad, San Antonio, TX 78205
O TETRATECH
September 7, 2007
Bill Williams
County Commissioner
Ken County, Texas
700 Main Street
Kerrville, Texas ?8028
Reference: EDAP Financial Assistance Application
Dear Commissioner Williams:
Below are responses to the questions from TWDB regarding the submitted Engineering Documentation
in their August 17, 2007 letter. Except where noted that we understand the information is coming from
others (Item 2 below), please feel free to directly copy the answers provided into the compiled response
along with the financial and legal responses.
1. Median Household Income: The data for Median Household Income in the Application for
Financial Assistance was incorrect. The correct amount, based on a 2005 survey and adjusted
to 2007 dollars, is $27,840 (see attached letters for further documentation).
2. Details of inadeguacy of current wastewater facilities: We understand this question will be
addressed by county personnel, specifically using inspections of septic systems.
3. Established Residence in Center Point: Attached are two random Kerr County Appraisal
District records that document residency within the Center Point Area prior to June 1, 2005.
4. Breakdown of En ig•n~eering Fees: Please see attached budget which provides a breakdown of
Engineering and other costs, based on the format provided by TWDB.
5. Breakdown of existing vs. new residences served: The intent of the design is to maximize
service to the existing residents of the Center Point area and the regional area between Center
Point and Comfort. The system size is based on the approximately 450 existing connections.
Based on preliminary investigation of school enrollment and other data, an estimated recent
growth rate of 2.5% could be used. This rate of growth and the basis of 3.0 persons per
household projects approximately 2210 residents at the end of twenty years (450 * 3.0
1.025^20). Estimating wastewater volume at 100 gpd per person, the demand at the end of 20
years would be for about 221,000 gpd. Utilizing a 4.0 peak factor, which yields a peak flow of
885,000 gpd, a minimum line size of 12" would be adequate at the minimum slope. Therefore,
the proposed 12" gravity transmission pipe is based on providing service only to existing
connections and the associated natural growth. We have not included any new development
beyond this in the design basis.
T ~tra Tech. Inr:.
501 Soledad Street, San Antonio; TX 78205
Tsi 210.226.2922 :pax 210.226.8497 www.tetratech.com
O TETRATECH
Mr. Williams
September 7, 2007
Page 2
6. Cost/Price Summary for Engineering Consultant Services: Please see attached budget which
provides a breakdown of Engineering and other costs, based on the format provided by
TWUB.
7. Project Budget for the planning phase: Please see attached budget which provides a
breakdown of Engineering and other costs, based on the format provided by TWDB.
8. Proj_eet Schedule: Please see attached milestone schedule.
If you have any questions, please contact us at (210) 226-2922.
Sincerely,
Jaime Kypuros, P.E.
Project Engineer
KD/jk
P:\PU931 U\UUU 1 \WordproDrafts\FinAppResponse. doc
CLIENT: Kerr County
PROJECT: EDAP Application
Project 1 Project 2
ENGINEER: Tetra Tech, Inc.
JOB NO.: 09310-0001-00
TOTAL
Basic En ineerin reference WRD 0238					
Plannin Cate o A	$	16,320	$ -	$	16,320
Plannin Cate o B	$	29,800	$ -	$	29,800
Plannin Cate o C	$	14,520	$ -	$	14,520
Plannin Cate o D	$	33,600	$ -	$	33,600
Plannin Other	$	8,950	$ -	$	8,950
S ecial En ineerin Services					
Environmental /Cultural	$	135,000	$ -	$	135,000
Surve in / Ma s	$	85,810	$ -	$	85,810
Geotechnical / Testin	$	46,000	$ -	$	46,000
Ins ection	$	-	$ -	$	
Permittin	$	15,000	$ -	$	15,000
O&M	$	-	$ -	$	
Other	$	-	$ -	$	
					
Planning Engineerin Subtotal	$	385,000	-		385,000
Desi n En ineerin Plans 8~ S ecs. $ 600,000 $ - $ 600,000
Construction Cost $ 9,936,500 $ - $ 9,936,500
Administration Costs $ 95,000 $ - $ 95,000
Easement !Land Acquisition
Ac uisition	$ 100,000	$ -	$ 100,000
A raisal	$ 50,000	$ -	$ 50,000
Le al	$ 100,000	$ -	$ 100 000
Other	$ -	$ -	$
Closing and Issuance Costs
Fiscal Fee financial advisor	$	50,000	$ -	$	50,000
Le al Fees bond counsel	$	100,000	$ -	$	100,000
Bond Insurance	$	55,000	$ -	$	55 000
Insurance / Suret	$	65,000	$ -	$	65,000
Ori ination Fee	$	230,140	$ -	$	230,140
Other Details
Water Ri hts	$ -	$ -	$
Ca acit Bu -In	$ -	$ -	$
Other	$ -	$ -	$
Contin enc $ 903,360 $ - $ 903,360
TOTAL $12,670,000 $ - $12,670,000
EDAP Budget Estimate.xls, SUMMARY Page 1 of 1 Printed on 9/7/2007
CLIENT: KerrCqunty
PROJECT: EDAP Application
A. 6lgibllky Assassmerrt
2. Demonstrate Sewer Service Inadequauy
3. Document Financial Resources of Residents
4. Demonstrate Occupancy on June 1, 2005
5. Tabulate Eligide Households
6. Submit Maps Delineating EDAP Area(s)
Category A Total
B. Existing Facliides and ProbNms
7. Define Existirg & Projected Population
8. Describe Existing Facilities
9. Discuss Existing & Projected Water Supply & Demand, Wastewater Form
11. Confirm Ability of Dwellings to Utilize Future Facildies
12. Document Public Consent for Construction
Category B Total
C. AhamaUves and Design Anaysis
13. Specify Preliminary Design Criteria
15. Identify and Evaluate ARernatives for Wastewater Improvements
16. Description of Recommendetl Facilties
17. Specify Percentage of Existing Capacity to Serve EDAP
18. Estimate Water Usage & Wastewater Flows After Completion
19. Submft Ernironmental Report (also D.25f below)
20. Estimate Construction & Operating Costs
Category C Total
D. Finaliis Project
21. Prepare Total Project Budget
22. Prepare Implementation Schedule
23. Confirm Water Conservation & prougM Management Contingency Plans
24. Submit Copies of Agreements
25a. Appraisals of Real Property -See separate sheet
25b. Acquisition of Property -See separate sheet
25c. Prepare & Submtt Wastewater Permits
25f. Environmental Report Qncluded in 10 above)
25g. Hold Public Headrg(s) (Federal Funds)
25h. Resolution Seeking Designated ManagerrxM Authority
25i. Confirmation of Mandatory Hook Up Policy
25j. FMT TraininglCertifigtiondetermination
Category D Total
Planning Other
Environmerhal /Cultural
Subcontador
Archaedogical
Coordination & Support of Subs.
Ernironmental Total
Surveying /Maps
Topographical Subcontractor
Coordination 8 Support oP Topo Sub.
Onsite surveying
Surveying /Maps Total
GeotechnltallTesting
Subcontractor
Coordination 8 Support of Subs.
Geotechnical /Testing Total
Inspection
Preliminary
Final
Inspection Total
PBrmittlng
Prelimirory (fxDOT & Utility Coordination, etc.)
Final
Permitting Total
Operatlons 8 Maintenance DocumerMation
Preliminary
Final
O&M Total
Other
Preliminary
Final
Other Total
Planning Grand Total
Project 1
Lure Item
Subtotal Totals
$ -
$ 4,800
$ 960
$ 960
$ 4,800
$ 4,800
$ 16 320
$14,400
$ 2,880
$ 960
$ -
$ 960
$10,600
$ 29 800
$ 960
$ -
$ 4,800
$ 1,920
$ 120
$ 960
$ 960
$ 4,800
$ 14520
$ 2,880
$ 2,880
$ 4,800
$ a,eoo
$ 4,800
$ 4,800
$ 2,880
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ 2,880
$ 960
$ 960
$ 960
$ 33 600
$ 6,950 $ 8 950
$40,000
$50,000
$45,000
$135 000
$39,910
$ 5,990
$ 39,910
$ 85 810
$40,000
$ 6,000
$ 46 000
$ -
-
$
$15,000
$ 15 000
$ -
-
$ -
$ r
_G~
S 386,000
ENGINEER: Tetra Tech, Inc.
JOB NO.: 09310-Im01-00
EDAP Budget Estimate.xls, Planning Page 1 of 1 Printed on 9!7!2007
__ _. __
~'
O -LL'
N. ~'~..
~:~-.
O!
T.
a
m
N,
a
a!:
''
_~'
~'
~.
rn LL!
N ~ M y
~ a i. ~ ~ ~
z' c ~ ~ g ~
Q .. a ~
~ $ c
3 °' ~ ~ ~ a ~
~ ~ m G VJ
~.. Y ~ ~ a+
d yA, A~ Q ~ r
~' ~~ m w a
'Q ~ " ~ ~
_~~~~W
~,~~~m~ ~
o _.. a ~ ~
_....._.i~ W m
~, W d /~-

c ~,
o~~'
~ ~
~ LL
~~
e m
v
r r` r r r r r r r ~ r~`°
.~aaraa~~a~am~~1arr~ ~
C r r r rW. C Z C C 7 'C 7 CCa LL ~
__.__.
i'a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
,raa~aaMaaacaaaa~~~~
r r r~~~ = c e c *' c~~ t
~ us. a N g ~ ~ ~ YJ ~ N ~ ~ ~ LL
d
Y
a ~
~ ~ P ~
a ~ a ,-6 c CC
'O G 9 O
~, ffi~ d a n oo ~~ ~ c ii a
~ a~ a LL~ ~~~ a~ LL~~ c Q
,. ~+ ~ ~ 4. N ~ ~ d lY C p
~ ~ ~ » ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2
w a mp3 w a y~ m Q~ [~j m~ ~ a g~ i p E ~ ffi Q °' a
Q M I- m U! F U (A F G A 1- Z U~ C W C~~1
m
c
3
m
0
',I
~+
c
y~
F
E
w w~`
E
E
E o
v~ a`
i.
o ._
a
Yyy L..
`N ~
~n
'~ o
~~
LL
~O
a`. o
00
a