HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/12 1
“Times do not change. We change.” - Henry David Thoreau
AGENDA
HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 - Council Chambers, City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
6:15 p.m. - CLOSED SESSION: See attached Closed Session Agenda
7:00 p.m. - REGULAR MEETING
MAYOR
Jeff Duclos
CITY CLERK
Elaine Doerfling
MAYOR PRO TEM
Patrick ‘Kit’ Bobko
CITY TREASURER
David Cohn
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Michael DiVirgilio
Howard Fishman
Peter Tucker
INTERIM CITY MANAGER
John Jalili
CITY ATTORNEY
Michael Jenkins
All council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND.
The Council receives a packet with detailed information and recommendations on nearly every
agenda item.
City Council agendas and staff reports are available for your review on the City's web site
located at www.hermosabch.org.
Complete agenda packets are also available for public inspection in the Police Department, Fire
Department, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk.
During the meeting, a packet is also available in the
Council Chambers foyer.
Written materials distributed to the City Council within 72 hours of the City Council meeting
are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at
1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California, during normal business hours.
All written communications from the public included in the agenda will be posted with the
agenda on the City’s website
To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices (ALD)
will be available for check out at the meeting.
If you require special assistance to participate in this meeting, you must call or submit your
request in writing to the Office of the City Clerk at (310) 318-0203 at least 48 hours prior to the
meeting.
Your participation in this meeting is in the public domain. Meetings are both cablecast
and streamed live over the Internet. Minutes of this meeting will reflect your participation in
this meeting and are posted on the city’s website
2
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
ANNOUNCEMENTS
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown
Act generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted
agenda as a business item.
1. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the
Council's jurisdiction not on this agenda, on items on this agenda as to which public comment
will not be taken, or to request the removal of an item from the consent calendar. Comments on
public hearing items are heard only during the public hearing. Members of the audience may
also speak:
1) during discussion of items removed from the Consent Calendar;
2) during Public Hearings; and,
3) during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters.
Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker.
The City Council acknowledges receipt of the written communications listed below. No action
will be taken on matters raised in written communications.
The Council may take action to schedule issues raised in oral and written communications for a
future agenda.
Citizens with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are requested to
submit those comments to the City Manager.
NO WRITTEN COMMUNCIATIONS
2. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by
one vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Council member removes an item from the
Consent Calendar. Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 4, with public
comment permitted at that time.
3
(a) Recommendation to approve the following minutes:
1) Minutes of the Adjourned Regular meeting held on June 26, 2012;
2) Minutes of the Regular meeting held on June 26, 2012; and,
3) Minutes of the Special meeting held on July 3, 2012.
(b) Recommendation to ratify check register and to approve cancellation of certain
checks as recommended by the City Treasurer.
(c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items.
(d) Recommendation to receive and file the June 2012 financial reports:
1) Revenue and expenditure report;
2) City Treasurer's report; and,
3) Investment report.
(e) Recommendation to deny the following claim and refer it to the City’s Liability
Claims Administrator. Memorandum from Interim City Manager John Jalili dated
July 17, 2012.
Claimant: Haggerton, Stefanie (on behalf of Amanda Sullivan)
Date of Loss: 02-02-12
Date Filed: 06-02-12
Allegation: Personal injury
(f) Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and
Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of June 25, 2012.
(g) Recommendation to authorize the Fire Chief to sign the Memorandum of
Understanding for the Transfer of Duel Band Radios Between the Consolidated Fire
Protection District of Los Angeles County and the City of Hermosa Beach Fire
Department. Memorandum from Fire Chief Lantzer dated July 17, 2012.
(h) Recommendation to approve the Subrecipient Agreement between the County of
Los Angeles and the City of Hermosa Beach for the 2011 State Homeland Security
Grant and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement and associated
exhibits; authorize the appropriation of $83,696 and the corresponding estimated
revenue to the Grant Fund for the Fire Agencies Interoperable Information Sharing
System Project ($75,000) and reimbursable overtime costs of sending fire personnel
to training for Terrorism Liaison Officer ($8,696) following receipt by the City of
the executed agreement from the County of Los Angeles. Memorandum from Fire
Chief Lantzer dated July 16, 2012.
4
(i) Recommendation to approve three (3) non-profit events and waive permit fees.
Memorandum from Interim City Manager John Jalili dated July 17, 2012.
EVENT DATE FEES (est.)
U.S. Army – Future Soldiers August 18 $895.00
Challenged Athletes Foundation – Board Short Mile Swim September 15 $795.00
Leadership Hermosa – Back to School VB Tournament September 29 $860.00
(j) Recommendation to approve contract for independent audit services with firm of
Pun & McGeady for three years (2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14) at a cost of $62,400,
with an option to extend for an additional two years. Memorandum from Finance
Director Viki Copeland dated July 12, 2012.
(k) Recommendation to receive and file Project Status Report. Memorandum from
Public Works Director Frank Senteno dated July 10, 2012.
(l) Recommendation to approve Professional Services Agreement with Katherine Spitz
Associates, Inc. (KSA) of Culver City to provide Architectural Consulting Services
in the amount of $125,558 for CIP 12-143 PCH/Aviation Beautification Project;
authorize the Mayor to execute and the City Clerk to attest the agreement subject to
approval by the City Attorney; and, authorize the Director of Public Works to make
changes to the agreement within the project budget. Memorandum from Public
Works Director Frank Senteno dated July 16, 2012.
(m) Recommendation to award Uniform Rental Services Contract to Prudential Overall
Supply in an amount not to exceed $26,871; authorize the Director of Public Works
to execute the Service Rental Agreement with Prudential Overall Supply; and,
authorize the Director of Public Works to approve changes in the agreement within
budget. Memorandum from Public Works Director Frank Senteno dated July 16, 2012.
(n) Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting of July 17, 2012.
3. CONSENT ORDINANCES
NONE
4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE
DISCUSSION
Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar.
5
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 7:30 P.M.
a. REVIEW PROPOSALS AND SELECT PROPOSER(S) TO NEGOTIATE
AN INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES (TRASH
AND RECYCLING SERVICES) FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR THE
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH. Memorandum from Community Development
Director Ken Robertson dated July 17, 2012
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Select solid waste collection Option 1 – Cart
System (pay as you throw with separated containers for trash and recycling), or
Option 2 – Manual Single-Stream (co-mingled trash and recycling); 2) Select one
Proposer, or one Proposer and an alternate, and direct staff to negotiate and return
with a draft Franchisee Agreement to be considered at a public hearing; and, 3)
Provide direction to staff regarding additional, modified or specific contract
provisions to be negotiated in the Franchise Agreement (proposed contract
enhancements, Council-requested additional or modified terms, etc.).
6. MUNICIPAL MATTERS
a. APPOINTMENT OF CITY MANAGER AND APPORVAL OF
AGREEMENT FOR CITY MANAGER SERVICES. Memorandum from
Interim City Manager John Jalili dated July 18, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Appoint Tom Bakaly as the Hermosa Beach City
Manager; and, 2) Approve a City Manager Employment Agreement, setting forth
the terms and conditions under which Mr. Bakaly will serve as the City’s City
Manager.
7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER
NONE
8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS - CITY
COUNCIL
a. BOARD/COMMISSION EXPIRATION OF TERMS –
APPOINT PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICANTS. Memorandum from
City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated July 17, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION: Appoint/reappoint from among the applicants to fill
the three expired terms on the Planning Commission. Each of the appointments is
for a four-year term ending June 30, 2016.
b. REPORT ON ICA SUMMER SEMINAR – JULY 12-15, 2012. Oral report by
Mayor Duclos and Mayor Pro Tempore Bobko.
6
9. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL
Requests from Council members for possible future agenda items. No discussion or
debate of these requests shall be undertaken; the sole action is whether to schedule the
item for consideration on a future agenda. No public comment will be taken.
a. Request from Councilmember Tucker to utilize Prop A funds to participate
in funding buses for Navy Days LA on August 18, 2012 from 4:00pm to
12:00am to transport Navy personnel to Hermosa Beach. Funding will be
shared with others.
ADJOURNMENT
7
AGENDA
CLOSED SESSION
HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 - Council Chambers, City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
6:15 p.m.
The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will
prejudice the position of the City in existing and anticipated litigation.
CALL TO ORDER
1. PUBLIC COMMENT: This time has been set aside for members of the public to
address the City Council on Closed Session items.
2. MINUTES:
a) Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on July 10, 2012 at 6:30pm;
b) Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on July 11, 2012 at 5:00pm;
c) Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on July 17, 2012 at 8:00am;
d) Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on July 17, 2012 at 6:00pm; and,
e) Approval of minutes of Closed Session meeting held on July 19, 2012 at 7:30am.
3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
The City Council finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open
session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation.
Existing Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Name of Case: City of Hermosa Beach v. Hitchcock
Case Number: YC067202, LA Co. Superior Court-Southwest District
4. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT
Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Manager
ADJOURNMENT
July 19, 2012
Honorable Mayor and Members Regular Meeting of
of the Hermosa Beach City Council July 24, 2012
TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
AUGUST 14, 2012AUGUST 14, 2012AUGUST 14, 2012AUGUST 14, 2012
Surf Memorial Public Works Director
Beach Restrooms final Acceptance Public Works Director
Text Amendment regarding portable signage on public right-of-way Community Development Director
Text Amendment to Muni. Code Chapters 12 & 17 to allow retails sales/displays on the public right-of-
way in commercial districts
Community Development Director
One year review of fee waiver for solar panel permit (not for structural part) approved by C.C. on
7/26/11 & other green initiatives.
Community Development Director
Polystyrene (No. 6 Recycle Code) Food Service Take-Out Containers Community Development Director
Consideration of reduction of business license fee request from Carol G. Weiss, Ph.D.. Finance Director
Review of documents relating to the solicitation of banking services and financial institutions or brokers
for investment services
Finance Director
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of
July 18, 2012
Public Works Director
AUGUST 28, 2012AUGUST 28, 2012AUGUST 28, 2012AUGUST 28, 2012
NO MEETING
SEPTEMBER 11, 2012SEPTEMBER 11, 2012SEPTEMBER 11, 2012SEPTEMBER 11, 2012
Public Hearing: Outsourcing Parking Enforcement Police Chief
Fire Permits Inspection Fees Fire Chief
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community
Resources Advisory Commission meeting of August 7, 2012
Community Resources
Text amendment to incorporate a policy for no intensification of on-sale alcoholic beverage
establishments open after 11:00 P.M. into the code, including a cap on the number of such late night
establishments
Community Development Director
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August
21, 2012
Community Development Director
Activity Reports for July 2012 All Departments
TUESDAY, TUESDAY, TUESDAY, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012SEPTEMBER 25, 2012SEPTEMBER 25, 2012SEPTEMBER 25, 2012
NO MEETING
DUE TO YOM KIPPUR, MEETING MOVED TO THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2012
THURSDAY, SEPTHURSDAY, SEPTHURSDAY, SEPTHURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2012TEMBER 27, 2012TEMBER 27, 2012TEMBER 27, 2012
Lots A and B Trash Enclosures (Continued from meeting of March 13, 2012) Public Works Director
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of
September 19, 2012
Public Works Director
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of
September 18, 2012
Community Development Director
Recommendation to receive and file the action minutes of the Emergency Preparedness Advisory
Commission meeting of July 2, 2012
City Manager
Activity Reports for August 2012 All Departments
2c
2l
2l
2l
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
Architectural Design Services for CIP 12-143 PCH/Aviation Beautification Project
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 24th day of July, 2012 at Hermosa
Beach, County of Los Angeles, State of California, by and between the CITY OF
HERMOSA BEACH, through its duly elected, qualified and acting MAYOR, hereinafter
called the CITY, and Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc., hereinafter called the
CONSULTANT.
WITNESSETH: That the CONSULTANT for and in consideration of the covenants,
conditions, agreements, and stipulations of the CITY herein expressed, does hereby agree
to furnish to the CITY professional services and materials, as follows:
ARTICLE I - Scope of Work
CONSULTANT shall perform all work necessary to complete in a manner
satisfactory to CITY the services set forth in the plans and specifications or the scope of
work attached as Exhibit A.
ARTICLE II - Costs
The CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT for all the work or any part of the work performed under this Agreement at the rates and in the manner established in the
attached Fee Schedule, Exhibit B.
Total expenditure made under this contract shall not exceed the sum of
$ 125,558. This fee includes all expenses, consisting of all incidental blueprinting, photography, travel, and miscellaneous costs, estimated to be accrued during the
life of the contract. It also includes any escalation or inflation factors anticipated.
No increase in fees will be allowed during the life of the contract.
Any increase in contract amount or scope shall be by express written amendment approved by the CITY and CONSULTANT.
The CONSULTANT will be reimbursed for costs incurred in the performance hereof
as are allowable under the provisions of Part 1-14 of the Federal Procurement
Regulations.
ARTICLE III - Method of Payment
CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed monthly in arrears based upon the hourly
services provided. CONSULTANT shall submit invoices in triplicate and addressed to the
CITY, c/o the Finance Department, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3884.
PSA No.
12.008
Attachment 1
2
ARTICLE IV - Subcontracting
CONSULTANT shall not be permitted to subcontract any portion of this contract
without the express written consent of the CITY.
ARTICLE V - Completion Date
CONSULTANT shall commence work under this agreement upon execution of this agreement and shall complete the work according to the schedule submitted as part of Exhibit “A”, however, the CITY’s Director of Public Works may extend the completion date
as required by the scope of this contract. Any contract time extension shall require the
express written consent of the Director of Public Works.
ARTICLE VI - Accounting Records
CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred which records and documents shall be kept available at the
CONSULTANT’s California office during the contract period and thereafter for three years
from the date of final payment of Federal funds hereunder.
ARTICLE VII - Ownership of Data
All data, maps, photographs, and other material collected or prepared under the
contract shall become the property of the CITY.
ARTICLE VIII - Termination
This contract may be terminated at any time for breach and the CITY may terminate
unilaterally and without cause upon seven (7) days written notice to the CONSULTANT. All work satisfactorily performed pursuant to the contract and prior to the date of
termination may be claimed for reimbursement.
ARTICLE IX - Assignability
CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer interest in this contract without the prior
written consent of the CITY.
ARTICLE X - Amendment
It is mutually understood and agreed that no alteration or variation of the terms of
this contract, or any subcontract requiring the approval of the CITY, shall be valid unless
made in writing, signed by the parties hereto, and approved by all necessary parties.
ARTICLE XI - Non-Solicitation Clause
The CONSULTANT warrants that he or she has not employed or retained any company or persons, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the
Attachment 1
3
CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other
consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For
breach or violation of this warranty, the CITY shall have the right to annul this contract
without liability, or, in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee,
gift, or contingent fee.
ARTICLE XII - Equal Opportunity Assurance
During the performance of this contract, the CONSULTANT agrees as follows:
A. The CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment because of race, sex, creed, color or national origin. The CONSULTANT
will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are
treated during employment without regard to their race, sex, creed, color or national origin.
Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoffs or termination; rates of
pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship.
The CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and
applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination
clause.
B. The CONSULTANT will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees
placed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT, state that all qualified applicants will receive
consideration for employment without regard to race, sex, creed, color or national origin.
C. The CONSULTANT will permit access to their books, records and accounts
by the applicant agency, the State, the Federal Highway Administration and/or the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for purposes of investigation to ascertain
compliance with this nondiscrimination clause.
D. In the event of the CONSULTANT’s noncompliance with the
nondiscrimination clauses of this contract, this contract may be canceled, terminated or
suspended in whole or in part.
ARTICLE XIII - Clean Air Act
During the performance of this Contract, the CONSULTANT agrees to comply with all applicable standards, orders, or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act of
1970 (42 U.S.C. 1857 et seq.) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1251 et seq.) as amended.
ARTICLE XIV - Indemnity
CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by CITY, and hold
harmless CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or
Attachment 1
4
in connection with CONSULTANT's negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct in the
performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained
in this AGREEMENT, except such loss or damage which is caused by the sole active
negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY (meaning that CONSULTANT shall indemnify and defend CITY notwithstanding any alleged or actual passive negligence of CITY which
may have contributed to the claims, damages, costs or liability). Should CITY in its sole
discretion find CONSULTANT’S legal counsel unacceptable, then CONSULTANT shall
reimburse the CITY its costs of defense, including without limitation reasonable attorneys
fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation. The CONSULTANT shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the CITY (and its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers) with respect to claims determined by a trier of fact to have
been the result of the CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct. It is
expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as
broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XV - Insurance
A. Without limiting CONSULTANT’S obligations arising under ARTICLE XIV -
Indemnity , CONSULTANT shall not begin work under this Agreement until it obtains
policies of insurance required under this section. The insurance shall cover CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives and employees in connection with the
performance of work under this Agreement, and shall be maintained throughout the term
of this Agreement. Insurance coverage shall be as follows:
i. Automobile Liability Insurance with minimum coverages of $500,000 for property damage, $500,000 for injury to one person/single occurrence, and $500,000
for injury to more than one person/single occurrence.
ii. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, insuring CITY its
elected and appointed officers, agents, and employees from claims for damages for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims for property damage which may
arise from CONSULTANT’S actions under this Agreement, whether or not done by
CONSULTANT or anyone directly or indirectly employed by CONSULTANT. Such
insurance shall have a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.
iii. Worker’s Compensation Insurance for all CONSULTANT’S
employees to the extent required by the State of California.
iv. Professional Liability Coverage. The CONSULTANT shall maintain
professional errors and omissions liability insurance for protection against claims alleging negligent acts, errors, or omissions which may arise from the CONSULTANT’s operations
under this Agreement, whether such operations be by the CONSULTANT or by its
employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors. The amount of this insurance shall not be
less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) on a claims-made annual aggregate basis, or a
combined single-limit-per-occurrence basis.
Attachment 1
5
B. Deductibility Limits for policies referred to in subparagraphs A (i) (ii) and (iii)
shall not exceed $5,000 per occurrence.
C. Additional Insured. City, its elected and appointed officers, agents, and employees shall be named as additional insureds on policies referred to in subparagraphs
A (i) and (ii).
D. Primary Insurance. The insurance required in paragraphs A (i) (ii) and (iv)
shall be primary and not excess coverage.
E. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall furnish CITY, prior to the execution
of this Agreement, satisfactory evidence of the insurance required, issued by an insurer
authorized to do business in California, and an endorsement to each such policy of
insurance evidencing that each carrier is required to give CITY at least 30 days prior written notice of the cancellation of any policy during the effective period of the
Agreement. All required insurance policies are subject to approval of the City Attorney.
Failure on the part of CONSULTANT to procure or maintain said insurance in full force
and effect shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement or procure or renew such
insurance, and pay any premiums therefor at CONSULTANT’S expense.
ARTICLE XVI - Enforcement of Agreement
In the event that legal action is commenced to enforce or declare the rights created under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees in the amount to be determined by the court.
ARTICLE XVII - Conflicts of Interest
No member of the governing body of the CITY and no other officer, employee, or agent of the CITY who exercises any functions or responsibilities in connection with the planning and carrying out of the program, shall have any personal financial interest, direct
or indirect, in this Agreement; and the CONSULTANT further covenants that in the
performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed.
ARTICLE XVIII - Independent CONSULTANT
The CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain as to the CITY a wholly
independent consultant. Neither the CITY nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of the CONSULTANT or any of the CONSULTANT’s employees, except as herein
set forth. The CONSULTANT shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or
any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the CITY.
ARTICLE XIX - Entire Agreement of the Parties
This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the employment of CONSULTANT by CITY and
contains all the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect such
employment in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that
Attachment 1
6
no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been
made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied
herein, and that no other agreement or amendment hereto shall be effective unless
executed in writing and signed by both CITY and CONSULTANT.
ARTICLE XX - Governing Law
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and all applicable federal statutes and regulations as amended.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement
on the date and year first above written. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CONSULTANT
MAYOR:
________________________________ ________________________________
Mayor, City of Hermosa Beach Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc.
ATTEST:
________________________________
Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
City Attorney
Attachment 1
Request for ProposalArchitectural Consulting Services
for PCH/Aviation Boulevard Improvements
City of Hermosa BeachDeartment of Public Works
Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc.
December 22, 2011
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER LETTER 1
1. FIRM OVERVIEW 2
2. PROJECT MANAGER 11
3. PROJECT TEAM 13
4. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING 30
5. PROJECT PLAN 32
6. REFERENCES 35
7. INDEMNIFICATION/INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 37
8. FEES 40
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 1
December 22, 2011
Attn: Mr. Frank J. Senteno, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-3885
Re: Request for Proposals, PCH/Aviation Boulevard Improvements - Landscape Architectural and
Graphic Design
Dear Mr. Senteno,
It is with great enthusiasm that I submit our qualifications for consulting services for the PCH/Aviation
Boulevard Improvements for the City of Hermosa Beach.
We have put together a very exciting and skilled team for this project. As design principal I am deeply
committed to the City of Hermosa Beach and its values. KSA has been noted for our experience and
sensitivity in community-based processes on a multitude of projects, including streetscapes, parks and
recreation centers in diverse communities throughout California. In addition, Rock Miller, Principal of Stantec
Consulting Services, will be providing multi-modal transportation expertise, and Simon Andrews, Principal of
Graphic Solutions will be providing graphic and signage concepts.
Our goal is to collaborate with the City, business, and property owners, Caltrans and public utilities to seek
viable, safe, environmentally friendly and cost effective solutions to improve the aesthetics and economic
well being of these vital transportation and business corridors by focusing on pedestrian walkability and
connections, bicycle infrastructure, creative amenities, and sustainable landscaping We strive to develop
both an inspiring overall design vision and a realistic, cost-effective implementation strategy for this
important City Corridor.
As a firm, Katherine Spitz Associates Inc. is design oriented, attentive to service, flexible and collaborative.
We have an excellent track record in adhering to schedules and budgets, and our design team and
subconsultants, working under my direction, will offer the highest standards of Conceptual design and client
service.
We hope that the information we have provided in this Statement of Qualifications accurately responds to
the City’s requests. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Katherine Spitz, AIA, ASLA
Principal
Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 2
1. FIRM OVERVIEW
Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc. (KSA) is a nationally recognized landscape architecture firm established
in 1993. Noted for its collaborative skills, award-winning designs and responsive client service, KSA brings
a strong aesthetic and experiential vision to each project. This ten-person firm engages in all scales of
landscape architecture and urban design, from public spaces, streetscapes and parks to select private
gardens.
Our design process investigates the history and the memory of an area, evoking the spirit of a community.
Each KSA project addresses the conceptual issues of identity and narrative in landscape, producing places
that reflect the client’s particular mission. Our landscape architecture embraces a sustainable approach that
respects our Southern California ecology, placing in it a cultural framework.
We welcome the challenges of complex sites, and our designs are always mindful of the practical
considerations of program, maintenance, and budget. The long-term success of any project depends on
the successful integration of both aesthetic and practical concerns. KSA is experienced in technically
demanding projects that involve complex engineering considerations, including large-scale urban projects,
planting over structure, intensive grading, and accessibility challenges.
The Principal of our firm, Katherine Spitz, AIA, ASLA, is trained as a painter and architect as well as a
landscape architect. Under her leadership, the design philosophy of KSA encompasses both a painterly
sensibility and a sense of artistic discipline. We are noted for working closely with architects, engineers and
clients to create landscapes that are simultaneously architectonic and site sensitive.
Within a wide-ranging portfolio of landscape experience, KSA has notable achievements in the following
areas:
• Streetscapes and public/civic projects
• High-end commercial projects
• Campus and higher education
• Urban design
Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc. is a certified Woman Business Enterprise (WBE) and meets the criteria for a
Small Business Enterprise (SBE) set forth by the Small Business Administration in Title 13, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 121.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 3
1.1 RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Alameda Corridor Landscape Study: Landscape Master Plan for 22 mile Alameda Corridor, linking the
Los Angeles Port with manufacturing plants near downtown, with DMJM/Keating for the Los Angeles Port
Authority.
Central Avenue Historic Corridor Streetscape Master Plan: Streetscape master plan for a 39 block
area of historic Central Avenue including bulbouts, transit stops, enhanced crosswalks, street trees, ‘dark
sky’ friendly pedestrian lighting, permeable parkways for better stormwater management, and elements
reflecting the rich history of Central Avenue; for CRA/LA.
El Camino Real Streetscape: Development of streetscape improvements and pedestrian amenities for
downtown San Clemente.
El Segundo Civic Center Plan: Winner of the design competition for the El Segundo Civic Center plaza;
with David Denton, Architect.
Fuller Avenue Streetscape Project: Development of design concepts for streetscapes in West Hollywood.
Hollywood Boulevard Master Plan: Urban landscape design and analysis for the initial Community
Redevelopment Agency Master Plan; with the IBI Group.
LANI Collaborative: consultant to the Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative design collaborative:
Development of community initiated pedestrian streetscape improvements. Specific assistance to the North
Hollywood District, and Vermont Boulevard.
Lankershim Boulevard Median Strip: Development of high profile streetscape at entrance to Universal
Studios for MCA.
Melrose Avenue Streetscape Improvements: Curb Extension designs for a high profile commercial
neighborhood in West Hollywood.
Metro Rail Station at Wilshire and Alvarado in Los Angeles: Development of on-structure planters and
pedestrian mall activity; with Gensler and Associates, Architects.
Pico Boulevard, Santa Monica: Development of landscape architectural components for the Pico
Boulevard Streetscape Improvements, including lighting, paving, artwork, medians and trees, and
assistance in facilitating community workshops as part of the public process.
Pico-Garnier Block: Landscape Architecture services for the Pico-Garnier Block, which is part of El Pueblo
de Los Angeles Historic Monument and adjacent to Olvera Street; with Castro Blanco Piscioneri Architects.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 4
Redondo Beach PCH/Catalina Gateway Improvements: Design and implementation of a new gateway
feature for the City of Redondo Beach at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Catalina Ave.,
including a sculptural water feature, new planting, and lighting; with David Denton, Architect.
Rialto Civic Center Master Plan: Master Plan and design of the new civic plaza, in the City of Rialto; with
David Denton, Architect.
Rialto Metrolink Streetscape: Design of the new streetscape and pedestrian improvements adjacent to
the Metrolink Station in the City of Rialto, with emphasis on the Metrolink pedestrian improvements; with
David Denton, Architect.
San Gabriel Streetscape Improvements: Developed a pedestrian-friendly streetscape plan for a 1.2 mile
business district along San Gabriel Blvd for the City of San Gabriel
Santa Monica Neighborhood Curb Extensions: Design, planting and irrigation for various traffic calming
planting areas in residential neighborhoods.
Santa Monica Ocean Park Parkways: Development, with neighborhood advisory committee, and design
of intimate garden-like parkways along Ocean Park Boulevard in Santa Monica using a plant palette
referring to local horticultural history.
Santa Monica Pedestrian Crosswalk Improvements: Planning, community workshops and construction
documents for improved pedestrian crosswalks at various locations in the City of Santa Monica; with Katz
Okitsu.
Torrance Boulevard and Catalina Avenue, Redondo Beach: Master plan for two major boulevards in the
City, including bulbouts, crosswalks, street trees, pedestrian lights, banner poles, and street furnishings.
Including links to gateway park, harbor and pier, with an emphasis on City identification and boundaries.
Venice Boulevard Streetscape and Art Park: Design and development of the Venice Boulevard street
landscape and artpark located in the median, with Studio of Architecture and the Venice Action Committee
community group.
Vermont Boulevard Streetscape Plan: Participation in community meetings, design, and implementation
for Vermont Boulevard streetscape improvements, including lighting, landscaping, signage, and banners;
with LR/Architecture.
Whittier Boulevard, East Los Angeles: Full service streetscape design and implementation project for a
Whittier Boulevard in unincorporated Los Angeles County, from the 710 freeway to Atlantic Avenue. For the
Community Development Corporation, Los Angeles County.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 5
Wilshire Boulevard Temple, Los Angeles: Design and development of landscape architecture design
for the renovation of open space surrounding the historic Wilshire Boulevard Temple; with Levin and
Associates.
Wrigley Village Streetscape, Pacific Avenue, Long Beach: Streetscape planning and design based on
community process, incorporating new planting, irrigation, street furniture and opportunities for public art
integration. For the City of Long Beach, Redevelopment Agency.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 6
1.2 SELECTED STREETSCAPE EXPERIENCE
Pico Garnier Block Renovation Los Angeles, CA
The streetscape for the Pico Garnier Block Renovation strengthens the historic district’s distinct identity by including
granite and porphyry paving, recalling the porphyry aggregate used in the original pueblo. Interpretive paving uses
traditional Chinese elements to recall the thriving history of Chinatown, while the paving also incorporates the original
trolley tracks that crossed the area.
Project Location: Historic Downtown Los Angeles, California
Dates of Work: 2001
Client: City of Los Angeles
Client Contact: Castro Blanco Piscioneri Architects
KSA Team: Katie Spitz, Steve Lacap
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 7
PCH/Catalina Gateway Redondo Beach, CA
The gateway plaza at Pacific Coast Highway and Catalina Avenue , a portion of a larger streetscape master plan
for Catalina Avenue and Torrance Boulevard, was implemented in 2009; the program for the site was to create a
welcoming park-like plaza that would convey the identity and character of the City of Redondo Beach.
The design recognizes the need to capture the City’s identity in elements that can be comprehended at vehicle speed,
but also creates a place designed for pedestrians, to make a useful well-loved place for people out of a traffic island, in
an area where new development created the potential for more pedestrian activity and involvement. The design goal
for the gateway project was to capture the qualities of the ocean environment – wind, spray, fog, and movement.
The sculptural mist fountain, with elements of steel and glass that could be described as “sails” or “fins,” was inspired
by the maritime forms associated with the City and the activity of beach and harbor. Sails composed of translucent
glass, along with the fountain’s mist, catch and reflect the light in unexpected ways throughout the day, while changing
patterns and colors of energy-efficient LED lights in marine blues and greens create drama and interest as darkness
falls.
Project Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Dates of Work: 2007 - 2010
Client: City of Redondo Beach
KSA Team: Katherine Spitz, Principal Landscape Architect
Steve Lacap, Project Designer
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 8
Whittier Boulevard Streetscape Improvements East Los Angeles, CA
KSA undertook a full streetscape design and implementation project for Whittier Boulevard in unincorporated Los
Angeles County, from the 710 freeway to Atlantic Avenue. The project incorporates design and placement of bulbouts,
crosswalks, street trees, new pedestrian lights, banner poles, and street furnishings, based upon a public process of
community workshops and presentations to ensure that the design is sensitive to community needs and history. The
client is the Community Development Commission of Los Angeles County.
Project Location: East Los Angeles, California
Dates of Work: 2008 - Current
Cost: Approximately $4 million
Client: Community Development Commission, Los Angeles County
KSA Project Team: Katie Spitz, Steve Lacap
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 9
Pico Boulevard Streetscape Santa Monica, CA
The landscape design for this three-mile street set the stage for the urban revitalization of the neighborhood and for
streetscape improvements throughout Santa Monica. Through the design of innovative and contemporary streetlights,
permeable parkways, medians with drought tolerant planting, and historic imprints, KSA created a new vision for the area
by “Greening the Boulevard.” The design included lining the boulevard with Sycamores to create identity and to tie the
boulevard to its political history as a land grant area and its natural history as an arroyo wash. Street lights were custom
designed and fabricated for the project to take on the form and character of foliage, to reference the trees and to provide a
subtle visual reference to the night sky. Katherine worked closely with the community in a series of animated community
and stakeholder meetings prior to arriving at the final design. Awards include the Los Angeles Business Council Design
Award (2000), Los Angeles American Planning Association, and the Westside Urban Forum Honor Award (1999).
Project Location: Santa Monica, California
Dates of Work: 1999-2000
Client: City of Santa Monica
Project Size: Approximately 3 miles
KSA Team: Katie Spitz, Steve Lacap
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 10
San Gabriel Blvd. Streetscape Improvement Project San Gabriel, CA
Katherine Spitz Associates and David Denton AIA Architect are developing a pedestrian-friendly streetscape plan
for a 1.2 mile business district along San Gabriel Boulevard for the City of San Gabriel. The goals of the project
include enhancing pedestrian amenities, improving pedestrian safety, and stimulating commercial activity. The project
scope includes engaging with local stakeholders and participating in community meetings. The project is current in
construction documentation.
Project Location: San Gabriel, California
Dates of Work: 2009-2011
Client: City of San Gabriel Community Development Department
Project Size: Approximately 1.2 miles
Client Contact: Robin Scherr, Acting Economic Development Manager
KSA Team: Katie Spitz, Principal Landscape Architect
Steve Lacap, Project Designer
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 11
2. PROJECT MANAGER
SHARN URE Project Manager
Sharn Ure first joined Katherine Spitz Associates in 2006. Her interest in Landscape Architecture began in
her homeland of Great Britain following in the family’s tradition of estate management and historic garden
restoration. Her 25 years of experience as a gardener and designer offers an understanding of plant
selection and appropriateness that creates a landscape of minimal maintenance, maximum impact and
ultimate beauty.
Her passion is to design sustainable spaces which enhance the built environment, respect site history and
culture, and that provide an aesthetic vision, which inspires and enrich lives.
She possesses wide-ranging horticultural expertise including extensive knowledge of California native
plants, and her professional experience from design to management and execution spans across multiple
project types from streetscapes and community parks, civic and educational projects, large scale residential
design, coastal buff restoration projects, and challenging multi-use on-structure projects.
Education: Professional Certificate in Landscape Architecture,
UCLA Extension Department of the Arts, 2008
LEED AP (in progress)
Relevant Experience:
San Gabriel Streetscape Improvements Project, San Gabriel
Pico Boulevard Green Street Improvements, West Los Angeles
Watts Greenstreets Improvements Project
Formosa Pocket Park, West Hollywood
Havenhurst Pocket Park, West Hollywood
Santa Monica Universally Accessible Park
Ted Watkins County Park
Orange Grove Park, Hacienda Heights
Professional Affiliations:
American Society of Landscape Architects
California Native Plant Society
National Trust/Royal Oak Preservation Society
Responsibilities include:
Directing and coordinating human and material resources throughout the lifecycle of the project to achieve
the predetermined objectives of the Client and Stakeholder group including, scope, cost, time, quality and
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 12
participation satisfaction.
Client/Stakeholder interface, design review, planning management, marketing, scheduling and related
finance.
Throughout all phases of planning and design, consult with other professionals, such as civil and traffic
engineer, signage consultant and other sub consultants involved in the project.
Community Outreach
Sharn has considerable experience in the public outreach and design process and recognizes that
community participation is the essential part of any successful public project. She believes that the earlier in
the process the public engagement, the better the result for the community.
Adept with the community outreach process; organizing interactive design workshops, site walkability
assessments, and intermedia outreach tools, to effectively engage the diverse communities in developing
the design in order to produce a product that promotes civic pride and ownership.
Prior Experience
Sharn worked together with the City of West Hollywood on design workshops and community presentations
for both Formosa and Havenhurst Park and was instrumental in organizing community outreach, for a
number of interactive workshops for the City of San Gabriel, as well as the creation of a media based NING
site for public comments and discussion.
She has worked with the communities of Hacienda Heights on public parks projects and is currently
working on a intensive community based streetscape design for the streets of Watts and a new Universally
Accessible Playground in Santa Monica.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 13
3. PROJECT TEAM
Principal Firm: Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc. Landscape Architects and Planners
Project Team: Katherine Spitz, AIA, ASLA, LEED AP Principal Landscape Architect
Steve Lacap, Project Architect
Karina Garcia Project Designer
Sharn Ure Project Manager
KATHERINE SPITZ, AIA, ASLA, LEED AP, Principal
As Principal of Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc., Katherine Spitz participates in all stages of project
development, from design through project management and construction administration. Trained as a
painter, licensed as an Architect and a Landscape Architect, she brings a strong sense of rigor combined
with creative aesthetics to each project. She is particularly interested in applying the experiential qualities of
landscape to the civic realm. Her background and experience in the fine arts and horticulture is extensive,
allowing her to develop landscape designs that are truly interdisciplinary. She has lectured on intention and
form in Landscape Architecture at UCLA and Cal State Pomona, and has taught design and drawing at the
Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCIARC), Otis Parsons, and USC.
Education:
Master of Architecture, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, UCLA
Bachelor of Arts, Painting, College of Creative Studies, UCSB
Professional Licenses:
Licensed Architect, State of California C-18142
Licensed Landscape Architect, State of California 3846,
Licensed Landscape Architect, State of Arizona 41547
LEED AP
Affiliations:
Board of Directors, American Institute of Architects, LA Chapter
American Society of Landscape Architects
Los Angeles Cultural Affairs Commission Mayor’s Design Advisory Panel
Former Commissioner, County of Los Angeles, Marina Del Rey Design Advisory Board
Selected Awards:
American Institute of Architects, Fire Station No. 67
American Institute of Architects, Hyde Park Branch Library
American Institute of Architects,Formosa Condominiums
American Planning Association, Pico Boulevard Streetscape
American Institute of Architects, Ennis House Rehabilitation
California Preservation Foundation, Cabrillo Beach House Rehabilitation
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 14
California Preservation Foundation, Design Award, Guasti Villa Restoration
California Preservation Foundation, Design Award, Walker House Restoration
California Preservation Foundation, Ennis House Rehabilitation
California Preservation Foundation, MacGowan Residence
City of Los Angeles Cultural Affairs Commission Award of Design Excellence, Ascot Reservoir DWP
Childcare
IIDA Calibre Award, UCSD Cancer Center Courtyard
Westside Urban Forum, Pico Boulevard Streetscape
STEVE LACAP, Project Architect
Steve LaCap’s contributions to projects include his technical expertise combined with a dynamic
contemporary design sensibility. He is responsible for design and construction documentation on all civic
and commercial projects, working closely with architects and consultants to resolve technical considerations
for streetscape and roof landscapes. He organizes the firm’s CAD system and standards, peer reviews all
construction documents, and works closely with contractors during construction.
Education: Bachelor of Architecture, Southern California Institute of Architecture,1991
Relevant Experience:
Pico Boulevard Streetscape Whittier Boulevard Streetscape
Ford Amphitheatre Wrigley Village Streetscape
Rialto Pedestrian Improvements Ted Watkins County Park
KARINA GARCIA, Project Designer
With a background in architecture and a particular interest in sustainable environmental design, Karina
views landscape architecture as a necessary element for a sustainable and integral architecture. Her
experience in architecture provides a unique interdisciplinary design approach to landscape. Karina’s
projects include streetscapes, healthcare, universally accessible parks, and institutional and educational
campuses. Her enthusiasm for community based projects is effusive and indicative of her passion for the
profession.
She joined KSA in 2004, after working with landscape architecture firm Aerea in San Diego from 2002-2004.
Education: Bachelor of Architecture
Universidad Iberoamericana del Noroeste
Tijuana, Mexico. 2002
USGBC Seminar, 2007 (Currently pursuing LEED AP certification)
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 15
Relevant Experience:
Central Avenue Historic Streetscape Watts Greenstreets Project
Redondo Beach / Catalina Corridor Streetscape Project Wrigley Village Streetscape
San Gabriel Streetscape Improvement Project Avocado Heights Park, La Puente
Reed Park, Santa Monica
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 16
3.1 SUBCONTRACTED TEAM MEMBERS
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Traffic and Civil Engineers
19 Technology Dr. Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
Contact: Rock Miller (949) 923-6000
Hunt Design
Signage Consultants
825 N Mentor Avenue
Pasadena, California 91106
Contact: Simon Andrews (626)-793-7847
www.huntdesign.com/blog
ADDITIONAL SUBCONSULTANTS IF REQUIRED
Bob Hansen Tree Preservation
Certified Arborist
7023 Semrad Road
West Hills, CA 91307
Contact: Gilbert R. (Bob) Hansen (818) 703-8024
Heider Engineering
Geotechnical Engineers, Soils Testing
Heider Engineering Services, Inc.
800 S Rochester Ave, Ste A
Ontario, CA 91761
Contact: Kafar Ahmed (909) 673-0292
Other qualified subconsultants are available for specialized services as needed.
Exhibit A
At Stantec, we provide innovative transportation solutions.
Traditionally, transportation planning needs have been addressed by providing more roadway capacity.
However, a wider range of approaches including Transportation Demand Management and alternative
transportation modes—such as walking and bicycling and high speed transit—need to be considered
and integrated into forward-thinking plans.
Stantec offers a range of services to assist in the planning, design, and implementation of
transportation elements that promote and support walking and bicycling by offering safe, efficient, and
accessible facilities. Based on experience from across North America, we offer the expertise to assist
communities in developing master plans, design guidelines, and funding strategies to improve their
walking and bicycling environments in a variety of climates. Perhaps more importantly, we offer the
expertise to get these plans designed, implemented and put to good use.
Stantec provides transportation planning services with a holistic approach that considers not only
alternative, technical solutions, but the impacts of alternative land use patterns, as well as
environmental and community concerns. This approach is complemented by our computer modeling
expertise using tools suitable for projects ranging from smaller community and neighborhood
transportation plans to large regional plans with major transit components. Using these models,
Stantec can easily investigate a wide range of alternatives and effectively present results to stakeholders
for their input.
Stantec, founded in 1954, provides professional consulting services in planning, engineering,
architecture, interior design, landscape architecture, surveying, environmental sciences, project
management, and project economics for infrastructure and facilities projects. Continually striving to
balance economic, environmental, and social responsibilities, we are recognized as a world-class leader
and innovator in the delivery of sustainable solutions. We support public and private sector clients in a
diverse range of markets at every stage, from the initial conceptualization and financial feasibility study
to project completion and beyond.
In
simple
terms,
the
world
of
Stantec
is
the
water
we
drink,
the
routes
we
travel,
the
buildings
we
visit,
the
industries
in
which
we
work,
and
the
neighborhoods
we
call
home.
Exhibit A
Rock E. Miller PE, PTOE
Principal, Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering
* denotes projects completed with other firms One Team. Infinite Solutions.
Mr. Miller is a registered Traffic and Civil Engineer in the State of California and has more than 30 years of
transportation planning, design, and operations experience. He formerly served as City Traffic Engineer for Costa
Mesa and staff traffic engineer with the County of Orange. He is familiar with the latest capabilities and requirements
available and expected from cities and municipal governments. For more than 18 years, Mr. Miller has been a
consultant at the senior or principal level in the field of traffic engineering, traffic safety, and circulation design.
Mr. Miller has completed a wide variety of unique transportation projects, including traffic signals, signing and
striping, street lighting, work site traffic control, traffic impact analysis, and the design of street and highway
improvements. He has also prepared many transportation policy plans and completed controversial and complex
transportation studies, including neighborhood traffic calming projects, projects anticipating litigation by another
public agency, and projects with intense public opposition.
Mr. Miller is well regarded for his ability to apply strong fundamental traffic engineering knowledge to custom
situations. He has frequently been an invited speaker to regional and national conferences and committees on many
topics, including pedestrian circulation, traffic calming, and transportation policy.
Mr. Miller was recently elected to serve as International Vice President of the 15,000 member Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) and will serve as the Institute President in 2012.
EDUCATION
M.S. Civil Engineering, University of California, Davis,
Davis, California, 1976
B.S. Civil Engineering, University of California, Davis,
Davis, California, 1973
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Engineer #11271-PE (Civil), State of
Hawaii
Professional Engineer #1139 (Traffic), State of
California
Professional Engineer #29493 (Civil), State of
California
Certified Professional Traffic Operations Engineer
#205, Institute of Transportation Engineers
MEMBERSHIPS
International President Elect, Institute of
Transportation Engineers
Member, Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle
Professionals
Member, American Society of Civil Engineers
Section and District President, Institute of
Transportation Engineers
Fellow, Institute of Transportation Engineers
AWARDS
2009 APWA Southern California B.E.S.T. Project of
the Year, Orange County Traffic Signal Master Plan
2005 43rd Annual Meeting Best Technical
Presentation: How Does the Chicken Cross the Road?
Exhibit A
Rock E. Miller PE, PTOE
Principal, Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering
* denotes projects completed with other firms
2002 WesternITE Editors Award - In Pavement
Flashing Crosswalks – State of the Art
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Bikeway Master Plan, Ventura, California (Project
Manager)
Mr. Miller assisted the City of Ventura in finalization of its recent
Bikeway Master Plan Update. He conducted a review of a draft
document on behalf of Stantec and made suggestions and additions
in areas of non-infrastructure/encouragement improvements,
participation in the League of American Bicyclists program to
honor bicycle-friendly communities, and potential use of innovative
treatments such as bicycle boulevards, protected bike lanes (cycle
tracks) and other treatments which are showing promise in other
California communities. The City approved the Bicycle Master Plan
in 2011 and intends to initiate development of proposed projects in
the next few years.
Second Street Green Sharrow Lane Project*, Long
Beach, California (Transportation Engineer)
The City of Long Beach obtained Federal permission to
demonstrate the use of bicycle shared lane markings (Sharrows) in
conjunction with a new application, by painting a six-foot wide
strip of green pavement in the center of the travel lane for the
length of the project. Mr. Miller helped to conceive the project,
obtain Federal experimentation status, and prepare the design and
evaluation reports. The subject roadway, Second Street, carries
about 35,000 cars per day through a commercial area with on street
parking and frequent traffic signals. Second Street is an extremely
desirable bicycle route, and the treatment implemented has
exceeded all project expectations for success. Bicycle traffic has
doubled to nearly 1,000 per day. Frequency of crashes is
unchanged, and reception by motorists, cyclists, and merchants has
generally been positive. The project won an award in 2010 from the
Institute of Transportation Engineers for innovation in bicycle
facilities.
Broadway and Third Street Protected Bikeways*, Long
Beach, California (Project Engineer)
Mr. Miller was responsible for project planning, design, and for
securing FHWA permission to demonstrate some experimental
traffic control devices needed for the project.
The City of Long Beach planned and implemented 20 blocks of
protected bikeway in its downtown along a pair of important one-
way streets, Broadway and Third Street. The project is closely
patterned after an award winning project that was constructed in
New York City recently along Eighth and Ninth Avenues. The
project relocates on street parking to provide physical separation
between the new bikeway adjacent to the sidewalk and motorized
vehicle travel lanes. The resulting facility has been well-received in
New York and was found to be most appropriate for this site in
downtown Long Beach.
Vista Avenue Bicycle Boulevard*, Long Beach,
California (Project Manager)
Mr. Miller led neighborhood workshops and provided design
services for the Vista Avenue Bicycle Boulevard in the City of Long
Beach, CA. This project, the first of its type in Southern California,
used a combination of traffic calming and bicycle-friendly
improvements to blaze a route along local streets connecting several
neighborhoods in Long Beach. The project included two compact
roundabouts, seven landscaped mini traffic-calming circles, a
traffic signal, plus turn restrictions with special branding signs and
markings to create a roadway that encourages bicycling while
discouraging through automobile traffic. Neighborhood reaction
was favorable during the concept development phase, and support
grew stronger as the project proceeded to completion. The City
plans to provide many additional miles of similar facilities.
Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing Study (Phase I & II)*,
Santa Monica, California (Project Manager)
Mr. Miller led a multi disciplinary team in the development of a
plan for enhancement of pedestrian mobility for ten major corridors
in the City of Santa Monica. The project team included an
architect/urban planner, a landscape architect, and two pedestrian
mobility specialists. The project addressed substantial community
concerns over pedestrian safety and mobility. The project team
achieved a consensus for various pedestrian circulation
improvements through a series of public workshops and meetings.
Recommended measures include an innovative in-ground crosswalk
flasher warning system at 10 locations, plus curb extensions and
median refuges at more than 20 locations along Wilshire
Boulevard.
Exhibit A
Rock E. Miller PE, PTOE
Principal, Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering
* denotes projects completed with other firms
Pedestrian Awareness Campaign and Task Force*,
Santa Ana, California (Transportation Engineer)
Mr. Miller was retained by the City of Santa Ana to improve
pedestrian safety and public awareness of related issues. The
project analyzed pedestrian/vehicle accident patterns at unmarked
crosswalk locations throughout the City and also conducted a
unique public awareness program. The safety study included an
analysis of mid-block pedestrian/vehicle accident patterns and
suggested measures to reduce this type of accident. The study also
analyzed factors related to accidents at unmarked crosswalks,
comparing characteristics of sites with pedestrian accidents to a
randomly selected control group of sites. A pedestrian safety public
awareness campaign was designed to increase public awareness of
pedestrian safety in the City. This campaign included participation
by the news media, transit operators, government organizations,
private companies, and volunteers. One of the features of the study
was the use of “Moving Violators," costumed actors that appeared
at venues throughout the City and made safety presentations. A
pedestrian safety “toolkit” for use by City officials in implementing
pedestrian safety programs was also developed as part of this phase
of the study. The project activities were funded under a grant from
the California Office of Traffic Safety. The Pedestrian
Safety/Moving Violators paper won the Best Paper Award at the
ITE International Section Annual Conference in May 2003.
East-West Bikeway Connectors Planning and Design
Project*, Long Beach, California (Project Engineer)
Mr. Miller provided preliminary planning and preparation of
Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) for the implementation
of two important east/west bikeway facilities, the Downtown/Los
Alamitos bikeway and the CSULB Access Bikeway. Also as a part
of the project, he designed logo artwork for bicycle route number
sign shields and a system of trailblazer/destination signs. Due to
extreme controversy over one of the project locations, Mr. Miller
planned and conducted three public workshops reaching out to the
local communities regarding the project and alternatives. His team
worked closely with the City to address residents' concerns and
suggestions and built consensus out of the variety of controversies.
In the design phase, Mr. Miller prepared plans for signing and
striping for Caltrans approval. In addition, we used ArcGIS
program to record the exact locations of the signs in the City's GIS
data base and to expand the city's signage inventory.
Old Town Pedestrian Crossing Study*, Tustin,
California (Project Manager)
Mr. Miller prepared a study to analyze an uncontrolled marked
pedestrian crossing location at the intersection of Main Street at
Prospect Avenue in the Old Town area. The study evaluated the
physical, environmental, and operational characteristics of the
crossing to determine if it was a candidate for removal or
improvement. The study also reviewed the accident history at the
location, and evaluated potential enhancements that could improve
the safety or effectiveness of the marked pedestrian crossing. The
criteria used in the evaluation included crossing purpose,
pedestrian usage, traffic and parking conditions, safety
considerations, proximity to controlled crossing locations, feasibility
of or presence of enhancements, environmental factors, accident
history, proximity to pedestrian generators and bus stops, and
appropriate traffic control options.
Crosswalk Safety Study for the City of Los Angles*,
Los Angles, California (Project Manager)
As research for the defense of the City in lawsuits, Mr. Miller was
requested to study usage and conditions at 50 marked uncontrolled
crosswalks in the City and develop information that would help the
City to improve safety and better defend itself from lawsuits. The
study's methodology largely replicated the methodology that he and
his team developed for a citywide crosswalk study in the City of
Santa Ana in 1997. The results of the study were startlingly similar
to the results of the 1997 study regarding safety versus usage.
Satisfactory safety results were being achieved at many locations
where a high number of vehicles and pedestrians were each
present. The study also identified a strong correlation between
pedestrian safety and safety for all users at intersections. Locations
with marked crosswalks that experienced an average of three to
four accidents per year involving vehicles were far more likely to
experience frequent pedestrian accidents than locations with a
minimum of vehicle accidents. While this conclusion may make
good sense, it cannot be found in the scant literature of pedestrian
safety. The results of this study were presented at technical
conferences and published in 2005.
Citywide Pedestrian Safety Study*, Santa Ana,
California (Project Manager)
Mr. Miller led an extensive study of pedestrian safety within
marked crosswalks at unsignalized intersections throughout the
City of Santa Ana. The study analyzed the relationship between
traffic volume, pedestrian volume, and crossing control, permitting
a safety-based analysis of treatment options. The study made many
new findings about crosswalk safety that may assist in safe
pedestrian planning for other communities.
Exhibit A
Rock E. Miller PE, PTOE
Principal, Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering
PUBLICATIONS
Transportation and Other Items of Interest in Orange
County CA. ITE Journal, 2008.
Traffic Signal Coordination, Myths and Realities.
California League of Cities/City Engineers Conference,
2008.
I-5 Capacity Analysis. Presentation to the Board of
Directors of the Orange County Transportation Authority,
2007.
Safety Experience with PPLT Conversions in
California. ITE District 6 Annual Meeting, 2007.
Designing Highway Facilities for Pedestrian Safety.
Montana Joint Engineers’ Council, 2005.
Walkin’ in L.A., Los Angeles Crosswalk Safety Study.
Presentation for State of Utah, WASHTO–X, 2005.
In-Pavement Flashing Crosswalks, State of The Art.
TRB Urban Street Symposium, 2003.
Can 25,000 Pedestrians Cross the Street Safely?. ITE
Spring Conference, 2003.
Managing Traffic Calming Projects, Speed Bumps in
the Process. American Public Works Association,
Southern California Section, 2001.
Active Control at Highway/Rail Grade Crossings
Committee, 2000.
Safety in Marked and Unmarked Crosswalks. Institute
of Transportation Engineers, Traffic Engineering Council
Newsletter, 2000.
Exhibit A
Graphic Solutions Company Profile
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
City of Hermosa Beach PCH/AVIATION BOULEVARD
Signage,Wayfinding, Branding, and Community Messaging
Graphic Solutions is a full-service graphic design firm,
established in 1970, specializing in sign planning and design,
development of identity programs and preparation of construction
and bid documents.
Recognized as an innovator in the field of sign-planning, Graphic
Solutions has created comprehensive sign programs for a diverse
mix of private developers as well as public agencies, including
more than seventy cities and downtowns throughout the
Southwest.
Graphic Solutions works as part of the project design team often
providing imaging, developing names and creating an identity to
reflect the project’s goals for public information and economic
development. Graphic Solutions will then create an aesthetic and functional
sign plan, and design signage and collateral materials incorporating
the project identity.
The firm has developed successful strategies for building consensus
among stakeholder groups
We are proud of our reputation, nurtured over more than forty
years of practice, for our applied knowledge of current codes
and sustainable materials, and for creating signage programs
which are unique and appropriate to the place, and economical
to implement and maintain.
Graphic Solutions, Ltd.
2952 Main Street
San Diego, CA 92113
P: (619) 239-1335
F: (619) 235-6018
www.GraphicSolutions.com
Firm Size
8
Personnel by Discipline
2 Principals
1 Project Coordinator
4 Designers
2 Administrative /Secretarial
Principals of the Firm
Ruben Andrews,
President
Simon Andrews,
Secretary of the Corporation
Exhibit A
Simon Andrews, Principal
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
City of Hermosa Beach PCH/AVIATION BOULEVARD
Signage,Wayfinding, Branding, and Community Messaging
SIMON ANDREWS
Principal
Graphic Solutions
35 Years of Experience
Education
Bachelor Degree, Psychology,
San Francisco State University Affiliations American Institute of Graphic Arts The Society of Environmental Graphic Designers The American Society of Landscape Architects (Affiliate) and member: National ASLA Parks and
Recreation Open Committee
California Redevelopment
Association (Associate)
La Jolla Community Planning
Association (past President)
East Village Association,
downtown San Diego (past
President) Design Review Committee of the City of San Diego Parks and Recreation Board Presentations California Redevelopment Assn. California Main Street Assn. Associated General Contractors
of San Diego
New School of Architecture
Institute of Business Designers
International Downtown Assn.
California Association of Public
Information Officials FAA License Simon is an instrument-rated private pilot.
Simon Andrews has been a principal with Graphic Solutions since 1976, serving as Vice President, Director of Marketing and Secretary of the Corporation. Simon’s responsibilities include problem-solving, design concepting, sign planning, and organizing and conducting public workshops for developing consensus. He has directed numerous award-winning projects, and serves as principal-in-charge of most public agency projects. Simon and his firm have developed strategies for discovering those visual elements which are unique to a community, then interpreting them graphically so they communicate an appropriate identity and serve as an effective brand for that community.
As a member of the Design Review Committee of the City of San Diego
Parks and Recreation Board, Simon assists in reviewing all proposed
public and private projects on city lands.
In addition, Simon has participated as a partner in private development teams, gaining first hand redevelopment experience and garnering “Downtown Improvement Awards” for both commercial and residential projects. Related Project Experience •Bell Gardens, CA, Signage, Wayfinding and Graphic Design •Chula Vista, CA, Third Avenue Downtown Comprehensive Sign Program •Desert Hot Springs, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation and Wayfinding
•El Cajon, CA, Downtown Gateway Signage
•El Monte, CA, Signage and Wayfinding
•Escondido, CA, Maple St. Plaza Gateway and Wayfinding Design
•Huntington Beach, CA, City Entry Sign Program
•Huntington Beach, CA, Downtown Wayfinding Sign Program •La Mesa CA, Citywide Branding and Comprehensive Sign Program •Lancaster, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation and Wayfinding •Merced, CA, Wayfinding Signage Program •Moreno Valley ,CA Gateway and Monument Signage •Morgan Hill, CA Comprehensive Citywide and Facility Identification Signage Programs •Morgan HIll, CA, Comprehensive Downtown Signage Program •Pinole, CA, Downtown Branding and Signage Program •San Clemente, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation
and Wayfinding
•Santa Ana, CA, Entry Arch Sign Design
•Tehachapi, CA, Downtown Branding & Comprehensive Sign Design
•Torrance, CA, Entry Monument, Wayfinding and Signage
•Vista, CA, District Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation •Windsor, CA, Comprehensive
Exhibit A
Frank Mando, Design Manager
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
City of Hermosa Beach PCH/AVIATION BOULEVARD
Signage,Wayfinding, Branding, and Community Messaging
FRANK MANDO
Designer Graphic Solutions
25 Years of Experience Education
Ivy School of Professional Art,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
A leader in the Design Department, Frank Mando’s responsibilities include planning, scheduling, quality control, art direction and
graphic design. He directs the design staff in design development
and construction documents. As a key member of the Graphic Solutions design team, Frank
provides creativity and guidance in developing unique, effective sign programs for all of the projects at Graphic Solutions.
Prior to joining Graphic Solutions, Frank honed his skills in design and production of printed materials for agencies and design firms in San Diego, Los Angeles and Pittsburgh. He has received
awards and recognition as a print and sign designer in numerous local and national competitions. In addition, Frank is recognized as
a prominent public artist and sculptor.
Related Project Experience
•Bell Gardens, CA, Signage, Wayfinding and Graphic Design,
•Chula Vista, CA, Third Avenue Downtown Comprehensive Sign Program
•Desert Hot Springs, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation and Wayfinding •El Cajon, CA, Downtown El Cajon Gateway Signage
•El Monte, CA, Signage and Wayfinding •Escondido, CA, Maple St. Plaza Gateway and Wayfinding Design
•Huntington Beach, CA, City Entry Sign Program •Huntington Beach, CA, Downtown Wayfinding Sign Program
•La Mesa CA, Citywide Branding and Comprehensive Sign
Program •Lancaster, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation
and Wayfinding •Merced, CA, Wayfinding Signage Program •Moreno Valley ,CA Gateway and Monument Signage
•Morgan Hill, CA Comprehensive Citywide and Facility Identification Signage Programs •Morgan HIll, CA, Comprehensive Downtown Signage Program
•Pinole, CA, Downtown Branding and Signage Program •San Clemente, CA, Branding, Sign Program, Entry Monumentation and Wayfinding
•Santa Ana, CA, Entry Arch Sign Design •Tehachapi, CA, Downtown Branding & Comprehensive Sign
Design
•Torrance, CA, Entry Monument, Wayfinding and Signage •Vista, CA, District Branding, Sign Program, Entry
Monumentation •Windsor, CA, Comprehensive Signage Program
Exhibit A
Bell Gardens
City of Bell Gardens, CA
To help accelerate the momentum of this community’s economic
development progress, Graphic Solutions worked with staff and
stakeholders to create an appropriate brand, and apply it
comprehensively to city and district gateways, wayfinding and
facility identification signage. Materials were selected for
sustainability and long-term durability.
Reference:
City of Bell Gardens
7100 South Garfield Avenue
Bell Gardens, CA 90201
Ms. Carmen Morales
(562) 806-7723 Exhibit A
Third Avenue Downtown Branding
City of Chula Vista, CA
As the most prominent statement of the community’s intent to
revitalize this important historic commercial district, Graphic
Solutions designed the “Third Avenue Downtown” brand and
classic overhead gateway sign, wayfinding and directional
signs, banners, and print materials – from preliminary design
concepts, through stakeholder meetings to build consensus,
incorporating the most sustainable technologies and durable
materials available, construction documents for competitive
bidding, realistic cost estimating, and construction
administration to oversee successful completion.
Reference:
Third Avenue Village
Association
353 Third Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Mr. Greg Mattson, Executive
Director (
619) 422-1982
Exhibit A
Sunnymead Boulevard Comprehensive Sign Program
City of Moreno Valley, CA
Working in close coordination with city staff, Graphic Solutions
provided creative design and construction documents for the
Sunnymead Boulevard sign program, including overhead gate-
way sign, monument signs, and banners.
“I strongly recommend Simon Andrews and
Graphic Solutions. As a fullservice graphic de-
sign firm, Graphic Solutions offers a creative and
innovative approach to working with their
clients. Simon Andrews and the Graphic
Solutions team used a ‘hands on approach’ in
creating an exciting new graphics design package
for Sunnymead Boulevard. Simon Andrews and
Graphic Solutions delivered great service to
Moreno Valley. Previously, I had the good
fortune to use the services of Graphic Solutions
while employed in other municipalities and every
time I’ve been extremely pleased with their work.
Again, without reservation I recommend Graphic
Solutions for any graphic design or sign creation
needs.”
-Robert Gutierrez, City Manager
Reference
City of Moreno Valley
14177 Frederick Street
Moreno Valley, CA 92552
Mr. Robert Gutierrez, City Manager
(951) 413-3020
Exhibit A
Morgan Hill Downtown Branding and Wayfinding
Morgan Hill, CA
Design of CityWide and Downtown District comprehensive
signage programs – concepts, location plans, consensusbuilding
with selected stakeholders as well as public outreach activities,
construction plans and specifications, realistic cost estimates,
implementation plans, and construction administration.
Reference
City of Morgan
17555 Peak Avenue
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
Mr. Garrett Toy
(408) 7767373
“Graphic Solutions’ involvement was instrumental in
helping to guide our citizens’ advisory group, keeping
them focused and helping them reach consensus. We
appreciate Graphic Solutions’ flexibility and willingness
to help us work through the issues encountered
throughout the project.”
-Joyce Maskell, Former Redevelopment Manager
Exhibit A
Santa Ana Gateway Sign
City of Santa Ana, CA
As part of the revitalization of the city’s Main Street
Commercial District, Graphic Solutions worked with research
imagery, staff and stakeholders to design a reconstruction of
an historic gateway sign which spans a CALTRANS
right-of-way. Forms, materials and colors are maintained, but
sign text and engineering are updated to current codes and
requirements.
Reference
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana,CA 92701
Ms. Mindy Ly (714) 647-5665
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 30
4. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
PROJECT APPROACH - SITE AND COMMUNITY
Pacific Coast Highway is a vitally important connector linking the Bay Cities,
but one which does not differentiate between neighborhoods. Our challenge
will be to create a plan that will announce the identity of Hermosa Beach,
create a pedestrian friendly environment, and enhance conditions for local
businesses. These goals must be realized in an affordable and sustainable
manner.
PROJECT APPROACH - ENGAGING COMMUNITY
Community participation in the planning and design of the project will be
vital to its ultimate success. Local residents, business owners, visitors, and
commuters all will have their own needs and concerns that will be addressed
and integrated in our design concept and plan.
In addition to the community meetings, KSA would assemble a design team
which would include a graphics consultant, a cost estimator, and possibly a
traffic consultant.
We will involve the community to explore the their goals and objectives for
the project with an eye to developing consensus. KSA will then follow up with
design studies, reviewing them periodically with your sub committee and
finally presenting them in a follow up community meeting. A final masterplan
with phasing options for the entire street would be developed, a conceptual
cost model would be generated and the final package presented either to the
community or to public agency.
DESIGN OPPORTUNITIES
Gateways: • Create a sense of arrival through thematic gateway elements at
north and south end of project area and create an identity of Hermosa Beach
Medians: Landscape medians in existing double striped lanes will create a
more pedestrian-friendly and visually attractive environment.
• Walkability: Walkabity improvements should include street trees to provide
shade, site amenities to provide seating and resting areas, improved
crosswalks and curb extensions to street to enhance safety for pedestrians.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 31
• Bike Lanes: creating a bicycle lane system that encourages and promotes
healthy and sustainable practices, while creating a network that provides local
and regional connectivity
•Lighting: New street and pedestrian lighting can be incorporated to enhance
safety and promote an inviting and lively environment along the business
corridor
• Transit: Improve transit stops to encourage use of public transit along project
area.
• Sustainability: Enhance sustainability through a drought tolerant plant palette,
reduce heat gain effect with tree canopies, and promoting sustainable storm
water management practices where possible
• Each of these elements would be evaluated for impact on infrastructure, traffic
and cost.
• We would work closely with the City, design representatives and stake holders
to review feasibility and desirability of components and elements to be included
in the entire plan.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 32
5. PROJECT PLAN
Our design process on public streetscape projects includes in-depth site investigation and documentation of
site conditions, presentation of early design schemes during the Schematic Design phase, and working with
stakeholders and the client groups to identify preferred alternatives and refine initial design concepts.
Working closely with our selected subconsultants, we will identify opportunities to enhance the community
identity of the PCH/Aviation Blvd Improvements, with the ultimate goal of creating a safe and attractive,
pedestrian-friendly, vibrant, economically viable district. The needs, concerns, and aspirations of business
owners, residents, and other stakeholders in the area must be made a central consideration in the design
process. On the technical side, considerations of construction expense, scheduling and phasing, long-term
maintenance, sustainability, and traffic management must also be incorporated at every stage of the design
process from the earliest phases. Our firm and subconsultant team have a proven track record in all of
these areas.
We strive to build a team that will bring a combination of design creativity, technical experience, and
innovation to the PCH/Aviation Blvd Improvements Project Area.
Our project team includes Rock Miller of Stantec, a highly experienced traffic planning and engineering
firm, to analyze the street and provide transpiration design to accommodate the multiple demands for
traffic safety, multi-modal transport, and green elements. Graphic Solutions will provide professional design
services for a comprehensive branding and signage program including gateways and wayfinding, street
name signs and various directional signs welcoming and guiding travelers to and through Hermosa Beach
and its key destinations.
The public improvement and landscape initiative scope of work will incorporate the following elements:
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Explore ideas for creating a commercial brand for the Project Area
Upgraded sidewalks; repair and replace, remove barriers
New and upgraded landscaped medians
Analysis of existing street trees for both health and position
New street trees, tree wells, and planter areas for both commercial and residential streets; native and/or
drought tolerant species of both plants and trees
Explore options for site appropriate trees: non invasive to sidewalk root systems
Installation of new street furniture, benches, trash cans, communicating the theme for the corridor
Special features at major intersections and gateways to the corridor
Incorporate pedestrian oriented elements where appropriate
Analyze areas of potential ADA deficiency and make suggestions
Estimate cost of improvements throughout the design process
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 33
TRANSPORTATION DESIGN FEATURES
Sidewalk design to maximize pedestrian flow
Analysis of street crossings and intersections for safety and pedestrian access; enhanced crosswalks,
bulbouts, enhanced signals (HawK) to reduce exposure time for pedestrians
Pedestrian-friendly design features; curb ramps, driveway aprons, and reduced intersection corner radii
Integration of the corridor with existing and planned bicycle routes
Landscape medians for pedestrian crossing safety and traffic calming
Pedestrian-friendly lighting
Bicycle features including bike racks and signal detection
Wayfinding program identifying connection to major destinations and transit facilities
5.1 WORK PLAN BY TASK
Task 1
1. Orientation/kick-off meeting with the PCH/Aviation committee to review goals and issues, and scope
of work
2. Review project documents provided by the city and areal photographs and other related documents
such as Beach Cities Livability Plan, South Bay Bicycle Master Plan and Measure R Program
3. Review conditions of project site and photo document the site
4. Meetings with Committee and Stake holders, including but not limited to, PCH/Aviation business
merchants, utility companies, Caltrans, bicycle groups, and city departments, to gather information
and feed back (4 meetings included)
5. Meet with design team and sub consultants to review scope, schedule of work and design strategy
and direction
6. Prepare site analysis and outline design issues and opportunities
7. Prepare three (3) conceptual plan alternatives
Task 2
1. Prepare presentation of three (3) conceptual plan alternatives and meet with Committee to present
designs
Task 3
1. Meet with design team and sub consultants to review feedback, revise design strategy and direction
2. Refine three (3) conceptual plans based on input of committee and stakeholders
3. Prepare presentation of conceptual alternatives in public meeting to gather additional comments and
input from stakeholders and the public (2 meetings included)
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 34
Task 4:
1. Meet with design team and sub consultants to refine conceptual design
2. Prepare final conceptual plan drawing for the project area based on all input
3. Meet and present final concept to PCH/Aviation improvement committee and city council (2
meetings included)
Task 5:
1. Provide assistance to staff in the application of grant funds. Including preparations of Grant
applications (3 grant applications included)
Task 6.
1. Prepare final concept plan and report with recommendations, recommended materials or sections
and conceptual roadway details as appropriate. Final report shall include digital presentation for
future staff use
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 35
Orange Grove Park, Hacienda Heights
Full landscape architectural design services for a new 5.5 acre park in
Hacienda Heights, incorporating a toddler playground area, par course
areas, walking trails and par course areas, California native plantings
and custom hardscape design elements: for the County of Los Angeles
Community Development Commission.;
Client Contact:,
Eric Chow: County of Los Angeles Community Development
Commission, (323) 260-3426
Havenhurst Park and Formosa Park
Complete landscape architectural design services for two innovative
public pocket parks in West Hollywood, each designed entirely over a
parking structure to fit into the existing neighborhood and complement
new housing developments. Designs incorporate public art, water
features, gathering areas, planting and hardscape. Incorporates public
process. For the City of West Hollywood.
Sam Baxter, Facilities & Landscape Manager, City of West Hollywood
(323) 848-6321
Redondo Beach Gateway at PCH and Catalina Ave.
Complete landscape architectural services for a landscaped gateway
feature under the famous Redondo Beach -King Harbor sign,
incorporating a water feature with sculptural element, hardscape and
planting suitable to the coastal zone. With David Denton Architect.
Client Contact:
Brad Lindahl, City of Redondo Beach, (310) 372-1171 x2286
6. REFERENCES
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 36
Whittier Boulevard, East Los Angeles
Full service streetscape design and implementation project for a
fourteen-block section of Whittier Boulevard in Los Angeles County.
Currently in Design Development. Incorporates community meetings
and working closely with stakeholder groups including the Whittier
Boulevard Merchants Association.
Client Contact:
Geoffrey Siebens, Community Development Corporation of the
County of Los Angeles, (323) 260-3490
San Gabriel Boulevard Streetscape Improvements, San Gabriel
Full service streetscape design and implementation project for a 1.2
section of San Gabriel Boulevard in the City of San Gabriel. Design
incorporated community meetings throughout all design phases,
Metro Call for Projects TEA Grant preparation and adherence to
CDBG funding and schedule requirements. Currently in Bid Phase.
Client Contact:
Jennifer Davis, Community Development Director, City of San
Gabriel, (626) 308-2806
The Pointe, Media Studios, Serrano Woodrise
Full service landscape architecture design services for several high
profile commercial projects in the City of Burbank. Project scopes
included technically demanding on-structure engineering, California
native and drought tolerant landscape design, hardscape design and
LEED adherence.
Client Contact:
M. David Paul, MDPA (310) 393-9653
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 374212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 37
7. INDEMNIFICATION/INSURANCE INFORMATION
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 38
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 39
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 40
8. FEES
Katherine Spitz Associates Inc.
PCH/Aviation Blvd Improvements - Landscape Architectural Concept Design Fee Proposal December 22th, 2011 Scope of Work Katherine Spitz Associates Inc.Stantec Graphic Solutions
Landscape
Architect/Prime Traffic Eng.Signage & Way-
finding SUBS TOTAL
Task 1 Pre-Design
Orientation/kick-off meeting with the PCH/Aviation committee to review goals and issues, and scope
of work 1,500$ $1,500
Review project documents provided by the city and areal photographs and other related documents
such as Beach Cities Livability Plan, South Bay Bicycle Master Plan and Measure R Program 2,400$ $2,400
Review conditions of project site and photo document the site 1,600$ $1,600
Meetings with Committee and Stake holders, including but not limited to, PCH/Aviation business merchants, utility companies, Caltrans, bicycle groups, and city departments, to gather information
and feed back (4 meetings included)4,200$ $4,200
Meet with design team and sub consultants to review scope, schedule of work and design strategy
and direction 3,000$ $3,000
Prepare site analysis and outline design issues and opportunities 4,800$ $4,800Prepare three (3) conceptual plan alternatives 18,000$ $18,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $10,800 $12,000 $22,800
Subtotal $58,300
Task #2
Prepare presentation of three (3) conceptual plan alternatives and meet with Committee to present designs 1,500$ $1,500
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $10,200 $11,900 $22,100
Subtotal $23,600
Task 3
Meet with design team and sub consultants to review feedback, revise design strategy and direction 2,000$ $2,000
Refine three (3) conceptual plans based on input of committee and stake holders 10,000$ $10,000
Prepare presentation of conceptual alternatives in public meeting to gather additional comments and
input from stake holders and the public (2 meetings included)4,000$ $4,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $2,800 $2,800 $5,600
Subtotal $21,600
Task 4:
Meet with design team and sub consultants to refine conceptual design 2,000$ $2,000
Prepare final conceptual plan drawing for the project area based on all input 5,000$ $5,000
Meet and present final concept to PCH/Aviation improvement committee and city council (2
meetings included)3,000$ $3,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $2,800 $2,800 $5,600
Subtotal $15,600
Task 5:
Provide assistance to staff in the application of grant funds. Including preparations of Grant
applications (3 grant applications included)18,000$ $18,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $18,000
Task 6Prepare final concept plan and report with recommendations, recommended materials or sections
and conceptual roadway details as appropriate. Final report shall include digital presentation for
future staff use 6,800$ $6,800
Reimbursable expenses 3,230$ $3,230
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $0 $0 $0
$10,030
TOTAL FEE ESTIMATE 91,030$ $26,600 $29,500 $147,130
Note:
Additional services and meetings, if requested, will be billed on a time and materials basis at the
prevailing hourly rates.
Fees are subject to renegotiation if six months pass without notice to proceed being issued on any uncompleted phase of work.
Geotechnical services are not included in this scope of work
Signage fees will be renegotiated once final scope of work is determined.
Exhibit A
Katherine
Spitz
Associates, Inc.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING
4212 1/2 Glencoe Ave., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
(310) 574-4460 • FAX (310) 574-4462 • www.ksa-la.com Page 41
Katherine Spitz Associates Inc.PCH/Aviation Blvd Improvements - Landscape Architectural Concept Design Fee Proposal December 22th, 2011 Scope of Work Katherine Spitz Associates Inc.Stantec Graphic SolutionsLandscape Architect/Prime Traffic Eng.Signage & Way-finding SUBS TOTALTask 1 Pre-DesignOrientation/kick-off meeting with the PCH/Aviation committee to review goals and issues, and scope of work 1,500$ $1,500Review project documents provided by the city and areal photographs and other related documents such as Beach Cities Livability Plan, South Bay Bicycle Master Plan and Measure R Program 2,400$ $2,400Review conditions of project site and photo document the site 1,600$ $1,600Meetings with Committee and Stake holders, including but not limited to, PCH/Aviation business merchants, utility companies, Caltrans, bicycle groups, and city departments, to gather information and feed back (4 meetings included)4,200$ $4,200Meet with design team and sub consultants to review scope, schedule of work and design strategy and direction 3,000$ $3,000Prepare site analysis and outline design issues and opportunities 4,800$ $4,800Prepare three (3) conceptual plan alternatives 18,000$ $18,000SUB CONSULTANT FEE $10,800 $12,000 $22,800Subtotal$58,300Task #2Prepare presentation of three (3) conceptual plan alternatives and meet with Committee to present designs 1,500$ $1,500SUB CONSULTANT FEE $10,200 $11,900 $22,100Subtotal$23,600Task 3Meet with design team and sub consultants to review feedback, revise design strategy and direction 2,000$ $2,000Refine three (3) conceptual plans based on input of committee and stake holders 10,000$ $10,000Prepare presentation of conceptual alternatives in public meeting to gather additional comments and input from stake holders and the public (2 meetings included)4,000$ $4,000SUB CONSULTANT FEE $2,800 $2,800 $5,600Subtotal$21,600Task 4: Meet with design team and sub consultants to refine conceptual design 2,000$ $2,000
Prepare final conceptual plan drawing for the project area based on all input 5,000$ $5,000
Meet and present final concept to PCH/Aviation improvement committee and city council (2
meetings included)3,000$ $3,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $2,800 $2,800 $5,600
Subtotal $15,600
Task 5:
Provide assistance to staff in the application of grant funds. Including preparations of Grant
applications (3 grant applications included)18,000$ $18,000
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $18,000
Task 6
Prepare final concept plan and report with recommendations, recommended materials or sections
and conceptual roadway details as appropriate. Final report shall include digital presentation for
future staff use 6,800$ $6,800
Reimbursable expenses 3,230$ $3,230
SUB CONSULTANT FEE $0 $0 $0
$10,030
TOTAL FEE ESTIMATE 91,030$ $26,600 $29,500 $147,130
Note:Additional services and meetings, if requested, will be billed on a time and materials basis at the prevailing hourly rates.
Fees are subject to renegotiation if six months pass without notice to proceed being issued on any uncompleted phase of work.
Geotechnical services are not included in this scope of work
Signage fees will be renegotiated once final scope of work is determined.
HOURLY RATES - CONSULTANT DESIGN TEAM
Katherine Spitz Associates, Inc - Landscape Architect/Prime Consultant
Classification Hourly Rate
Principal Landscape Architect $200
Project Architect $125
Project Manager $90
Designer/Draftsperson $80
Stantec - Civil Engineering
Classification Hourly Rate
Principal in Charge $218
Planner $130
Graphic Solutions - Signage/Wayfinding
Classification Hourly Rate
Principal $120
Design Manager $95
Sr. Designer II $90
Sr. Designer I: Sr. Project Manager: Planning Specialist; Estimator $85
Project Manager III; Designer III $80
Project Manager II; Designer II; Technical Writer/Copywriter $75
Project Manager I; Designer I $70
Project Coordinator II; Sr. Production Artist $65
Project Coordinator I; Production Artist III $60
Production Artist II; Production Coordinator II $55
Production Artist I; Production Coordinator I $50
Production Assistant $45
Clerical/Word Processing $40
8.1 HOURLY RATES - CONSULTANT DESIGN TEAM
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
1 2m
2 2m
3 2m
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
HF&H CONSULTANTS, LLC Northern California
Advisory Services to Southern California
Municipal Management
19200 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 360 Robert D. Hilton, CMC
Irvine, California 92612 John W. Farnkopf, PE
Telephone: 949/251-8628 Laith B. Ezzet, CMC
Fax: 949/251-9741 Richard J. Simonson, CMC
www.hfh-consultants.com Marva Sheehan, CPA
July 19, 2012
Mr. Ken Robertson
Community Development Director
City of Hermosa Beach
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, California 90254
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
Evaluation of Solid Waste Services Proposals - Updated
Dear Mr. Robertson:
The attached report includes our evaluation report for the solid waste services proposals
previously submitted to the City of Hermosa Beach on July 5, 2012 for inclusion in the
July 11, 2012 City Council meeting packets, and four report pages subsequently adjusted
and submitted to the City on July 6, 2012. These four pages (page 4, page 1-1, page 4-1
and page 4-5) were included in supplemental packets provided to the City Council on
July 11, 2012.
Please call me at (949) 251-8902 if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Laith Ezzet, CMC Lisa Keating
Senior Vice President Project Manager
Enclosure – As stated
July 5, 2012 1 City of Hermosa Beach
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
REVIEW OF SOLID WASTE SERVICES PROPOSALS
This memorandum summarizes the results of the solid waste proposal review
performed by HF&H Consultants, LLC (“HF&H”) for the City of Hermosa Beach
(“City”).
BACKGROUND
The City of Hermosa Beach released on March 13, 2012 a Request for Proposals for
Integrated Solid Waste Management Services (“RFP”). On May 7, 2012, the City
received four proposals. HF&H performed a preliminary review of the proposals and
prepared a summary of each proposal. Written questions clarifying the proposals were
sent to each proposer on May 30, 2012, and each proposer was also provided an
opportunity to review and comment on the accuracy of the written proposal summary.
PROPOSALS REVIEWED
HF&H reviewed proposals submitted by the following companies:
• Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., dba Athens Services (“Athens”), a family-owned
business with significant operations in Los Angeles County, as well as
surrounding counties.
• Consolidated Disposal Service, LLC (“CDS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Republic Services, Inc., the second largest solid waste hauling company in North
America.
• Crown Disposal Inc. (“Crown”), a privately-held company with operations in the
Los Angeles County.
• USA Waste of California, Inc., dba Waste Management of Los Angeles,
(“WMLA”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc., the largest
solid waste hauling company in North America.
A summary of key evaluation metrics is provided in Attachment 1. A further summary
of the evaluated proposals is contained in Attachment 3.
KEY TERMS OF THE RFP
The term of the agreement is seven years beginning January 1, 2013, with an option to
extend the agreement for up to 24 additional months at the City’s sole discretion. The
July 5, 2012 2 City of Hermosa Beach
exclusive scope of this agreement includes residential, commercial and roll-off
collection services, with the exception of construction and demolition debris collection.
A summary of the key services and contract terms requested by the City in its RFP is
provided in Attachment 2.
The City’s RFP included the draft franchise agreement that the successful proposer
would be expected to execute. The agreement identifies in significant detail the various
solid waste collection and recycling services to be provided. The scope of services
contained in the agreement is comprehensive, specific, and tailored to meet the needs of
the customers within the City of Hermosa Beach. Therefore, unless significant
exceptions were proposed or significant enhancements added to the City’s desired
terms, all of the proposals would offer similar services.
Residential Proposal Options
Proposers were provided the opportunity to propose on two residential collection
methods:
Option 1: Cart System – Separate collection of refuse and recyclables in hauler-provided
carts to be collected using an automated arm. Customers would be charged based on
the size and number of refuse carts provided.
Option 2: Manual Single Stream – Combined collection of refuse and recyclables in
customer-provided containers, with solid waste to be processed at a material recovery
facility to recover the recyclables prior to landfilling. Customers would be charged a flat
monthly rate regardless of the quantity of waste placed for collection.
Included in Attachment 8 are excerpts from the September 13, 2011 HF&H presentation
to the City Council related to the comparative advantages of the two options above.
Green Waste Collection Program - Proposers were also instructed to propose an opt-in
green waste program under each option. Under Option 1, the hauler may charge a
monthly fee for green waste carts as part of the volume-based rate structure. Under
Option 2, green waste collection is to be included at no additional cost as part of the flat
monthly rate.
DETAILED PROPOSAL MATRIX
In order to compare the proposals, we prepared a matrix (Attachment 3) that
summarizes the following information obtained from the proposals:
July 5, 2012 3 City of Hermosa Beach
1. “Proposer Overview,” including the company’s corporate headquarters,
guaranteeing entity, if any, and contract revenue as a percentage of total
company revenues.
2. “Experience,” including a summary of each proposer’s experience in other
jurisdictions.
3. “Facilities,” describing the proposed operating yard, recycling and green waste
facilities, disposal site, C&D facility, and transfer station facilities.
4. “Equipment,” describing the carts and vehicles proposed.
5. “Minimum Diversion Rate,” including proposed minimum overall diversion
rates, bin waste processing, and construction and demolition debris recovery
rates.
6. “Additional Information Requested in the RFP,” describing:
Disposal rate adjustment method and rate adjustment caps, if proposed
Solid waste facility capacity guarantees
Optional food waste programs
Optional door-to-door household hazardous waste (“HHW”) collection and
other HHW programs
Collection programs and options to service the downtown area
Green waste programs under each residential collection option
Form of performance surety
Safety performance Experience Modification Rate (“EMR”)
Biennial Inspection of Terminal (“BIT”) status
Average hourly driver wage
Proposed minimum diversion rates
Optional recycling incentive programs
Other diversion programs
7. “Proposer Exceptions to Franchise Agreement.” Proposers were required to
identify any terms in the City’s franchise agreement that proposers desired to
negotiate.
8. “Legal Disclosures,” indicating any legal issues that the RFP required the
proposer to disclose.
9. “Unique Proposal Features,” identifying proposed terms that exceed the
minimum requirements of the RFP.
Updated July 6, 2012 4 City of Hermosa Beach
Proposed Rate Revenue
Proposed rate revenue represents all customer charges that would be paid by
residential and commercial customers in the City to the contractor based upon the
proposed rates. This is the best method to compare overall costs.
Proposers were asked to propose monthly rates for various services to be provided
under the new agreement. The rates are adjusted annually based on changes in a
weighted rate adjustment formula using published price indices for labor, fuel,
equipment, disposal and “other” costs. Proposers were permitted to propose alternative
adjustment methods for disposal, as detailed below under Rate Adjustment Parameters.
See page 3-7 under Rate Adjustment Terms for detail. Total proposed first-year rate
revenues were calculated by multiplying the proposed rates for each type of service by
the number of customers receiving that service (see Attachment 4).
The current single family residential rate structure is a flat monthly fee for all customers
for unlimited service. Under Option 1, rate revenue will depend on the number and size
of refuse carts selected by the customer. Rates for all proposers were applied to a
standardized cart distribution for comparison purposes.
Table 1: Proposed Total First-Year Rate Revenue(1)
Proposer
Option 1
w/opt-in green
waste
Option 2
w/opt-in
green waste
% Difference
(Option 2 vs.
Option 1)
Above (Below)
Current Rates(2)
Cart System Manual Single
Stream Option 1 Option 2
Athens -
Base(4) $2,255,000 $2,219,000 (2%) 3% 1%
Crown(3) $2,297,000 $2,326,000 1% 5% 6%
Athens –
Alternative(4) $2,356,000 $2,320,000 (2%) 7% 6%
CDS $2,690,000 $2,766,000 3% 23% 26%
WMLA $3,018,000 n/a n/a 38% n/a
(1) Based on a standardized container distribution.
(2) Current annual rate revenue is $2,194,000, with no green waste service.
(3) Based on adjusted rate proposal submitted during proposal clarification process, which reduced rate
revenue by $113,000 for Option 1 and $130,000 for Option 2.
(4) Athens offered a base proposal, and an alternative proposal with additional waste processing and
higher diversion for an additional cost.
July 5, 2012 5 City of Hermosa Beach
Rate Adjustment Parameters
The draft agreement provides for annual rate adjustments based on published price
indices. The RFP permitted proposers to propose an alternative method of adjusting the
disposal component of the rates. A significant decline in disposal tonnage over the last
several years has resulting in some landfills in the region seeking additional disposal
tonnage at reduced rates. However, the anticipated closure of the Puente Hills Landfill
in November 2013 adds uncertainty to the long-term disposal market. The parent
companies of CDS and WMLA own landfills, which provides greater control over
future disposal cost increases. Athens and Crown utilize various landfills owned by
other entities in the region. All proposers offer the City guarantees of capacity for the
term of the agreement at their processing and transfer facilities and, for CDS and
WMLA, their landfills.
Proposed disposal component adjustors, and other proposed rate adjustment benefits
and limitations include:
Athens:
5% annual increase to disposal component.
5% cap on total annual adjustments, with changes above 5% rolled forward to
subsequent years.
An adjustment for increased green waste costs due to the closure of Puente Hills in
2013 (green waste is used as alternative daily landfill cover or “ADC”) and the
subsequent use of Athens’ composting facility in Victorville. The increase would be:
o Option 1: $0.30 per green waste cart per month
o Option 2: $0.31 per home per month
CDS:
Disposal cost increases based on the change in the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”),
capped at 2% per year in years two and three, and capped at 3% in subsequent years
The total annual adjustment would have a floor of 0% (no rate decreases).
Crown:
Disposal cost increases based on the change in the CPI.
5% cap on total annual adjustments, with increases above 5% rolled forward to
subsequent years.
WMLA:
Disposal cost increases based on the change in the CPI.
In Table 2 below are projected rate revenues over the contract term, based on the
proposed adjustment methods:
July 5, 2012 6 City of Hermosa Beach
Table 2: Projected Seven-Year Rate Revenue
(sorted lowest to highest)
Proposer
Option 1 Option 2
Rate Revenue % Above Low
Cost Proposer Rate Revenue % Above Low
Cost Proposer
1. Athens - Base $17.5 million - $17.6 million -
2. Crown $17.6 million 1% $17.8 million 1%
3. Athens – Alt. $18.4 million 5% $18.4 million 5%
4. CDS $20.5 million 17% $21.1 million 20%
5. WMLA $23.1 million 32% n/a n/a
Experience
Proposer experience for all four proposers is summarized starting on page 3-1 of
Attachment 3. Below are service highlights:
Athens provides exclusive services, including both automated and manual
residential collection, to cities throughout Los Angeles County, with a significant
presence in the San Gabriel Valley. In the South Bay area, Athens exclusively
services the cities of Redondo Beach and Palos Verdes Estates. Athens provides
street sweeping services to the City of Hermosa Beach.
CDS has been the exclusive solid waste service provider for the City of Hermosa
Beach since 2001. CDS provides exclusive services, including both automated and
manual residential collection, to cities throughout Los Angeles County. In the South
Bay area, CDS exclusively services the cities of El Segundo (residential), Hawthorne
(residential and commercial), Rolling Hills (residential), and Inglewood (residential
and commercial, beginning August 1, 2012).
Crown provides exclusive residential and commercial services to the cities of Santa
Paula and San Fernando, and to the community of Playa Vista, and exclusive
commercial service to the Santa Monica-Malibu School District and the City of
Beverly Hills. Crown provides non-exclusive commercial services in cities
throughout Los Angeles County.
WMLA provides exclusive services, including both automated and manual
residential collection, to cities throughout Los Angeles County. In the South Bay
area, WMLA provides exclusive residential and commercial services to the cities of
Inglewood (until July 31, 2012), Manhattan Beach and Rolling Hills Estates, and
exclusive residential and non-exclusive commercial services to the City of Carson.
Updated July 6, 2012 4 City of Hermosa Beach
Proposed Rate Revenue
Proposed rate revenue represents all customer charges that would be paid by
residential and commercial customers in the City to the contractor based upon the
proposed rates. This is the best method to compare overall costs.
Proposers were asked to propose monthly rates for various services to be provided
under the new agreement. The rates are adjusted annually based on changes in a
weighted rate adjustment formula using published price indices for labor, fuel,
equipment, disposal and “other” costs. Proposers were permitted to propose alternative
adjustment methods for disposal, as detailed below under Rate Adjustment Parameters.
See page 3-7 under Rate Adjustment Terms for detail. Total proposed first-year rate
revenues were calculated by multiplying the proposed rates for each type of service by
the number of customers receiving that service (see Attachment 4).
The current single family residential rate structure is a flat monthly fee for all customers
for unlimited service. Under Option 1, rate revenue will depend on the number and size
of refuse carts selected by the customer. Rates for all proposers were applied to a
standardized cart distribution for comparison purposes.
Table 1: Proposed Total First-Year Rate Revenue(1)
Proposer
Option 1
w/opt-in green
waste
Option 2
w/opt-in
green waste
% Difference
(Option 2 vs.
Option 1)
Above (Below)
Current Rates(2)
Cart System Manual Single
Stream Option 1 Option 2
Athens -
Base(4) $2,255,000 $2,219,000 (2%) 3% 1%
Crown(3) $2,297,000 $2,326,000 1% 5% 6%
Athens –
Alternative(4) $2,356,000 $2,320,000 (2%) 7% 6%
CDS $2,690,000 $2,766,000 3% 23% 26%
WMLA $3,018,000 n/a n/a 38% n/a
(1) Based on a standardized container distribution.
(2) Current annual rate revenue is $2,194,000, with no green waste service.
(3) Based on adjusted rate proposal submitted during proposal clarification process, which reduced rate
revenue by $113,000 for Option 1 and $130,000 for Option 2.
(4) Athens offered a base proposal, and an alternative proposal with additional waste processing and
higher diversion for an additional cost.
July 5, 2012 7 City of Hermosa Beach
Total Company Revenues
The proposed Hermosa Beach annual rate revenues of each company as a percentage of
total company revenues are shown in the table below. This is an indicator of the size of
the Hermosa Beach contract relative to the company’s other operations.
Table 3: First-Year Rate Revenues as Percentage of Annual Company Revenue
Proposer Hermosa Beach First-Year Rate Revenue as
% of Annual Company Revenue
Athens 1%
CDS (1) <1%
Crown 5%
WMLA(1) <1%
(1) Based on revenue for parent company that proposed performance guaranty.
Waste Diversion
The City of Hermosa Beach is part of the Los Angeles Regional Agency, or LARA, 16
cities that submit a combined report to CalRecycle under AB 939. LARA’s 2010
diversion is approximately 70%. This diversion percentage is used for AB 939
compliance purposes and includes source reduction and other recycling activities
performed by parties other than the franchise hauler, such as independent recyclers and
self-haulers. The diversion rates for hauler-collected material only are generally far
lower than citywide diversion rates. The City of Hermosa Beach’s 2011 diversion rate
for hauler-collected solid waste was 26%. Proposers were asked to propose a
guaranteed diversion rate for hauler-collected waste and to describe programs to be
implemented to achieve this rate. Proposed diversion rates for waste collected under
the agreement are summarized below.
Table 4: Proposed Guaranteed Hauler Diversion Rates
(sorted highest to lowest)
Proposer Guaranteed Hauler Diversion Rate
Option 1 Option 2
Crown 65% 60%
Athens – Alternative 42.5% 50%
Athens - Base 35% 40%
CDS 31% 35%
WMLA 27% n/a
Current 26%
July 5, 2012 8 City of Hermosa Beach
If the diversion amount guaranteed is not achieved, the agreement provides for
liquidated damages of $25 per ton for each ton that the contractor falls short of the
guarantee. The highest diversion rates were proposed by Crown. Two key components
of Crown’s plan to reach the higher diversion levels are:
1. Processing of Residential Refuse – Under Option 1, residential refuse is not required
to be processed, as recyclables are to be separated into the recycling carts. Crown
proposes to process the refuse to recover recyclables not separated by the customer
into the recycling cart.
2. Processing of Commercial Refuse – Crown proposes to process commercial refuse to
remove recyclables prior to landfilling.
3. Restaurant Food Waste Program – Crown proposes to include a restaurant food
waste program as part of its base proposal at the same rates as refuse service for
equivalent size containers.
For comparison, recent contracting processes in the South Bay beach cities resulted in a
guaranteed diversion rate of 75% in Redondo Beach and 62% by the end of the term in
Manhattan Beach.
Food Waste Diversion Programs (Optional)
Proposing food waste diversion programs was optional under the RFP. The number of
restaurant food waste programs in the region is growing, and such programs can
increase commercial diversion rates in cities with a heavy restaurant concentration. Few
residential food waste programs have been implemented in the region, and those in
place have shown limited improvement in recovery rates. Proposed programs for the
City of Hermosa Beach are listed below:
Athens proposed:
o A three-month residential pilot program, at no additional cost, in which
customers may place food waste in the green waste cart. After the closure of the
Puente Hills Landfill, Athens proposes to take its green waste to its Victorville
facility for composting. Athens proposed a rate increase for green waste costs to
be effective at the time that Puente Hills Landfill closes. At this point, food waste
may be added to the green waste.
o Restaurant food waste collection for an additional cost to be negotiated.
CDS proposed:
o A six-month restaurant pilot program at no additional cost.
July 5, 2012 9 City of Hermosa Beach
o A six–month residential bagged food waste program at no additional cost. The
cost to the City and residents to continue the program would be the cost of the
food waste bags. Food waste bags can be placed inside the green waste or refuse
carts, with recovery of the food waste bags at a material recovery facility.
Crown proposed
o To immediately implement an on-going restaurant program to divert food and
food-soiled paper, collecting food waste at the same cost as refuse.
WLMA proposed:
o A six-month restaurant pilot program at no additional cost.
Optional Household Hazardous Waste Programs
Proposers were asked to propose a rate for door-to-door collection of household
hazardous waste (HHW). The cost for this program is proposed as a cost per residential
dwelling unit (single and multi-family) per month. Proposers were also provided an
opportunity to propose alternative HHW programs, including drop-off events.
Table 5: Optional HHW Programs
Proposer Door-to-Door
Call-In Other Optional HHW Programs
Athens $0.45/home/mo. Two drop-off events per year instead of door-to-door
program for the same cost.
CDS $0.44/home/mo. Sharps drop-off/mail-back program at no additional
cost.
Crown $0.45/home/mo. At no additional cost, one annual HHW drop-off
event, mail-back Sharps program, one annual e-waste
event, and publicizing of Los Angeles County events.
WMLA $0.99/home/mo. Alternative limited participation door-to-door
program for up to 286 participants per year for
$0.56/home/mo.
Residential Recycling Incentive Programs (Optional)
Proposers were provided an option to propose residential recycling incentive programs,
such as gift cards or coupons to neighborhoods with higher recycling participation.
CDS and WMLA proposed programs for an additional cost. Crown proposal includes a
program. Details and costs for each program are included on page 3-12.
July 5, 2012 10 City of Hermosa Beach
Exceptions to the Franchise Agreement
The only company to take any exceptions to the draft franchise agreement included in
the RFP was WMLA, which took 25 exceptions to the draft agreement language,
ranging in level of significance, addressing extraordinary rate adjustment procedures,
fuel usage, billing procedures, audit scope limitations, time limits on container repair
and other terms. See page 3-13.
Safety
Proposers were asked to submit the status of their Biennial Inspection of Terminal, or
“BIT,” report. All of the haulers provided Safety Compliance Report/Terminal Record
Update certifications with a Satisfactory status.
Proposers were requested to submit their Experience Modification Rate, which is
determined by the National Council on Compensation Insurance. This helps to measure
the efficacy of a company’s safety program. A rating of 1.0 is average, with lower
numbers being preferable. All proposers, except Crown, had factors more favorable
than average. Crown’s rating was 1.08, versus a 1.0 average. Crown noted that this
lower than industry average rating was due to the company’s inclusion of a higher
percentage of material recovery facility employment versus route driver employment
compared to other companies in the industry. (Crown indicates that the rating is for the
combined operations of Crown and Community Resource Recovery and Recycling.)
Safety issues in the solid waste industry are more heavily concentrated at solid waste
processing and disposal facilities than on collection routes.
Table 6: Experience Modification Rate
Proposer EMR – Effective As of May 2012
Athens 0.89
CDS 0.80
Crown 1.08
WMLA 0.75
A three-year history of the EMR is shown on page 3-11.
Legal Disclosures
The RFP required the proposers to describe certain legal actions meeting the disclosure
requirements that occurred in the past five years against the entity submitting the
July 5, 2012 11 City of Hermosa Beach
proposal, its key personnel, or affiliated companies in the State of California. See page
3-14 of Attachment 3 for details.
Table 7: Number of Legal Disclosures
Proposer # of Legal Disclosures
Athens 7
CDS 9
Crown 2
WMLA 6
An organization called “Montebello Residents for Honest Government PAC”
established a website www.stopathens.org. Athens provides exclusive residential
service in this city, while multiple haulers compete to provide commercial service. The
city awarded Athens an exclusive commercial agreement, to be effective after a required
five-year notice to existing commercial haulers ends. This agreement was awarded
without a competitive process. The cities of Lawndale, Manhattan Beach and Rancho
Palos Verdes, in which Athens proposed, received information from third parties
referring the City to the www.stopathens.org website, which includes a range of
negative allegations against Athens. See Attachment 7 for a response from Athens
regarding assertions made on this website.
Crown’s sister company, Community Recycling and Resource Recovery (CRRR), had a
fatal accident at its composting facility in Lamont last year, which has attracted media
attention. The Kern County Board of Supervisors voted to fine CRRR and revoke its
permit. The Court issued a stay of closure as the parties work out legal disputes. The
facility continues to operate at this time. See page 3-15.
Unique Proposal Features
Proposers were permitted to include contract enhancements over and above RFP and
contract requirements. These are summarized on pages 3-16 and 3-17 (unique proposal
features) and page 3-13 (other diversion programs). These generally involve community
support and minor recycling program enhancements, and the results of the latter would
be reflected in the guaranteed diversion rates.
Athens’ Alternative Term Proposal
The City contracts with Athens for street sweeping services through June 30, 2013.
Athens proposes to negotiate street sweeping cost savings for significant term
July 5, 2012 12 City of Hermosa Beach
extensions of the street sweeping agreement and the solid waste agreement. See page 3-
16 for additional information.
Regarding financial savings from contract extensions, each proposer would likely
propose additional savings if it is offered a longer term agreement. If the City is seeking
to enter into a longer term agreement with a proposer, it may consider soliciting similar
offers from the other competitors for comparison.
Reference Checks
HF&H conducted reference checks for the four proposers. HF&H contacted each
proposer’s references regarding the proposer’s performance in the areas of customer
service, program implementation, and working with the public agency. HF&H then
solicited an overall rating reflecting each city’s satisfaction with their hauler. All
proposers received combined ratings “above expectations” and no hauler received any
overall rating from a customer below a “satisfactory” rating.
Table 8: Reference Check Summary
Proposer # of References Ratings by Municipal
References(1)
Athens 16 4.3
CDS 13 4.1
Crown 5 4.6
WMLA 11 4.1
(1) 1 = Unsatisfactory, 2 = Below Expectations, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Above
Expectations, 5 = Exceptional Performance
Interviews
The City staff, with HF&H, interviewed the three lowest cost proposers. The City did
not interview WMLA due to proposed rate revenue that was 40% above current rates
and 12% higher than CDS, which was the next highest cost proposer.
Overall Observations
1. All the proposers are experienced and successfully providing services in other cities.
Reference checks for all companies were positive, as shown in Table 8.
2. All proposals will result in an overall cost increase for ratepayers, as shown in Table
1 on page 4 of this report. (Note that, under Option 1, residential costs may increase
July 5, 2012 13 City of Hermosa Beach
or decrease depending on the number and size refuse carts selected. The residential
rate would decrease under Athens’ Option 2 proposal.)
3. Crown and Athens proposed similar costs over the seven-year contract term, with
Athens slightly lower by 1% as shown in Table 2 on page 6. As shown in Table 4 on
page 7, Crown proposed significantly higher diversion at 60% to 65% versus 35% to
40% for Athens under its base (lowest cost) proposal.
4. Under Athens’ alternative proposal, diversion is increased to 42.5% to 50%, versus
Crown’s 60% to 65%, but Athens proposed costs would increase by 5% compared to
its base proposal, resulting in Crown having the lowest costs by 4% over the contract
term.
5. CDS, the incumbent, has the largest financial resources of the proposers
interviewed, which can provide greater financial stability, while minimizing service
transition issues. The CDS proposal achieves lower diversion (31% to 35%)
compared to Crown and Athens, and results in costs that are 17% to 20% higher than
the lowest cost proposer over the contract term as shown in Table 2 on page 6.
6. The costs of Option 1 (cart system) and Option 2 (manual single stream) are similar,
with a variance of approximately 3%, depending on which proposer is selected as
shown in Table 1 on page 4.
Summaries of cost over the contract term and proposed diversion rate guarantees are
recapped in Tables 9 and 10 below.
Table 9: Seven-Year Rate Revenue Projection
(sorted lowest to highest)
Proposer Option 1:
Cart System
Option 2:
Manual Single Stream
1. Athens - Base $17.5 million $17.6 million
2. Crown $17.6 million $17.8 million
3. Athens – Alternative $18.4 million $18.4 million
4. CDS $20.5 million $21.1 million
5. WMLA $23.1 million n/a
July 5, 2012 14 City of Hermosa Beach
Table 10: Proposed Guaranteed Hauler Diversion Rates*
(sorted highest to lowest)
Proposer Option 1:
Cart System
Option 2:
Manual Single Stream
1. Crown 65% 60%
2. Athens – Alternative 42.5% 50%
3. Athens - Base 35% 40%
4. CDS 31% 35%
5. WMLA 27% n/a
* Current hauler diversion is 26%.
Attachments
1. Summary of Proposals
2. Summary of Key Services and Contract Terms Requested in the RFP
3. Detailed Proposal Matrix
4. Proposed Rate Revenue
5. Projected Seven-Year Rate Revenue
6. Diversion Plan Comparison
7. Athens’ Response to StopAthens.org
8. Excerpts from HF&H presentation to the City of Hermosa Beach City Council
September 13, 2011
Attachment 1 8S8SGWDHG
Updated July 6, 2012 City of Hermosa Beach
Summary of Proposals (in alphabetical order)
PROPOSER PROPOSING ENTITY REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS HERMOSA BEACH CONTRACT RATE
REVENUE AS A % OF COMPANY
REVENUE
Athens Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., dba Athens
Services
City of Industry 1%
CDS Consolidated Disposal Service, LLC Santa Fe Springs Less than 1%
Crown Crown Disposal Co., Inc. Sun Valley 5%
WMLA USA Waste of California, Inc., dba Waste
Management of Los Angeles
Long Beach Less than 1%
Option 1 – With Residential Cart System
PROPOSER RATE REVENUE PROPOSED MONTHLY RATE RESIDENTIAL
GREEN WASTE –
64-GALLON CART
MONTHLY RATE
DIVERSION
RATE RESIDENTIAL – 64
GALLON REFUSE
CART
BIN RATE – 3 YARD,
1X WEEK
COLLECTION
PROPOSED
FIRST-YEAR
SEVEN-YEAR
PROJECTION
Athens-Base $2,255,000 $17.5 million $10.92 $99.75 $4.20 35%
Athens-Alt. $2,356,000 $18.4 million $10.92 $109.92 $4.20 42.5%
CDS $2,690,000 $20.5 million $13.12 $118.09 $5.15 31%
Crown $2,297,000 $17.6 million $10.79 $103.23 $4.00 65%
WMLA $3,018,000 $23.1 million $15.17 $118.86 $5.94 27%
Current $2,194,000 $11.57 $91.59 n/a 26%
Option 2 – With Residential Manual Single Stream Collection
PROPOSER RATE REVENUE PROPOSED MONTHLY RATE
DIVERSION
RATE RESIDENTIAL –
UNLIMITED COLLECTION
BIN RATE – 3 YARD, 1X
WEEK COLLECTION PROPOSED FIRST-
YEAR
SEVEN-YEAR
PROJECTION
Athens-Base $2,219,000 $17.6 million $10.92 $99.75 40%
Athens-Alt. $2,320,000 $18.4 million $10.92 $109.92 50%
CDS $2,766,000 $21.1 million $14.62 $118.09 35%
Crown $2,326,000 $17.8 million $11.79 $103.23 60%
Current $2,194,000 $11.57 $91.59 26%
PROPOSER RATE CAP/DISPOSAL COMPONENT ADJUSTMENT CONTRACT
EXCEPTIONS
Athens 5% cap on overall increases. Disposal component to adjust by 5% each year.
Increase upon Puente Hills Landfill closure:
Option 1: $0.30/green waste cart/month; Option 2: $0.31/home/month
0
CDS Disposal component to adjust by CPI, capped at 2% in years 2 and 3, and at 3% thereafter.
Overall increase to have a floor of 0% (no rate reductions). 0
Crown 5% cap on overall increases. Disposal component to adjust by the change in CPI. 0
WMLA Disposal component to adjust by the change in CPI. 25
Attachment 2
July 5, 2012 2 - 1 City of Hermosa Beach
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
SUMMARY OF KEY SERVICES AND CONTRACT TERMS
REQUESTED IN RFP
I. SERVICES
A. Residential Services
Option 1:
• One automated 96, 64 or 32-gallon refuse cart. Monthly fee based on size and number of refuse
carts.
• One automated 96, 64 or 32-gallon recycling cart. No charge for additional recycling carts.
• On request, one automated 96, 64 or 32-gallon green waste cart. Monthly fee per cart
requested, based on cart size.
• Manual can service provided to customers with properties that cannot accommodate
automated collection. Monthly fee for unlimited service.
• Backyard service for disabled residents at no additional charge.
Option 2:
• Unlimited collection of mixed refuse and recyclables in customer-provided containers.
• Processing of residential mixed waste to recover recyclables.
• On request, green waste collection at no additional cost. Collection method to be proposed.
• Backyard service for disabled residents at no additional charge.
B. Residential Bin and Commercial Collection Services
• Bin refuse collection for commercial customers, and residential customers not receiving cart
service.
• 96, 64 and 32-gallon commercial cart service available to businesses that cannot accommodate
a bin.
• Recyclables collection for residential bin and commercial customers at 50% of comparable refuse
rates. Mandatory commercial recycling outreach requirements.
• Temporary bin services.
• Exclusive permanent and temporary roll-off box service, except for non-exclusive construction
and demolition debris service.
• 70% diversion of construction and demolition debris.
• Porter service for downtown collection, whereby hauler collects waste from downtown
businesses in a small vehicle, transporting the waste to the Lot A bin enclosure. RFP requested
additional input on methods to improve downtown solid waste collection and enclosure
cleanliness.
C. City Services – at no additional charge
• Refuse, recyclables and green waste collection from City facilities, and in-office recycling
containers provided.
• Refuse and recyclables collection from City-sponsored events.
• Abandoned item collection.
• City litter container collection.
Attachment 2
July 5, 2012 2 - 2 City of Hermosa Beach
C. City Services – at no additional charge (continued)
• Refuse, recyclables and green waste collection from schools.
• Annual document shred day.
• Rate for optional door-to-door HHW program. Opportunity to propose alternative HHW
programs, such as drop-off events.
• On-call bulky item collection, up to two pickups per year of up to three cubic yards each
pickup for single and multi-family residents. Additional pickups and pickups from businesses
provided for a fee.
• Holiday tree collection from all residential customers, and provision of three roll-off boxes for
drop-off of trees, for three weeks following December 25.
II. CONTRACT TERMS
A. Term of Contract
Seven-year term, with a City option to extend the agreement for up to twenty-four additional
months.
B. Minimum Recycling Requirements
Minimum diversion rate for hauler-collected waste to be proposed. Liquidated damages of $25
per ton for failure to achieve guaranteed diversion.
C. City Fees
• Collector Fee – 10% of gross receipts, net of AB 939 fees.
• AB 939 Fee – Residential - $0.25/home/month. Other - $0.25/cubic yard of refuse.
• Administrative Fee - $50,000 per year, adjusted by CPI.
D. Audits
Biennial performance audit required.
E. Faithful Performance Bond/Letter of Credit
Franchisee will provide $500,000 in performance surety and was permitted to propose whether it
would be in the form of a performance bond, letter of credit, or combination of the two.
F. Vehicles
All route collection vehicles will use natural gas within six months of the start of service.
G. Rate Adjustment
Rate adjustment is based on weighted changes in published indices. Proposers were permitted to
propose alternative methods to adjust the disposal component.
H. Billing
Hauler bills all customers.
July 5, 2012 City of Hermosa Beach
Attachment 3
City of Hermosa Beach
Detailed Proposal Matrix
July 5, 2012
Table of Contents
Contents Page
Proposer Overview p. 3-1
Experience p. 3-1
Facilities p. 3-3
Equipment p. 3-6
Additional Information Requested in RFP p. 3-7
Minimum Diversion Rate p. 3-12
Recycling Incentives p. 3-12
Proposed Exceptions to Franchise Agreement p. 3-13
Legal Disclosures p. 3-14
Unique Proposal Features p. 3-16
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 1 City of Hermosa Beach
Proposer Overview
PROPOSER CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS GUARANTOR (PARENT COMPANY) HERMOSA BEACH CONTRACT
REVENUE AS A % OF COMPANY
REVENUE
Athens City of Industry, CA Arakelian Enterprises, Inc. 1%
CDS Phoenix, AZ Republic Services, Inc. Less than 1%(1)
Crown Sun Valley, CA n/a 5%
WMLA Houston, TX Waste Management, Inc. Less than 1%(1)
(1) The annual revenue used in calculation represents the operating results of the parent company providing guaranty.
Experience
PROPOSER OVERALL EXPERIENCE
Athens Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., dba Athens Services (“Athens”), a family-owned business, has been providing
waste collection and recycling services in Southern California for over 53 years. Athens cites 22 exclusive city
agreements and experience in 40 other cities. Athens also owns the Athens Material Recovery Facility in City
of Industry, American Waste Industries in Sun Valley, and American Organics in Victorville.
CDS Consolidated Disposal Services, LLC (“CDS”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Republic Services, Inc., the
second largest solid waste service provider in the USA.
As a legal entity, CDS was organized in 1998; however, the operating companies that comprise CDS have
Southern California service history of over 50 years. CDS has exclusive contracts with 29 municipalities and
non-exclusive contracts with 21 jurisdictions in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The parent company also
owns and/or operates seven transfer stations/material recovery facilities in the Los Angeles County, and
owns Sunshine Canyon Landfill.
Crown Crown Disposal, Inc. (“Crown”), a privately-held corporation, with the same ownership since 1960, provides
hauling services in Los Angeles and Ventura counties
Crown’s sister company, Community Recycling and Resource Recovery, shares common ownership with
Crown and operates a materials processing facility and transfer station in Sun Valley, a composting facility
in Lamont, and an anaerobic digestion facility in Ventura County.
WMLA USA Waste of California, Inc. dba Waste Management of Los Angeles (“WMLA”), formed in 1993. WMLA is
wholly owned by Waste Management, Inc., the largest solid waste service provider in North America.
WMLA cites 23 exclusive municipal agreements in or near Los Angeles County, and additional semi- and
non-exclusive service arrangements. Waste Management owns and operates 10 transfer stations/material
recovery facilities and four landfills throughout the region.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 2 City of Hermosa Beach
Experience (continued)
PROPOSER RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION EXPERIENCE
Athens Athens cites exclusive residential three-cart collection experience in the cities of Bell Gardens, Covina,
Monrovia, Redondo Beach, Sierra Madre, and West Hollywood, and the unincorporated areas of the
County of Los Angeles of Altadena and South San Gabriel, two-cart experience in the cities of Montebello,
Monterey Park, San Gabriel, and West Covina, and one-cart service for the City of Irwindale. Provides
semi-exclusive residential service in the City of La Canada Flintridge.
Cites manual collection experience in the cities of Azusa, Glendora, South El Monte and Temple City, and
manual backyard service in Palos Verdes Estates, San Marino and South Pasadena.
CDS CDS currently provides residential automated cart collection service in the County of Los Angeles (seven
districts), and cities of Alhambra, Artesia, Bell, Cudahy, Cypress, Hawaiian Gardens, Hawthorne,
Lawndale, Los Alamitos, Lynwood, Maywood, Norwalk, Rosemead, Santa Fe Springs, Seal Beach, and
Whittier.
Cites manual can collection service in the cities of Avalon, El Segundo, Hermosa Beach, and Rolling Hills.
Crown Crown provides exclusive three-cart collection for the cities of City of San Fernando and Santa Paula, and
the community of Playa Vista.
WMLA WMLA cites the following automated three-cart collection experience: cities of Agoura Hills, Arcadia,
Baldwin Park, Calabasas, Carson, Diamond Bar, El Monte, Hidden Hills, Huntington Park, Inglewood, La
Verne, Lancaster, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Moorpark, Palmdale, Rolling Hills Estates, San Dimas, Santa
Clarita, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Westlake Village, and Whittier. Provides two-cart collection in the
cities of Ridgecrest and South Gate.
PROPOSER BIN COLLECTION EXPERIENCE
Athens Athens provides exclusive commercial service in the cities of Azusa, Bell Gardens, Covina, Glendora,
Irwindale, Monterey Park, Palos Verdes Estates, Redondo Beach, San Gabriel, San Marino, Sierra Madre,
South El Monte, South Pasadena, Temple City, West Covina, and West Hollywood, and semi-exclusive in
the cities of La Canada Flintridge and Monrovia,
CDS CDS currently provides exclusive commercial collection in the cities of Alhambra, Artesia, Avalon, Bell,
Cudahy, Cypress, Hawaiian Gardens, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Huntington Park Lawndale, Los
Alamitos, Lynwood, Maywood, Rosemead, and Seal Beach.
CDS has semi-exclusive and non-exclusive commercial collection experience in the cities of Torrance,
Rancho Palos Verdes, Norwalk, Whittier, El Segundo, and Santa Fe Springs.
Crown Crown cites exclusive commercial collection in the cities of Beverly Hills, San Fernando, and Santa Paula,
the community of Playa Vista, and the Santa Monica –Malibu School District. Crown cites additional
exclusive roll-off box service contracts in three additional jurisdictions. Provides non-exclusive bin
collection in the City of Los Angeles and other cities in Los Angeles County.
WMLA WMLA cites exclusive commercial service for the cities of Baldwin Park, Calabasas, Inglewood, Lancaster,
La Verne, Manhattan Beach, Moorpark, Palmdale, Ridgecrest, Rolling Hills Estates, San Dimas, Simi Valley,
South Gate and Thousand Oaks. Provides semi-exclusive services in the cities of Arcadia, Carson, El Monte,
Hidden Hills, and Westlake Village.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 3 City of Hermosa Beach
Experience (continued)
PROPOSER SERVICE TRANSITION EXPERIENCE
Athens Athens cites recent hauler transitions including the cities of Redondo Beach (2011), Irwindale (2011), and the
unincorporated area of the County of Los Angeles of Altadena (2011).
CDS CDS cites multiple transitions including the cities of Hawthorne (2007, three-cart system from prior hauler)
and Lawndale (2011, transition to volume-based system), and the Athens district of Los Angeles County (2010,
transition to three-cart system from prior hauler).
Crown Crown transitioned the City of San Fernando from another hauler in 2002, implementing automated collection
at transition. Crown transitioned commercial services for the City of Beverly Hills in 2004 with seven days
notice that the previous hauler would begin pulling its bins. In 2011, Crown transitioned residential and
commercial service in the City of Santa Paula from service by two haulers and the city in less than two months
from contract award, implementing a volume-based rate structure and a food waste program at transition.
WMLA WMLA transitioned the City of Rolling Hills Estates from another hauler to a volume-based rate structure in
2005. WMLA transitioned the City of South Gate from another hauler in 2005. WMLA transitioned residential
services from an open market to exclusive automated service in unincorporated Los Angeles County area of
Citrus in 2007.
Facilities
PROPOSER OPERATING FACILITY/LOCAL OFFICE
Athens 15045 Salt Lake Ave., City of Industry
Will establish a local office in the city of either Hermosa Beach or Redondo Beach.
CDS Operating Yard - 14905 S. San Pedro Street, Gardena
Customer Service Call Center – 12949 Telegraph Road, Santa Fe Springs
Crown 9189 De Garmo Ave., Sun Valley
Local office staffed by two local residents to be established in City.
WMLA Operating Yard - 1970 E. 213th St., Long Beach and 9081 Tujunga Avenue, Sun Valley
Customer Service - 5701 Eastern Avenue, Commerce
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 4 City of Hermosa Beach
Facilities (continued)
PROPOSER DISPOSAL SITE
Athens Chiquita Canyon Landfill - 29201 Henry Mayo Dr, Castaic
Sunshine Canyon Landfill - 14747 San Fernando Road, Sylmar
El Sobrante Landfill - 10910 Dawson Canyon Road, Corona
Puente Hills Landfill - 13130 Crossroads Parkway South, City of Industry
Average landfill cost is $34.00/ton. Per ton transfer rate at Athens Transfer Station to these landfills: $35.00
to $65.00/ton
CDS Sunshine Canyon Landfill - 14747 San Fernando Road, Sylmar - Owned and operated by hauler
Crown Sunshine Canyon Landfill - 14747 San Fernando Road, Sylmar @ $59.88/ton
Chiquita Canyon Landfill - 29201 Henry Mayo Dr, Castaic @ $59.00/ton
WMLA El Sobrante Landfill - 10910 Dawson Canyon, Corona @ $29.36/ton landfilling plus $20.56/ton transfer costs
- Owned and operated by hauler
PROPOSER TRANSFER FACILITIES
Athens Athens MRF – Transfer Station - 14048 Valley Blvd., City of Industry @ $35.00 to $65.00/ton - Owned and
operated by hauler
CDS Falcon Transfer and Recycling Station – 3031 East I Street, Wilmington @ $43.00/ton
American Waste Transfer – 1449 W. Rosecrans, Gardena @ $43.00/ton
Both facilities owned and operated by hauler
Crown Culver City Transfer Station – 9225 Jefferson, Culver City @ $15.00/ton (transfer only)
Community Recycling & Resource Recovery, Inc. - 9147 De Garmo Ave., Sun Valley @ $51.00/ton -
common ownership with hauler
WMLA WM Carson Transfer Station – 321 West Francisco Street, Carson, CA @ $93.00/ton - Owned and operated
by hauler
PROPOSER COMMINGLED RECYCLABLES PROCESSING
Athens Potential Industries - 922 E Street, Wilmington
CDS CVT Regional MRF - 2740 Coronado Street, Anaheim - Owned and operated by hauler
Crown Santa Monica Community Recycling Center – 2411 Delaware Ave., Santa Monica
Potential Industries, Inc. – 922 East St., Wilmington
(Sister company CRRR formed a joint venture with Potential Industries, Inc. for the operation of a recycling
center in San Carlos.)
WMLA Smurfit Recycling – 20502 S. Denker Avenue, Torrance, CA 90501
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 5 City of Hermosa Beach
Facilities (continued)
PROPOSER GREEN WASTE FACILITIES/USES
Athens Puente Hills Landfill - 2800 Workman Mill Road, Whittier @ $22.95/ton, for use as alternative daily cover
(ADC). Landfill closes 11/2013.
Alternative Facility:
American Organics – 20055 Shay Road, Victorville - To be used after Puente Hills closure. Composting
facility owned and operated by proposer.
CDS Falcon Transfer and Recycling Station – 3031 East I Street, Wilmington - Owned and operated by hauler. To
be transferred to Organic Ag, Community Recycling or Farm Share facilities for processing @ $35.00/ton.
Crown Community Recycling & Resource Recovery, Inc. – 11300 Pendelton St., Sun Valley @ $41.75/ton, common
ownership with hauler
WMLA Sun Valley Recycling Park - 9227 Tujunga Ave, Sun Valley @ $57.00/ton, owned and operated by hauler
Agromin – 17121 Nichols St., Huntington Beach @ $28.00/ton
PROPOSER MIXED WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES
Athens Athens MRF – Transfer Station - 14048 Valley Blvd., City of Industry@ $35.00 to $65.00 per ton
CDS CVT Regional MRF - 2740 Coronado Street, Anaheim - Owned and operated by hauler
Crown Community Recycling & Resource Recovery, Inc. – 11300 Pendelton St., Sun Valley @ $51.00/ton, common
ownership with hauler
WMLA WM Carson Transfer Station – 321 West Francisco Street, Carson
$93.00/ton, owned and operated by hauler
PROPOSER CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS FACILITIES
Athens California Waste Systems – 621 West 152nd Street, Gardena
$50.50/ton., reports a 68% diversion rate.
Alternative Facility:
American Waste - Sun Valley
Owned and operated by proposer.
CDS Falcon Transfer and Recycling Station – 3031 East I Street, Wilmington
$51.00/ton, owned and operated by hauler, reports a certified recycling rate of 96% for 2011
Crown Community Recycling & Resource Recovery, Inc. – 11300 Pendelton St., Sun Valley
$51.00/ton, common ownership with Crown, reports a 92.51% diversion certification by City of Los
Angeles for 2011.
WMLA Downtown Diversion, Inc. - 2424 East Olympic Blvd, Los Angeles
$56.00/ton, owned and operated by hauler
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 6 City of Hermosa Beach
Facilities (continued)
PROPOSER WASTE-TO-ENERGY FACILITIES
Athens Southeast Resource Recovery Facility (S.E.R.R.F) – 120 Pier S Ave., Long Beach @ $47.00/ton
Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Facility – 5926 Sheila St., Commerce @ $49.00/ton
CDS Southeast Resource Recovery Facility (S.E.R.R.F) – 120 Pier S Ave., Long Beach @ $47.00/ton
Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Facility – 5926 Sheila St., Commerce @ $49.00/ton
Crown Southeast Resource Recovery Facility (S.E.R.R.F) – 120 Pier S Ave., Long Beach @ $47.00/ton
Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Facility – 5926 Sheila St., Commerce @ $49.00/ton
WMLA Southeast Resource Recovery Facility (S.E.R.R.F) – 120 Pier S Ave., Long Beach @ $47.00/ton
Equipment
PROPOSER COLLECTION VEHICLES VEHICLE FOR NARROW STREETS
Athens Seven 2012 AutoCar CNG route vehicles, and
one 2010 Peterbilt roll-off vehicle.
Chevrolet 2011 pup truck. Truck will be equipped with
a body designed to tip into a bin attached to a standard
collection vehicle. Waste will be transloaded from the
pickup to a standard collection vehicle in the City.
CDS Five 2010 to 2011 AutoCar CNG route vehicles,
and one 2007 AutoCar roll-off vehicle.
Electric car, 7.25’ wide, 8.3’ high and 22.2’long.
Crown Five 2012 AutoCar CNG route vehicles, and one
2009 LNG roll-off vehicle.
Isuzu N Series, 2 axle, narrow wheel base.
WMLA Four 2008 AutoCar LNG, one 2011 McNeilus
CNG, and two 2009 Autocar LNG route vehicle,
and one 2011 AutoCar CNG roll-off vehicle.
McNeilus SREL, two axle, 18.5 cubic yard capacity.
PROPOSER CARTS (NEW CARTS REQUIRED) BIN COLORS
Athens Manufacturer: Rehrig Pacific
Black, blue, green
Refuse: grey
Recycling: confer with City staff
CDS Otto carts: charcoal, blue, green Refuse: blue
Recycling: white
Crown Rehrig Pacific carts and stackable barrels with
lids. Carts will have a minimum of 30%
recyclable content.
Colors will be grey, blue and green, unless City
prefers a granite-look lid color.
Hot-stamped, not labeled.
Colors to be determined with City.
(Offers split bins, for refuse and recyclables.)
WMLA Rehrig Pacific carts: black, blue, green Refuse: green
Recycling: white
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 7 City of Hermosa Beach
Additional Information Requested in RFP
PROPOSER RATE ADJUSTMENT TERMS
Athens The disposal component will adjust by 5% per year. Total annual change in any year is capped at 5%, with
any change over 5% rolled forward to future years.
Requests the following adjustments for an increase in green waste costs from $22.95 to $49.95 per ton upon
closure of Puente Hills Landfill (anticipated in November 2013):
Option 1: $0.30 per green waste cart per month
Option 2: $0.31 per home per month
CDS Disposal component, by the change in CPI, capped at 2% in years two and three, and capped at 3% for the
remainder of the term. Proposes that all components have a floor of 0%.
Crown Overall rate cap of 5% per year, with overages rolled forward to subsequent years. Disposal cost component
would adjust by the change in CPI.
(Permitted increases for regulatory fees/surcharges per Section 6.5 would be exempt from 5% cap.)
WMLA Disposal component to adjust by the change in the CPI for Garbage and Trash Collection, US City average.
PROPOSER CAPACITY GUARANTEES
Athens Guarantees capacity at its processing facility for all Hermosa Beach tonnage collected under this agreement.
CDS Guarantees capacity at all of its own facilities, including processing facilities and the Sunshine Canyon
Landfill, which are owned by CDS’ parent company.
Crown Guarantees priority for Hermosa Beach franchise tonnage at Crown and CRRR Sun Valley facilities,
including subsequent disposal. Facility guarantees at CRRR facilities are available due to the common
ownership of Crown and CRRR.
WMLA Guarantees capacity for all City recycling and disposal collected for the term of this agreement. WMLA
indicates six Waste Management owned facilities that can be used under this agreement, including a
landfill.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 8 City of Hermosa Beach
Additional Information Requested in RFP (continued)
PROPOSER FOOD WASTE PROGRAMS - OPTIONAL
Athens Residential - Athens offers to conduct a three-month pilot program for residential food waste diversion. Pilot
program will include approximately 10% of residents. Athens can provide residential and/or commercial
food waste programs for an additional cost, and currently provides such programs in the region.
Food waste may be added to residential green waste carts after the closure of Puente Hills Landfill and the
corresponding rate increase for green waste is in force. Under Option 1, rate increase will be $0.30 per green
waste cart per month. Under Option 2, the increase will be $0.31 per home per month.
CDS Restaurant - CDS offers, at no additional cost, a six-month commercial food waste/organics pilot program to
be started by the end of the first year of service.
Residential - Under residential collection Option 1, CDS offers a residential organics pilot program that
permits inclusion of food waste and other organics in brightly colored bags to be placed in refuse or green
waste carts for removal at CDS’ transfer station. Residents would be provided six months worth of bags
initially, and additional bags upon request. The only additional cost will be for bags after the initial six month
supply. Bag cost and distribution method would be determined with the City after initial results are obtained.
This program would permit residents without space for green waste carts to recycle green waste in these
bags. Residents with green waste carts are expected to only place food waste in the bags.
Under Option 2, food and green waste would be collected through this bag program, eliminating the need for
a green waste truck. This would be an on-going program and not a pilot.
Schools will participate in an on-going bagged food waste diversion program at no additional cost.
Disneyland is currently running this program as a pilot.
Crown Restaurant - Estimating at least 100 participating food waste generators producing approximately 3,250 tons
of compostable food and food-soiled paper per year. Based on each customers’ container storage capacity and
wastestream, Crown will provide either:
Two bins, one for compostables and one for remaining waste which will be processed to recover
recyclables
One split bin, with separate compartments, one for compostables and one for either recyclables or refuse
to be processed to recover recyclables, or
A cart for commingled recyclables and a bin for all other waste, which will be processed to remove non-
compostables and then processed as food waste.
Cost of program at no additional charge – same rate as proposed for refuse.
Residential – Does not recommend initiating a residential food waste program at this time. Crown notes its
program to process residential refuse will provide for a larger increase in diversion.
Facilities:
Community Recycling Mixed MSW MRF – 9147 DeGarmo Ave., Sun Valley at $65.00/ton
IEUA Regional Plant #5 Solids Handling Facility – 6075 Kimball Ave., Chino at $70.00/ton
Community Recycling Lamont Compost Facility – 1261 N. Wheeler Ridge Road, Lamont
Cost included in Community Recycling Mixed MSW MRF per ton price.
Community Recycling Anaerobic Digestion Facility – Ventura County
Existing facility recently acquired by CRRR, in permitting process.
WMLA Restaurant - After six months of service, at no additional charge, WMLA will offer a six-month restaurant
food waste pilot program to 10% of the City’s food waste generating commercial customers. WMLA will
deliver food waste to its Reclaimable Anaerobic Composter at its Lancaster landfill (600 E. Avenue F,
Lancaster) at $83.00/ton.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 9 City of Hermosa Beach
Additional Information Requested in RFP (continued)
PROPOSER HHW PROGRAM
Athens $0.45 per dwelling unit per month for door-to-door collection. On pre-determined City-wide HHW
collection days, Athens will collect HHW in a special vehicle, or may subcontract the service. Pre-scheduled
days will be set at a frequency to be determined by the City, up to twice per month. Sharps will be collected
through this program.
Alternatively, for the same rate increase, Athens will provide two City-wide HHW drop-off events per year
at a City-provided location.
CDS $0.44 per dwelling unit per month for door-to-door scheduled call-in collection. CDS will collect kits left
for customers and Clean Harbors will collect kits from an appropriate CDS-provided storage location.
Proposes to provide Sharps containers to customers through CDS’ website for drop-off at a location to be
serviced weekly by CDS. Alternatively, the containers may be mail-back.
Crown $0.45 per dwelling unit per month for door-to-door scheduled call-in collection. Crown will provide
collection service.
Crown offers, at no additional cost, one annual HHW drop-off event in the City using Veolia
Environmental Services, a mail-in Sharps program, publicizing Los Angeles County HHW events in and
near Hermosa Beach, and one additional annual event for e-waste using a certified electronic waste
recycler.
WMLA $0.99 per dwelling unit per month for door-to-door scheduled call-in collection, using the HHW company
recently purchased by Waste Management.
Offers a limited program (up to 286 participants per year) for $0.56 per dwelling unit per month.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 10 City of Hermosa Beach
Additional Information Requested in RFP (continued)
PROPOSER DOWNTOWN AREA ALTERNATIVES – OPTIONAL
PROPOSERS ALL PROPOSED COSTS AS REQUIRED FOR EXISTING PORTER SERVICE
Athens Athens suggests replacing bins with roll-off compactors. Alternatively, Athens suggests using a small
collection vehicle to collect waste directly from the businesses.
CDS CDS suggests the following enhancements be made:
Implement a bagged organics program (which contains odor producing material).
Implement a monitoring and tracking system, time-stamping visits to each customer to help allocate
porter service.
Construct a chain-link lid over Lot A to keep out birds and scavenging activities, allocating costs to
porter service customers.
Provide locks for all recycling containers next to Lot A.
CDS will consider working with community-based groups to collect recyclable materials as a cost control
measure, or work with businesses to pilot other workable solutions.
Crown Crown recommends re-opening Lot B, covering Lots A and B, and installing split compactors. Enclosures
would be reconfigured to accommodate compactors at Crown’s cost. Crown offers solar powered split bins
with a back up 120 volt single phase power option.
Businesses would be issued electronic keys and access would be monitored to determine allocation of costs
based on frequency of access. Proposes issuing each customer a container for commingled recyclables and
for remaining solid waste. The remaining solid waste would be processed as food waste.
Costs to be negotiated.
WMLA Will work with the existing porter service, adjusting services based on heavy holiday demand and other
service variations. Notes that full participation of the downtown businesses in a food waste program may
generate enough food waste for a separate route that collects organics directly from the businesses and
transports them to a processing facility without taking the potentially odor causing material into the shared
bin enclosure.
Suggests that the City install additional surface and groundwater protection features, such as Abtech.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 11 City of Hermosa Beach
Additional Information Requested in RFP (continued)
PROPOSER RESIDENTIAL GREEN WASTE PROGRAMS
OPTION 1 OPTION 2
Athens Green waste carts shall be collected on Thursdays.
Residential bin and commercial customers will be
able to participate as well
Proposed to provide barrels to participants. All green
waste shall be collected on Thursdays. Residential bin
and commercial customers will be able to participate
as well at no additional charge.
CDS Green waste carts shall be collected on refuse and
recycling collection day. CDS’ proposed organics
pilot program, as described on page 3-8, would be
conducted in addition to green waste cart
collection.
Recommends implementing a bag organics program,
whereby residents can place green waste, food waste
and other organics in CDS-provided orange bags,
which will be collected in the mixed waste can and
recovered at CDS’ processing facility. CDS notes that
this option does not require an additional green
waste truck.
Crown Green waste cart collection on Thursday. Green
waste bundles would be collected.
Offers green waste collection in bins or split bins to
commercial and multi-family customers at
comparable refuse rates.
Green waste collection on Thursday. Green waste
bundles would be collected.
Offers green waste collection in bins or split bins to
commercial and multi-family customers at
comparable refuse rates.
WMLA Green waste carts collected on refuse and recycling
collection day. Will offer green waste collection in
96-gallon carts to residential bin and commercial
customers at the proposed residential green waste
cart rate.
Option 2 not proposed.
PROPOSER PERFORMANCE BOND/LOC
AMOUNTS
EMR – MOST RECENT 3 YEARS(1) BIENNIAL INSPECTION
OF TERMINAL (“BIT”)
STATUS
AVERAGE DRIVER
HOURLY WAGE(2) 2012 2011 2010 2009
Athens $500,000 performance bond 0.89 0.95 0.75 Satisfactory $27.43
CDS $500,000 performance bond 0.80 0.84 0.82 Satisfactory $32.16
Crown $500,000 performance bond 1.08 1.12 1.09 Satisfactory $33.26
WMLA $500,000 performance bond 0.75 0.76 0.72 Satisfactory $34.62
(1) EMR = Experience Modification Rate, determined by the National Council on Compensation Insurance.
Helps measure the efficacy of a company’s safety program. 1.0 is average, with lower numbers preferable.
(2) Including average hourly wage, payroll taxes, and employee benefits.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 12 City of Hermosa Beach
Minimum Diversion Rate
PROPOSER MINIMUM GUARANTEED DIVERSION RATE FOR ALL HAULER-COLLECTED SOLID WASTE
OPTION 1 OPTION 2
Athens – Base 35% 40%
Athens – Alternative 42.5% 50%
CDS 31% 35%
Crown 65% 60%
WMLA 27% n/a
Recycling Incentives
PROPOSER RECYCLING INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
Athens Not proposed.
CDS For an additional $0.52/home/month, CDS will provide the My Recycling Rewards program. Residential
participants are to sign up via a website. CDS will track recycling by zone and, quarterly, residents in the
zone will receive a $5 gift card to a local business. Each year, ten recyclers will receive a year of free solid
waste collection services. The zone with the best recycling for the year will receive $5,000 towards a
community project in their neighborhood.
Crown Proposes, at no extra cost, to track recycling participation by city area, with the winning quadrant receiving
a donation for a local institution or other local purpose.
WMLA For an additional cost ($0.51 to $0.81 per home per month depending upon the length of the service
contract committed to), WMLA will provide residents with the opportunity to set up an account on-line to
accumulate points toward discounts and coupons toward purchases. WMLA determines participation
based on a route-by-route measurement.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 13 City of Hermosa Beach
Recycling Incentives (continued)
PROPOSER OTHER DIVERSION PROGRAMS
Athens Can offer additional processing and food waste programs for an additional cost.
CDS At no additional cost, CDS will conduct Meet Your Driver block parties to reward neighborhood recycling
participation.
Organics program – CDS will:
Offer a roll-off box for residential green waste drop-off.
Subsidize 50% of compost and worm bins for residents.
Conduct a minimum of two composting classes per year.
Provide bags for event boxes or carts and divert organics from City-sponsored events.
Conduct composting classes at schools.
Implement bagged food waste program at schools.
Crown Processing of all residential, commercial and roll-off mixed refuse to recover recyclables, including
residential trash carts, with transformation of all pre-processed residue.
Facility can process yucca, palm fronds and other hard to process materials.
Diversion of carpeting and polyethylene film.
Processing of all bulky waste and of resident’s discarded old solid waste containers.
Crown will collect and recycle carpet at no additional cost from drop-off locations, and at frequencies to be
determined between City and company.
WMLA ---
Proposed Exceptions to Franchise Agreement
PROPOSER NUMBER OF
EXCEPTIONS DESCRIPTION OF EXCEPTIONS TAKEN
Athens 0
CDS 0
Crown 0
WMLA 25 WMLA requested 25 language changes to the RFP, including WMLA’s reasoning for each
request, ranging in significance and including, but are not limited to, relaxing requirements
regarding:
• Extraordinary rate adjustments
• Audit scope restrictions
• Invoicing practices
• Insurance requirements
• Waiver of natural gas requirement for spare vehicles
• Charging for collection and processing of construction and demolition debris generated
at City facilities
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 14 City of Hermosa Beach
Legal Disclosures
PROPOSER # OF LEGAL
DISCLOSURES SUMMARY OF LEGAL DISCLOSURES
Athens 7
1. California Air Resource Board - Athens entered into a settlement agreement in 2009 with
the Air Resources Board; ARB asserted that Athens failed to properly inspect diesel
vehicles in 2005 and 2006 and to install emission-reduction devices from 2004 to 2008.
2. South Coast Air Quality Management District – Reached settlement 1/2009 for facility
improvements, costs and fines regarding ongoing odor issues at its City of Industry
facility (Athens MRF).
3. City of Los Angeles v. American Waste Industries (2006) - Purchased American Waste
Ind. Inc. in November 2006. American’s Sun Valley MRF had a number of legal and
regulatory issues. Athens negotiated an agreement with the City of Los Angeles and the
local enforcement agency to allow on-going operations. Indicates facility is in full
compliance at this time.
4. State of California EPA, Dept. of Toxic Substance Control (2006) – Hazardous waste
hauling permit dispute based on DTSC inspection of company yard. Athens disputed
DTSC allegations. Settled Consent Decree. Athens indicates no admission of liability or
wrongdoing in the consent decree.
5. California Integrated Waste Management Board (2005) – CIWMB alleged Athens hauled
tires during a lapse in renewal of the registration required to do so. New registration was
completed. Settled.
6. California Integrated Waste Management Board (2008) – Athens indicates it was fined
due to a bin containing tires being inadvertently dumped into a route vehicle instead of
receiving special handling. Settled.
7. South Coast Air Quality Management District (2005) – Athens received an Engineering
and Compliance Office Notice of Violation related to its unleaded fuel system at its yard.
Athens indicates that incorrect value was inadvertently entered on a certification test
form. System has since been tested with satisfactory results.
Administrative Proceedings
OSHA facility inspections:
# Facility Citation Date Settlement
125918953 Valley Blvd 9/27/07 $1,150
310196019 Sun Valley 6/29/07 $1,685
307149268 Sun Valley 6/28/07 Contested. No further inquiries
CDS 9 1. Citizens for a Fair Trash Contract –The citizens of Los Alamitos allege that the City of Los
Alamitos did not properly follow the competitive bidding procedures for an RFP in
awarding the new collection contract. Writ of mandate issued to amend City Code or
conduct new proposal process. CDS is to continue as services provider. Filed October 27,
2010. Resolution pending.
2. South Coast Air Quality Management District – Complaint that Sunshine Canyon Landfill
is emitting air contaminants in 2009. Resolution pending.
3. CERCLA action by EPA relating to closed Los Angeles County landfill – Filed in 1988
against 60 waste generators, who in turn brought action against 29 municipalities, which
then brought action against various haulers, including proposer. Settlement offer from
EPA issued to CDS 2010.
Note: Browning Ferris Industries, or BFI, merged with Allied, which subsequently merged
with CDS’ parent company Republic.
4. County of Los Angeles – County sued multiple defendants, including BFI, for
reimbursement of monies expended on the Cal Compact Landfill site. County claims that
company is a successor to Removal, Inc. Filed October 2009. Settled August 2011.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 15 City of Hermosa Beach
Legal Disclosures (continued)
PROPOSER # OF LEGAL
DISCLOSURES SUMMARY OF LEGAL DISCLOSURES
CDS
(cont.)
5. Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles – Browning-Ferris
Industries of California, Inc. filed a complaint about the City of Los Angeles “Alternative
to Landfilling” fee in connection with its operations at Sunshine Canyon Landfill. Filed
Dec 2008. Settled May 2010.
6. California v. Browning-Ferris Industries – Allegation of vehicle code violation in 2005.
Resolved.
7. California v. Browning-Ferris Industries – 2005 criminal complaint for alleged violations
of the Health and Safety Code related to asbestos storage and vapor recovery equipment.
Resolved.
8. California v. Browning-Ferris Industries – 2001 criminal complaint in Santa Clara County
for misdemeanor violations of the San Jose Municipal Code. Resolved.
9. City of Carson (2002) – Two BFI employees, City of Carson officials and other parties were
indicted in a matter related to the award of the City’s solid waste agreement. The BFI
employees were fired prior to the indictment.
Crown 2 1. California Air Resource Board – Enforcement action in 2009 for failing to conduct diesel
truck smoke tests in 2005 and 2006 and to properly label a portion of its fleet with ARB-
required labels. $88,275 fine.
2. Reporting of Community Recycling and Resource Recovery Incident - In 2011, Crown’s
sister company Community Recycling and Resource Recovery had a fatal incident at its
Lamont composting facility. This facility has been in operation for 18 years. The current
status of the facility and its permits is that it is fully permitted and operational and the
temporary revocation of the CUP was stayed pending the court proceedings expected in
2013. The CAL/OSHA fines that were assessed are currently under appeal. This facility is
proposed for use as one of the facilities for green waste/food waste recycling.
WMLA 6 1. Irwindale Partners LP v. United Rock Products Corporation and USA Waste of California,
Inc. - City of Irwindale alleges that WM did not properly backfill two inert landfills
operated by WM and/or did not meet current industry standards for backfilling. Filed
September 2007. Case dismissed.
2. USA Waste of California, Inc. v. City of Compton - Breach of contract action against
Compton for unpaid amounts under franchise agreement and failure to return company’s
containers. Filed October 2008. Settled.
3. S&H Disposal et al. v. City of Gardena, Waste Resources of Gardena, Inc. and Gardena
Waste Joint Venture – Challenge of City’s joint venture with a private hauler in 2003.
Resolved.
4. USA Waste v. Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority – USA Waste filed a complaint, in
2004, that SVSWA should have performed closure and post-closure requirements at a
landfill leased from USA Waste. Settled.
5. California EPA, CTSC and California Regional Water Quality Control Board v. Azusa Land
Reclamation, Inc. – Allegation of unlawful receipt and disposal of unpermitted waste in
2005. Settled.
6. County of Los Angles, et al. v. USA Waste of California, Inc., Western Waste Industries, et
al. – Cost recovery action against several Waste Management entities in 2006. Settled.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 16 City of Hermosa Beach
Unique Proposal Features
Athens
1. Semi-Annual Free Compost/Mulch Events - Twice per year, Athens will provide two 40-cubic-yard containers of compost
to residents on a first-come basis using resident-supplied containers.
2. Free City Compost – Athens will provide 100 cubic yards of compost for City usage. Additional compost may be
purchased at cost.
3. One-Hour Emergency Response – Contract requires the successful hauler to provide a 24-hour emergency line for the City.
In such emergencies, Athens commits to a one-hour response time.
4. Twitter – Athens has a Twitter handle @AthensServices that covers environmental and local community news.
5. Military Discount – Offers a 25% military discount to residents that are active in the military.
6. Battery Recycling Program – Athens will provide boxes for collection and disposal of used batteries at City Hall and
elsewhere in the City at no additional cost.
7. Dedicated C&D Customer Service Representative.
8. City Mailings – Will send semi-annual waste and recycling inserts, or any other City material (over and above
contractually-required mailings), on a quarterly basis with the solid waste invoices at no additional charge.
9. Live Operator – Customer service line is answered by a live person, not a recorded menu.
10. Mighty Mike – Athens will provide its “Mighty Mike” truck at City-sponsored events at no additional charge.
11. Community Support – Athens commits to annual donations and memberships in seven community projects and
organizations, a corporate match for Athens’ employee donations to the Hermosa Beach Education Foundation, four $500
scholarships, and an annual donation of $5,000 to $10,000 for other non-profit organizations at City request. Athens noted
six organizations and events it is currently supporting.
Alternative Proposal
Processing of Bin and Commercial Cart Waste – Athens will increase its diversion guarantee to 50% by processing residential
bin and commercial refuse to recover recyclables for an increase to commercial rates of 10.5%.
Street Sweeping Contract – Athens offers to negotiate savings on the street sweeping contract if the City rolls the solid waste
and street sweeping contracts together, lining up their contract terms, with savings primarily depending on the length of the
contract extensions. Savings on the street sweeping contract would range from up to 40% for a six-year extension of the street
sweeping agreement, to up to 100% if the solid waste and street sweeping agreements are both extended to 15-year agreements,
or if a 10-year evergreen (rolling) term is granted.
CDS
1. Earth Lab Stipend – Republic will provide a $5,000 stipend to the Hermosa Beach Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) for
Earth Lab projects at Valley and View schools, to create programs to target environmental sustainability education and
awareness at Hermosa Beach schools.
2. Free Curbside Collection of Small E-Waste and Batteries – Household batteries, cell phones and other small electrical
items may be placed on top of the recycling carts for weekly collection at no additional cost.
3. Second Annual Shred Day – The agreement requires an annual “Shred Day.” CDS proposes to offer a second annual
event.
4. Grades of Green Partnership – CDS partners with Grades of Green to provide education programs to the schools,
including contests, green cleaning supplies and a trash-free lunch program.
5. MRFY the Recycling Robot – CDS will provide its new recycling robot mascot to assist in teaching students in Hermosa
Beach schools.
6. Commercial Audit Calculator – CDS will use a diversion calculator to estimate appropriate recycling and, if applicable,
food waste, container sizes for businesses, create custom reports for such customers and City, including carbon footprint
analyses.
Detailed Proposal Matrix Attachment 3
July 5, 2012 3 - 17 City of Hermosa Beach
Unique Proposal Features (continued)
Crown
1. Dedicated Route Supervisor - Service liaison/route supervisor 100% allocated to City of Hermosa Beach.
2. Compost Give-a-Way – Will conduct semi-annual compost give-a-way events, supplying 50 tons for residents at each
event.
3. Senior Discount – 10% discount for residents 62 years of age or older.
4. Emergency Vehicle – Will maintain an emergency vehicle stocked with supplies at the City at no additional cost.
Alternative Proposal
100% Recycled Liners for Public Trash Receptacles – Provided at a cost comparable to current costs for City litter containers.
Provided at no additional charge for City Facilities and City Events.
WMLA
1. Out-Dialing/E-mailing – WMLA can use out-dialing messages and e-mail to communicate holiday schedules, emergency
messages, or special pick-up events.
2. Personal Senior Consultants – WMLA will provide representatives to visit senior on request to assist with the transition to
the new services.
3. Customer Service Requests – Customers will be able to place service requests directly with their driver.
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Option 1: Cart System1 Residential Service Revenue (without Optional Green Waste Program)921,000$ 868,000$ 868,000$ 1,043,000$ 876,000$ 1,225,000$ 2 Commercial Service Revenue3Commercial Bin Refuse Service Revenue903,000$ 982,000$ 1,081,000$ 1,161,000$ 1,016,000$ 1,169,000$ 4Commercial Cart Refuse Service Revenue21,000$ 23,000$ 25,000$ 27,000$ 24,000$ 28,000$ 5Commercial Bin Recycling Service Revenue44,000$ 32,000$ 32,000$ 38,000$ 33,000$ 38,000$ 6Commercial Cart Recycling Service Revenue222,000$ 161,000$ 161,000$ 191,000$ 167,000$ 193,000$ 7Commercial Special Service Revenue34,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 141,000$ 100,000$ 245,000$ 8 Total Commercial Service Revenue1,224,000$ 1,298,000$ 1,399,000$ 1,558,000$ 1,340,000$ 1,673,000$ 9 Roll-Off and Temporary Service Revenue49,000$ 52,000$ 52,000$ 45,000$ 47,000$ 68,000$ 10 Total Customer Rate Revenue2,194,000$ 2,218,000$ 2,319,000$ 2,646,000$ 2,263,000$ 2,966,000$ 11 Optional Green Waste37,000$ 37,000$ 44,000$ 34,000$ 52,000$ 12 Total Customer Rate Revenue with Optional Green Waste2,194,000$ 2,255,000$ 2,356,000$ 2,690,000$ 2,297,000$ 3,018,000$ 13 Percent above (below) Hermosa Beach Current Rates- 3% 7% 23% 5% 38%Option 2: Single Stream14 Residential Service Revenue921,000$ 869,000$ 869,000$ 1,163,000$ 939,000$ Not15 Commercial Service RevenueProposed16Commercial Bin Refuse Service Revenue 903,000$ 982,000$ 1,081,000$ 1,161,000$ 1,016,000$ 17Commercial Cart Refuse Service Revenue 21,000$ 23,000$ 25,000$ 27,000$ 24,000$ 18Commercial Bin Recycling Service Revenue 44,000$ 32,000$ 32,000$ 38,000$ 33,000$ 19Commercial Cart Recycling Service Revenue 222,000$ 161,000$ 161,000$ 191,000$ 167,000$ 20Commercial Special Service Revenue34,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 141,000$ 100,000$ 21 Total Commercial Service Revenue1,224,000$ 1,298,000$ 1,399,000$ 1,558,000$ 1,340,000$ 22 Roll-Off and Temporary Service Revenue49,000$ 52,000$ 52,000$ 45,000$ 47,000$ 23 Total Customer Rate Revenue2,194,000$ 2,219,000$ 2,320,000$ 2,766,000$ 2,326,000$ 24 Percent above (below) Hermosa Beach Current Rates- 1% 6% 26% 6%Additional Rates25 Residential HHW Door-to-Door Collection26 Per Home Per Month0.45$ 0.45$ 0.44$ 0.45$ 0.99$ 27 Non-City Sponsored Litter Boxes28 Cost per Cardboard Litter Box4.50$ 4.50$ 3.33$ 5.00$ 3.75$ 29 Cost of box/liners$50.00 per 200 liners $50.00 per 200 liners $106.41 per 250 liners $35.00 per 125 liners $70.00 per 100 linersAnnual Rate Revenue SummaryWMAnnual Rate RevenueAthens - AlterantiveAthens - BaseService CategoryLineCDS CrownCurrent RatesUpdated 7/6/2011&ity of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Current System1Current Rate - Any Size, Unlimited11.32$ 0.25$ 11.57$ 2Wheel-Out Service4.00$ -$ 4.00$ 3Wheel-Out Service for Disabled-$ -$ -$ Option 1: Cart SystemOne refuse and unlimited recycling carts495-gallon cart (1)14.67$ 16.87$ 14.54$ 18.92$ 0.25$ 14.92$ 17.12$ 14.79$ 19.17$ 564-gallon cart - Base Rate10.67$ 12.87$ 10.54$ 14.92$ 0.25$ 10.92$ 13.12$ 10.79$ 15.17$ 635-gallon cart (2)6.67$ 8.87$ 6.54$ 10.92$ 0.25$ 6.92$ 9.12$ 6.79$ 11.17$ 7Unlimited refuse and recycling can collection (3)10.67$ 12.87$ 15.54$ 20.23$ 0.25$ 10.92$ 13.12$ 15.79$ 20.48$ Additional Refuse Cart Rates (for each refuse cart above one)895-gallon cart8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ -$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 964-gallon cart6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ -$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 1035-gallon cart4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ -$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ Opt-In Green Waste Program (4)1195-gallon cart4.70$ 6.75$ 6.00$ 6.78$ -$ 4.70$ 6.75$ 6.00$ 6.78$ 1264-gallon cart4.20$ 5.15$ 4.00$ 5.94$ -$ 4.20$ 5.15$ 4.00$ 5.94$ 1335-gallon cart3.70$ 3.55$ 2.00$ 5.17$ -$ 3.70$ 3.55$ 2.00$ 5.17$ Option 2: Single Stream14Unlimited single stream refuse and recycling collection10.67$ 14.37$ 11.54$ -$ 0.25$ 10.92$ 14.62$ 11.79$ Not15Opt-In Green Waste Program (5)-$ -$ -$ -$ - -$ -$ -$ Proposed(1) 95-gallon refuse cart rate shall be set $4.00 per month higher than the proposed 64-gallon rate.(2) 35-gallon refuse cart rate shall be set $4.00 per month lower than the proposed 64-gallon rate.(3) For customers unable to accommodate carts.(4) Propose rates no higher than additional refuse cart rates.(5) Green waste included in program at no additional cost. Details of Option 2 green waste program must be described, including container type, in proposal.(6) Waste Management is not proposing on Option 2.Residential Service RatesLineService CategoryContractor Monthly RatesAthensCurrent RatesAB 939 FeeCDSCDS WM (6)Customer Monthly RateCrownCrownCurrent RatesAthensWM (6)7/5/20124-2City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Current System1Current Rate - Any Size, Unlimited11.57$ 6,621 76,605$ 2Wheel-Out Service4.00$ 39 156$ 3Wheel-Out Service for Disabled-$ 26 -$ 4Gross Monthly Single Family Revenue76,761$ 5Months per year126Gross Annual Single Family Revenue 921,132$ 7Gross Annual Single Family Revenue* 921,000$ Option 1: Cart SystemOne refuse and unlimited recycling carts895-gallon cart (1)14.92$ 17.12$ 14.79$ 19.17$ 409 6,102$ 7,002$ 6,049$ 7,841$ 964-gallon cart - Base Rate10.92$ 13.12$ 10.79$ 15.17$ 4,456 48,660$ 58,463$ 48,080$ 67,598$ 1035-gallon cart (2)6.92$ 9.12$ 6.79$ 11.17$ 1,451 10,041$ 13,233$ 9,852$ 16,208$ 11Unlimited refuse and recycling can collection (3)10.92$ 13.12$ 15.79$ 20.48$ 305 3,331$ 4,002$ 4,816$ 6,246$ 12Backyard Service Charge4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 39 156$ 156$ 156$ 156$ Additional Refuse Cart Rates (for each refuse cart above one)1395-gallon cart8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 8.00$ 53 424$ 424$ 424$ 424$ 1464-gallon cart6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 6.00$ 532 3,192$ 3,192$ 3,192$ 3,192$ 1535-gallon cart4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ 104 416$ 416$ 416$ 416$ Gross Monthly Single Family Revenue72,322$ 86,888$ 72,985$ 102,081$ Months per year12 12 12 12Gross Annual Single Family Revenue867,864$ 1,042,656$ 875,820$ 1,224,972$ 22Gross Annual Single Family Revenue*868,000$ 1,043,000$ 876,000$ 1,225,000$ Option 1: Green Waste Program OnlyOpt-In Green Waste Program (4)1695-gallon cart4.70$ 6.75$ 6.00$ 6.78$ 57 268$ 385$ 342$ 386$ 1764-gallon cart4.20$ 5.15$ 4.00$ 5.94$ 547 2,297$ 2,817$ 2,188$ 3,249$ 1835-gallon cart3.70$ 3.55$ 2.00$ 5.17$ 135 500$ 479$ 270$ 698$ 19Gross Monthly Green Waste Revenue3,065$ 3,681$ 2,800$ 4,333$ 20Months per year12 12 12 1221Gross Annual Green Waste Revenue36,780 44,172 33,600 51,996 22Gross Annual Green Waste Revenue*37,000$ 44,000$ 34,000$ 52,000$ Option 1: Cart System with Green Waste Program - Total Revenue*905,000$ 1,087,000$ 910,000$ 1,277,000$ Option 2: Single Stream23Unlimited single stream refuse and recycling collection10.92$ 14.62$ 11.79$ Not 6,621 72,301$ 96,799$ 78,062$ Not 24Backyard Service Charge4.00$ 4.00$ 4.00$ Proposed 39 156$ 156$ 156$ Proposed25Opt-In Green Waste Program (5)-$ -$ -$ 652 -$ -$ -$ 26Gross Monthly Single Family Revenue72,457$ 96,955$ 78,218$ 27Months per year12 12 1228Gross Annual Single Family Revenue869,484$ 1,163,460$ 938,616$ 29 Gross Annual Single Family Revenue*869,000$ 1,163,000$ 939,000$ (1) 95-gallon refuse cart rate shall be set $4.00 per month higher than the proposed 64-gallon rate.(2) 35-gallon refuse cart rate shall be set $4.00 per month lower than the proposed 64-gallon rate.(3) For customers unable to accommodate carts.(4) Propose rates no higher than additional refuse cart rates.(5) Green waste included in program at no additional cost. Details of Option 2 green waste program must be described, including container type, in proposal.(6) Waste Management is not proposing on Option 2.(7) For Option 1 and 2, Billing Units are Average Units from Att. 4-13.*Rounded to the nearest thousand. Athens CDS Crown WM (6)WM (6)Current RatesResidential Service RatesLineService CategoryCustomer Monthly RatesBilling Units (7)Monthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesAthens CDS Crown7/5/20124-3City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Commercial Bins, Refuse1 1 Cubic Yard 1x week 64%56.78$ 61.76$ 68.27$ 73.50$ 63.99$ 73.99$ 1.08$ 57.86$ 62.84$ 69.35$ 74.58$ 65.07$ 75.07$ 2 1 Cubic Yard 2x week 96%85.22$ 92.64$ 102.40$ 110.25$ 95.98$ 110.99$ 2.16$ 87.38$ 94.80$ 104.56$ 112.41$ 98.14$ 113.15$ 3 1 Cubic Yard 3x week 129%113.61$ 124.49$ 137.60$ 148.14$ 128.97$ 149.14$ 3.24$ 116.85$ 127.73$ 140.84$ 151.38$ 132.21$ 152.38$ 4 1 Cubic Yard 4x week 161%142.07$ 155.37$ 171.74$ 184.89$ 160.97$ 186.13$ 4.32$ 146.39$ 159.69$ 176.06$ 189.21$ 165.29$ 190.45$ 5 1 Cubic Yard 5x week 192%169.91$ 185.28$ 204.81$ 220.49$ 191.96$ 221.97$ 5.40$ 175.31$ 190.68$ 210.21$ 225.89$ 197.36$ 227.37$ 6 1 Cubic Yard 6x week 225%198.84$ 217.13$ 240.01$ 258.39$ 224.96$ 260.12$ 6.48$ 205.32$ 223.61$ 246.49$ 264.87$ 231.44$ 266.60$ 7 1 Cubic Yard 7x week 263%232.66$ 253.80$ 280.54$ 302.03$ 262.95$ 304.05$ 7.56$ 240.22$ 261.36$ 288.10$ 309.59$ 270.51$ 311.61$ 8 1.5 Cubic Yard 1x week 71%63.13$ 68.52$ 75.74$ 81.54$ 70.99$ 82.08$ 1.62$ 64.75$ 70.14$ 77.36$ 83.16$ 72.61$ 83.70$ 9 1.5 Cubic Yard 2x week 107%94.67$ 103.26$ 114.14$ 122.88$ 106.98$ 123.70$ 3.24$ 97.91$ 106.50$ 117.38$ 126.12$ 110.22$ 126.94$ 10 1.5 Cubic Yard 3x week 152%134.71$ 146.68$ 162.14$ 174.56$ 151.97$ 175.73$ 4.86$ 139.57$ 151.54$ 167.00$ 179.42$ 156.83$ 180.59$ 11 1.5 Cubic Yard 4x week 179%158.18$ 172.74$ 190.94$ 205.56$ 178.96$ 206.94$ 6.48$ 164.66$ 179.22$ 197.42$ 212.04$ 185.44$ 213.42$ 12 1.5 Cubic Yard 5x week 214%189.37$ 206.51$ 228.27$ 245.76$ 213.96$ 247.41$ 8.10$ 197.47$ 214.61$ 236.37$ 253.86$ 222.06$ 255.51$ 13 1.5 Cubic Yard 6x week 287%253.49$ 276.96$ 306.14$ 329.59$ 286.94$ 331.80$ 9.72$ 263.21$ 286.68$ 315.86$ 339.31$ 296.66$ 341.52$ 14 1.5 Cubic Yard 7x week 336%296.57$ 324.24$ 358.41$ 385.86$ 335.93$ 388.45$ 11.34$ 307.91$ 335.58$ 369.75$ 397.20$ 347.27$ 399.79$ 15 2 Cubic Yard 1x week 86%75.78$ 82.99$ 91.74$ 98.76$ 85.98$ 99.42$ 2.17$ 77.95$ 85.16$ 93.91$ 100.93$ 88.15$ 101.59$ 16 2 Cubic Yard 2x week 132%116.85$ 127.38$ 140.80$ 151.59$ 131.97$ 152.61$ 4.34$ 121.19$ 131.72$ 145.14$ 155.93$ 136.31$ 156.95$ 17 2 Cubic Yard 3x week 179%157.84$ 172.74$ 190.94$ 205.56$ 178.96$ 206.94$ 6.51$ 164.35$ 179.25$ 197.45$ 212.07$ 185.47$ 213.45$ 18 2 Cubic Yard 4x week 225%198.84$ 217.13$ 240.01$ 258.39$ 224.96$ 260.12$ 8.68$ 207.52$ 225.81$ 248.69$ 267.07$ 233.64$ 268.80$ 19 2 Cubic Yard 5x week 264%233.61$ 254.76$ 281.61$ 303.18$ 263.95$ 305.21$ 10.85$ 244.46$ 265.61$ 292.46$ 314.03$ 274.80$ 316.06$ 20 2 Cubic Yard 6x week 304%268.35$ 293.36$ 324.28$ 349.11$ 303.94$ 351.45$ 13.02$ 281.37$ 306.38$ 337.30$ 362.13$ 316.96$ 364.47$ 21 2 Cubic Yard 7x week 355%313.94$ 342.58$ 378.68$ 407.68$ 354.93$ 410.42$ 15.19$ 329.13$ 357.77$ 393.87$ 422.87$ 370.12$ 425.61$ 22 3 Cubic Yard 1x week 100%88.34$ 96.50$ 106.67$ 114.84$ 99.98$ 115.61$ 3.25$ 91.59$ 99.75$ 109.92$ 118.09$ 103.23$ 118.86$ 23 3 Cubic Yard 2x week 154%135.70$ 148.61$ 164.27$ 176.85$ 153.97$ 178.04$ 6.50$ 142.20$ 155.11$ 170.77$ 183.35$ 160.47$ 184.54$ 24 3 Cubic Yard 3x week 207%183.11$ 199.76$ 220.81$ 237.72$ 206.96$ 239.31$ 9.75$ 192.86$ 209.51$ 230.56$ 247.47$ 216.71$ 249.06$ 25 3 Cubic Yard 4x week 261%230.41$ 251.87$ 278.41$ 299.73$ 260.95$ 301.74$ 13.00$ 243.41$ 264.87$ 291.41$ 312.73$ 273.95$ 314.74$ 26 3 Cubic Yard 5x week 314%277.72$ 303.01$ 334.94$ 360.60$ 313.94$ 363.02$ 16.25$ 293.97$ 319.26$ 351.19$ 376.85$ 330.19$ 379.27$ 27 3 Cubic Yard 6x week 367%324.45$ 354.16$ 391.48$ 421.46$ 366.93$ 424.29$ 19.50$ 343.95$ 373.66$ 410.98$ 440.96$ 386.43$ 443.79$ 28 3 Cubic Yard 7x week 431%380.33$ 415.92$ 459.75$ 494.96$ 430.91$ 498.28$ 22.75$ 403.08$ 438.67$ 482.50$ 517.71$ 453.66$ 521.03$ 29 4 Cubic Yard 1x week 120%105.99$ 115.80$ 128.00$ 137.81$ 119.98$ 138.73$ 4.33$ 110.32$ 120.13$ 132.33$ 142.14$ 124.31$ 143.06$ 30 4 Cubic Yard 2x week 184%162.89$ 177.56$ 196.27$ 211.31$ 183.96$ 212.72$ 8.66$ 171.55$ 186.22$ 204.93$ 219.97$ 192.62$ 221.38$ 31 4 Cubic Yard 3x week 278%245.87$ 268.27$ 296.54$ 319.26$ 277.94$ 321.40$ 12.99$ 258.86$ 281.26$ 309.53$ 332.25$ 290.93$ 334.39$ 32 4 Cubic Yard 4x week 313%276.87$ 302.05$ 333.88$ 359.45$ 312.94$ 361.86$ 17.32$ 294.19$ 319.37$ 351.20$ 376.77$ 330.26$ 379.18$ 33 4 Cubic Yard 5x week 377%333.31$ 363.81$ 402.15$ 432.95$ 376.92$ 435.85$ 21.65$ 354.96$ 385.46$ 423.80$ 454.60$ 398.57$ 457.50$ 34 4 Cubic Yard 6x week 442%390.11$ 426.53$ 471.48$ 507.59$ 441.91$ 511.00$ 25.98$ 416.09$ 452.51$ 497.46$ 533.57$ 467.89$ 536.98$ 35 4 Cubic Yard 7x week 517%456.44$ 498.91$ 551.48$ 593.72$ 516.90$ 597.70$ 30.31$ 486.75$ 529.22$ 581.79$ 624.03$ 547.21$ 628.01$ 36 6 Cubic Yard 1x week 150%132.54$ 144.75$ 160.01$ 172.26$ 149.97$ 173.42$ 6.50$ 139.04$ 151.25$ 166.51$ 178.76$ 156.47$ 179.92$ 37 6 Cubic Yard 2x week 230%203.57$ 221.95$ 245.34$ 264.13$ 229.95$ 265.90$ 13.00$ 216.57$ 234.95$ 258.34$ 277.13$ 242.95$ 278.90$ 38 6 Cubic Yard 3x week 311%274.69$ 300.12$ 331.74$ 357.15$ 310.94$ 359.55$ 19.50$ 294.19$ 319.62$ 351.24$ 376.65$ 330.44$ 379.05$ 39 6 Cubic Yard 4x week 391%345.67$ 377.32$ 417.08$ 449.02$ 390.92$ 452.04$ 26.00$ 371.67$ 403.32$ 443.08$ 475.02$ 416.92$ 478.04$ 40 6 Cubic Yard 5x week 472%416.65$ 455.48$ 503.48$ 542.04$ 471.91$ 545.68$ 32.50$ 449.15$ 487.98$ 535.98$ 574.54$ 504.41$ 578.18$ 41 6 Cubic Yard 6x week 552%487.64$ 532.68$ 588.82$ 633.92$ 551.89$ 638.17$ 39.00$ 526.64$ 571.68$ 627.82$ 672.92$ 590.89$ 677.17$ 42 6 Cubic Yard 7x week 646%570.55$ 623.39$ 689.09$ 741.87$ 645.87$ 746.84$ 45.50$ 616.05$ 668.89$ 734.59$ 787.37$ 691.37$ 792.34$ 43 8 Cubic Yard 1x week 186%164.15$ 179.49$ 198.41$ 213.60$ 185.96$ 215.03$ 8.66$ 172.81$ 188.15$ 207.07$ 222.26$ 194.62$ 223.69$ 44 8 Cubic Yard 2x week 286%252.23$ 275.99$ 305.08$ 328.44$ 285.94$ 330.64$ 17.32$ 269.55$ 293.31$ 322.40$ 345.76$ 303.26$ 347.96$ 45 8 Cubic Yard 3x week 383%337.91$ 369.60$ 408.55$ 439.84$ 382.92$ 442.79$ 25.98$ 363.89$ 395.58$ 434.53$ 465.82$ 408.90$ 468.77$ 46 8 Cubic Yard 4x week 479%423.49$ 462.24$ 510.95$ 550.08$ 478.90$ 553.77$ 34.64$ 458.13$ 496.88$ 545.59$ 584.72$ 513.54$ 588.41$ 47 8 Cubic Yard 5x week 571%504.21$ 551.02$ 609.09$ 655.74$ 570.89$ 660.13$ 43.30$ 547.51$ 594.32$ 652.39$ 699.04$ 614.19$ 703.43$ 48 8 Cubic Yard 6x week 668%589.79$ 644.62$ 712.56$ 767.13$ 667.87$ 772.27$ 51.96$ 641.75$ 696.58$ 764.52$ 819.09$ 719.83$ 824.23$ 49 8 Cubic Yard 7x week 783%692.13$ 755.60$ 835.23$ 899.20$ 782.84$ 905.23$ 60.62$ 752.75$ 816.22$ 895.85$ 959.82$ 843.46$ 965.85$ (1) Rates are exclusive of the AB 939 fees.(2) AB 939 fees are not collected on current bin rates.LineCommercial Bin Service Rates Customer Monthly RateCrownAthens - BaseCDSService Category Contractor Monthly Rates (1)Current Rates (2)Relationship to 3-Yd BinAthens - AlterantiveAthens - AlterantiveCurrent RatesAthens - BaseCrownWMAB 939 FeesWMCDS7/5/20124-4City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Commercial Bins, Refuse1 1 Cubic Yard 1x week57.86$ 62.84$ 69.35$ 74.58$ 65.07$ 75.07$ 56 3,240$ 3,519$ 3,884$ 4,176$ 3,644$ 4,204$ 2 1 Cubic Yard 2x week87.38$ 94.80$ 104.56$ 112.41$ 98.14$ 113.15$ 14 1,223$ 1,327$ 1,464$ 1,574$ 1,374$ 1,584$ 3 1 Cubic Yard 3x week116.85$ 127.73$ 140.84$ 151.38$ 132.21$ 152.38$ 5 584$ 639$ 704$ 757$ 661$ 762$ 4 1 Cubic Yard 4x week146.39$ 159.69$ 176.06$ 189.21$ 165.29$ 190.45$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5 1 Cubic Yard 5x week175.31$ 190.68$ 210.21$ 225.89$ 197.36$ 227.37$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6 1 Cubic Yard 6x week205.32$ 223.61$ 246.49$ 264.87$ 231.44$ 266.60$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7 1 Cubic Yard 7x week240.22$ 261.36$ 288.10$ 309.59$ 270.51$ 311.61$ 3 721$ 784$ 864$ 929$ 812$ 935$ 8 1.5 Cubic Yard 1x week64.75$ 70.14$ 77.36$ 83.16$ 72.61$ 83.70$ 43 2,784$ 3,016$ 3,326$ 3,576$ 3,122$ 3,599$ 9 1.5 Cubic Yard 2x week97.91$ 106.50$ 117.38$ 126.12$ 110.22$ 126.94$ 14 1,371$ 1,491$ 1,643$ 1,766$ 1,543$ 1,777$ 10 1.5 Cubic Yard 3x week139.57$ 151.54$ 167.00$ 179.42$ 156.83$ 180.59$ 4 558$ 606$ 668$ 718$ 627$ 722$ 11 1.5 Cubic Yard 4x week164.66$ 179.22$ 197.42$ 212.04$ 185.44$ 213.42$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 12 1.5 Cubic Yard 5x week197.47$ 214.61$ 236.37$ 253.86$ 222.06$ 255.51$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13 1.5 Cubic Yard 6x week263.21$ 286.68$ 315.86$ 339.31$ 296.66$ 341.52$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 14 1.5 Cubic Yard 7x week307.91$ 335.58$ 369.75$ 397.20$ 347.27$ 399.79$ 1 308$ 336$ 370$ 397$ 347$ 400$ 15 2 Cubic Yard 1x week77.95$ 85.16$ 93.91$ 100.93$ 88.15$ 101.59$ 84 6,548$ 7,153$ 7,888$ 8,478$ 7,405$ 8,534$ 16 2 Cubic Yard 2x week121.19$ 131.72$ 145.14$ 155.93$ 136.31$ 156.95$ 27 3,272$ 3,556$ 3,919$ 4,210$ 3,680$ 4,238$ 17 2 Cubic Yard 3x week164.35$ 179.25$ 197.45$ 212.07$ 185.47$ 213.45$ 10 1,644$ 1,793$ 1,975$ 2,121$ 1,855$ 2,135$ 18 2 Cubic Yard 4x week207.52$ 225.81$ 248.69$ 267.07$ 233.64$ 268.80$ 2 415$ 452$ 497$ 534$ 467$ 538$ 19 2 Cubic Yard 5x week244.46$ 265.61$ 292.46$ 314.03$ 274.80$ 316.06$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20 2 Cubic Yard 6x week281.37$ 306.38$ 337.30$ 362.13$ 316.96$ 364.47$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 21 2 Cubic Yard 7x week329.13$ 357.77$ 393.87$ 422.87$ 370.12$ 425.61$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 22 3 Cubic Yard 1x week91.59$ 99.75$ 109.92$ 118.09$ 103.23$ 118.86$ 85 7,785$ 8,479$ 9,343$ 10,038$ 8,775$ 10,103$ 23 3 Cubic Yard 2x week142.20$ 155.11$ 170.77$ 183.35$ 160.47$ 184.54$ 66 9,385$ 10,237$ 11,271$ 12,101$ 10,591$ 12,180$ 24 3 Cubic Yard 3x week192.86$ 209.51$ 230.56$ 247.47$ 216.71$ 249.06$ 48 9,257$ 10,056$ 11,067$ 11,879$ 10,402$ 11,955$ 25 3 Cubic Yard 4x week243.41$ 264.87$ 291.41$ 312.73$ 273.95$ 314.74$ 10 2,434$ 2,649$ 2,914$ 3,127$ 2,740$ 3,147$ 26 3 Cubic Yard 5x week293.97$ 319.26$ 351.19$ 376.85$ 330.19$ 379.27$ 9 2,646$ 2,873$ 3,161$ 3,392$ 2,972$ 3,413$ 27 3 Cubic Yard 6x week343.95$ 373.66$ 410.98$ 440.96$ 386.43$ 443.79$ 5 1,720$ 1,868$ 2,055$ 2,205$ 1,932$ 2,219$ 28 3 Cubic Yard 7x week403.08$ 438.67$ 482.50$ 517.71$ 453.66$ 521.03$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 294 C bi Y d 1 k110 32$ 120 13$ 132 33$ 142 14$ 124 31$ 143 06$ 5 552$ 601$ 662$ 711$ 622$ 715$ Athens - AlterantiveAthens - AlterantiveWMCrown WMCurrent RatesAthens - BaseCDSCrownCommercial Bin Service RatesLine Service Category Customer Monthly RatesBilling UnitsMonthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesAthens - BaseCDS294 Cubic Yard 1x week110.32$ 120.13$ 132.33$ 142.14$ 124.31$ 143.06$ 5 552$ 601$ 662$ 711$ 622$ 715$ 30 4 Cubic Yard 2x week171.55$ 186.22$ 204.93$ 219.97$ 192.62$ 221.38$ 11 1,887$ 2,048$ 2,254$ 2,420$ 2,119$ 2,435$ 31 4 Cubic Yard 3x week258.86$ 281.26$ 309.53$ 332.25$ 290.93$ 334.39$ 11 2,847$ 3,094$ 3,405$ 3,655$ 3,200$ 3,678$ 32 4 Cubic Yard 4x week294.19$ 319.37$ 351.20$ 376.77$ 330.26$ 379.18$ 13 3,824$ 4,152$ 4,566$ 4,898$ 4,293$ 4,929$ 33 4 Cubic Yard 5x week354.96$ 385.46$ 423.80$ 454.60$ 398.57$ 457.50$ 6 2,130$ 2,313$ 2,543$ 2,728$ 2,391$ 2,745$ 34 4 Cubic Yard 6x week416.09$ 452.51$ 497.46$ 533.57$ 467.89$ 536.98$ 11 4,577$ 4,978$ 5,472$ 5,869$ 5,147$ 5,907$ 35 4 Cubic Yard 7x week486.75$ 529.22$ 581.79$ 624.03$ 547.21$ 628.01$ 2 974$ 1,058$ 1,164$ 1,248$ 1,094$ 1,256$ 36 6 Cubic Yard 1x week 139.04$ 151.25$ 166.51$ 178.76$ 156.47$ 179.92$ 1 139$ 151$ 167$ 179$ 156$ 180$ 37 6 Cubic Yard 2x week216.57$ 234.95$ 258.34$ 277.13$ 242.95$ 278.90$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 38 6 Cubic Yard 3x week294.19$ 319.62$ 351.24$ 376.65$ 330.44$ 379.05$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 39 6 Cubic Yard 4x week371.67$ 403.32$ 443.08$ 475.02$ 416.92$ 478.04$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 40 6 Cubic Yard 5x week449.15$ 487.98$ 535.98$ 574.54$ 504.41$ 578.18$ 2 898$ 976$ 1,072$ 1,149$ 1,009$ 1,156$ 41 6 Cubic Yard 6x week526.64$ 571.68$ 627.82$ 672.92$ 590.89$ 677.17$ 1 527$ 572$ 628$ 673$ 591$ 677$ 42 6 Cubic Yard 7x week616.05$ 668.89$ 734.59$ 787.37$ 691.37$ 792.34$ 1 616$ 669$ 735$ 787$ 691$ 792$ 43 8 Cubic Yard 1x week 172.81$ 188.15$ 207.07$ 222.26$ 194.62$ 223.69$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 44 8 Cubic Yard 2x week269.55$ 293.31$ 322.40$ 345.76$ 303.26$ 347.96$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 45 8 Cubic Yard 3x week363.89$ 395.58$ 434.53$ 465.82$ 408.90$ 468.77$ 1 364$ 396$ 435$ 466$ 409$ 469$ 46 8 Cubic Yard 4x week458.13$ 496.88$ 545.59$ 584.72$ 513.54$ 588.41$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 47 8 Cubic Yard 5x week547.51$ 594.32$ 652.39$ 699.04$ 614.19$ 703.43$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 48 8 Cubic Yard 6x week641.75$ 696.58$ 764.52$ 819.09$ 719.83$ 824.23$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 49 8 Cubic Yard 7x week752.75$ 816.22$ 895.85$ 959.82$ 843.46$ 965.85$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 50 Total Bins551 51 Gross Monthly Revenue - Commercial Refuse Bins75,230$ 81,842$ 90,116$ 96,761$ 84,671$ 97,384$ 52 Months per year12 12 12 12 12 1253 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Refuse Bins902,760$ 982,104$ 1,081,392$ 1,161,132$ 1,016,052$ 1,168,608$ 54 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Refuse Bins*903,000$ 982,000$ 1,081,000$ 1,161,000$ 1,016,000$ 1,169,000$ *Rounded to the nearest thousand.Updated 7/6/201-5&ity of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Commercial Carts, Refuse1 32-Gallon 1x week 24% 21.61$ 23.16$ 25.60$ 27.56$ 24.00$ 27.75$ 0.17$ 21.78$ 23.33$ 25.77$ 27.73$ 24.17$ 27.92$ 2 32-Gallon 2x week 42% 37.04$ 40.53$ 44.80$ 48.23$ 41.99$ 48.56$ 0.34$ 37.38$ 40.87$ 45.14$ 48.57$ 42.33$ 48.90$ 3 32-Gallon 3x week 59% 52.47$ 56.94$ 62.94$ 67.76$ 58.99$ 68.21$ 0.51$ 52.98$ 57.45$ 63.45$ 68.27$ 59.50$ 68.72$ 4 32-Gallon 4x week 77% 67.90$ 74.31$ 82.14$ 88.43$ 76.98$ 89.02$ 0.68$ 68.58$ 74.99$ 82.82$ 89.11$ 77.66$ 89.70$ 5 32-Gallon 5x week 94% 83.34$ 90.71$ 100.27$ 107.95$ 93.98$ 108.67$ 0.85$ 84.19$ 91.56$ 101.12$ 108.80$ 94.83$ 109.52$ 6 32-Gallon 6x week 112% 98.76$ 108.08$ 119.47$ 128.62$ 111.98$ 129.48$ 1.02$ 99.78$ 109.10$ 120.49$ 129.64$ 113.00$ 130.50$ 7 32-Gallon 7x week 140% 123.46$ 135.10$ 149.34$ 160.78$ 139.97$ 161.85$ 1.19$ 124.65$ 136.29$ 150.53$ 161.97$ 141.16$ 163.04$ 8 64-Gallon 1x week38% 33.96$ 36.67$ 40.53$ 43.64$ 37.99$ 43.93$ 0.35$ 34.31$ 37.02$ 40.88$ 43.99$ 38.34$ 44.28$ 9 64-Gallon 2x week 66% 58.02$ 63.69$ 70.40$ 75.79$ 65.99$ 76.30$ 0.70$ 58.72$ 64.39$ 71.10$ 76.49$ 66.69$ 77.00$ 10 64-Gallon 3x week 93% 82.10$ 89.75$ 99.20$ 106.80$ 92.98$ 107.52$ 1.05$ 83.15$ 90.80$ 100.25$ 107.85$ 94.03$ 108.57$ 11 64-Gallon 4x week 120% 106.17$ 115.80$ 128.00$ 137.81$ 119.98$ 138.73$ 1.40$ 107.57$ 117.20$ 129.40$ 139.21$ 121.38$ 140.13$ 12 64-Gallon 5x week 147% 130.25$ 141.86$ 156.80$ 168.81$ 146.97$ 169.95$ 1.75$ 132.00$ 143.61$ 158.55$ 170.56$ 148.72$ 171.70$ 13 64-Gallon 6x week 175% 154.32$ 168.88$ 186.67$ 200.97$ 174.97$ 202.32$ 2.10$ 156.42$ 170.98$ 188.77$ 203.07$ 177.07$ 204.42$ 14 64-Gallon 7x week 217% 191.36$ 209.41$ 231.47$ 249.20$ 216.96$ 250.87$ 2.45$ 193.81$ 211.86$ 233.92$ 251.65$ 219.41$ 253.32$ 15 96-Gallon 1x week52% 46.30$ 50.18$ 55.47$ 59.72$ 51.99$ 60.12$ 0.51$ 46.81$ 50.69$ 55.98$ 60.23$ 52.50$ 60.63$ 16 96-Gallon 2x week 87% 77.16$ 83.96$ 92.80$ 99.91$ 86.98$ 100.58$ 1.02$ 78.18$ 84.98$ 93.82$ 100.93$ 88.00$ 101.60$ 17 96-Gallon 3x week 122% 108.03$ 117.73$ 130.14$ 140.10$ 121.98$ 141.04$ 1.53$ 109.56$ 119.26$ 131.67$ 141.63$ 123.51$ 142.57$ 18 96-Gallon 4x week 157% 138.89$ 151.51$ 167.47$ 180.30$ 156.97$ 181.51$ 2.04$ 140.93$ 153.55$ 169.51$ 182.34$ 159.01$ 183.55$ 19 96-Gallon 5x week 192% 169.75$ 185.28$ 204.81$ 220.49$ 191.96$ 221.97$ 2.55$ 172.30$ 187.83$ 207.36$ 223.04$ 194.51$ 224.52$ 20 96-Gallon 6x week 227% 200.62$ 219.06$ 242.14$ 260.69$ 226.95$ 262.43$ 3.06$ 203.68$ 222.12$ 245.20$ 263.75$ 230.01$ 265.49$ 21 96-Gallon 7x week 262% 231.48$ 252.83$ 279.48$ 300.88$ 261.95$ 302.90$ 3.57$ 235.05$ 256.40$ 283.05$ 304.45$ 265.52$ 306.47$ (1) Rates are exclusive of the AB 939 fees.(2) AB 939 fees are not collected on current cart rates.CDSWMCrown WMCurrent Rates (2)Athens - BaseCDS CrownAthens - AlterantiveRelationship to 3-Yd BinCommercial Cart Service Rates Line Service Category Contractor Monthly Rates (1)AB 939 FeesCustomer Monthly RateCurrent RatesAthens - BaseAthens - Alterantive7/5/20124-6City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Commercial Carts, Refuse1 32-Gallon 1x week 21.78$ 23.33$ 25.77$ 27.73$ 24.17$ 27.92$ 5 109$ 117$ 129$ 139$ 121$ 140$ 2 32-Gallon 2x week37.38$ 40.87$ 45.14$ 48.57$ 42.33$ 48.90$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3 32-Gallon 3x week52.98$ 57.45$ 63.45$ 68.27$ 59.50$ 68.72$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4 32-Gallon 4x week68.58$ 74.99$ 82.82$ 89.11$ 77.66$ 89.70$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5 32-Gallon 5x week84.19$ 91.56$ 101.12$ 108.80$ 94.83$ 109.52$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6 32-Gallon 6x week99.78$ 109.10$ 120.49$ 129.64$ 113.00$ 130.50$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7 32-Gallon 7x week124.65$ 136.29$ 150.53$ 161.97$ 141.16$ 163.04$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8 Total Carts5 9 64-Gallon 1x week 34.31$ 37.02$ 40.88$ 43.99$ 38.34$ 44.28$ 15 515$ 555$ 613$ 660$ 575$ 664$ 10 64-Gallon 2x week58.72$ 64.39$ 71.10$ 76.49$ 66.69$ 77.00$ 2 117$ 129$ 142$ 153$ 133$ 154$ 11 64-Gallon 3x week83.15$ 90.80$ 100.25$ 107.85$ 94.03$ 108.57$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 12 64-Gallon 4x week107.57$ 117.20$ 129.40$ 139.21$ 121.38$ 140.13$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13 64-Gallon 5x week132.00$ 143.61$ 158.55$ 170.56$ 148.72$ 171.70$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 14 64-Gallon 6x week156.42$ 170.98$ 188.77$ 203.07$ 177.07$ 204.42$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 15 64-Gallon 7x week193.81$ 211.86$ 233.92$ 251.65$ 219.41$ 253.32$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 16 Total Carts17 17 96-Gallon 1x week 46.81$ 50.69$ 55.98$ 60.23$ 52.50$ 60.63$ 22 1,030$ 1,115$ 1,232$ 1,325$ 1,155$ 1,334$ 18 96-Gallon 2x week78.18$ 84.98$ 93.82$ 100.93$ 88.00$ 101.60$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19 96-Gallon 3x week109.56$ 119.26$ 131.67$ 141.63$ 123.51$ 142.57$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20 96-Gallon 4x week140.93$ 153.55$ 169.51$ 182.34$ 159.01$ 183.55$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 21 96-Gallon 5x week172.30$ 187.83$ 207.36$ 223.04$ 194.51$ 224.52$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 22 96-Gallon 6x week203.68$ 222.12$ 245.20$ 263.75$ 230.01$ 265.49$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 23 96-Gallon 7x week235.05$ 256.40$ 283.05$ 304.45$ 265.52$ 306.47$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 24 Total Carts22 25 Gross Monthly Revenue - Commercial Refuse Carts 1,771$ 1,916$ 2,116$ 2,277$ 1,984$ 2,292$ 26 Months per year12 12 12 12 12 1227Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Refuse Carts21,252$ 22,992$ 25,392$ 27,324$ 23,808$ 27,504$ 28 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Refuse Carts*21,000$ 23,000$ 25,000$ 27,000$ 24,000$ 28,000$ *Rounded to the nearest thousand.CDSWMCrown WMCurrent RatesAthens - BaseCDS CrownAthens - AlterantiveCommercial Refuse Cart Service RatesLine Service Category Customer Monthly RatesBilling UnitsMonthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesAthens - BaseAthens - Alterantive7/5/20124-7City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 31 Porter Service Rate5,500$ 8,889$ 5,500$ 17,519$ Scout Service2 1x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 34 393$ 393$ 393$ 393$ 393$ 3 2x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 31 359$ 359$ 359$ 359$ 359$ 4 3x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 32 370$ 370$ 370$ 370$ 370$ 5 4x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11 127$ 127$ 127$ 127$ 127$ 6 5x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 4 46$ 46$ 46$ 46$ 46$ 7 6x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 2 23$ 23$ 23$ 23$ 23$ 8 7x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 3 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 9 Total117 Bin, Refuse10 1x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 64 740$ 740$ 740$ 740$ 740$ 11 2x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 31 359$ 359$ 359$ 359$ 359$ 12 3x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 6 69$ 69$ 69$ 69$ 69$ 13 4x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 5 58$ 58$ 58$ 58$ 58$ 14 5x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 3 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 15 6x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 3 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 35$ 16 7x week11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ 11.57$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 17 Total112 Locking Bin18 1x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 23 133$ 133$ 133$ 133$ 133$ 19 2x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 8 46$ 46$ 46$ 46$ 46$ 20 3x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5 29$ 29$ 29$ 29$ 29$ 21 4x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 3 17$ 17$ 17$ 17$ 17$ 22 5x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 23 6x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 24 7x week5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ 5.79$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 Total39 26 Gross Monthly Revenue - Special Services2,874$ 8,374$ 11,763$ 8,374$ 20,393$ 27Months per year12 12 12 12 1228 Gross Annual Revenue - Special Services 34,488$ 100,488$ 141,156$ 100,488$ 244,718$ 29 Gross Annual Revenue - Special Services*34,000$ 100,000$ 141,000$ 100,000$ 245,000$ *Rounded to the nearest thousand.Monthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesAthens CDS CrownCommercial Special Service RatesLine Service Category Monthly RatesBilling UnitsCrown WMWM Athens CDSCurrent Rates7/5/20124-8 City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Bin, Recycling (1)1 1 Cubic Yard 1x week42.58$ 30.88$ 36.75$ 31.99$ 37.00$ 6 255$ 185$ 221$ 192$ 222$ 2 1 Cubic Yard 2x week63.92$ 46.32$ 55.12$ 47.99$ 55.49$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3 1 Cubic Yard 3x week85.22$ 62.24$ 74.07$ 64.49$ 74.57$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4 1 Cubic Yard 4x week106.56$ 77.68$ 92.45$ 80.48$ 93.07$ 2 213$ 155$ 185$ 161$ 186$ 5 1 Cubic Yard 5x week127.43$ 92.64$ 110.25$ 95.98$ 110.99$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6 1 Cubic Yard 6x week149.13$ 108.56$ 129.20$ 112.48$ 130.06$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7 1 Cubic Yard 7x week174.50$ 126.90$ 151.01$ 131.47$ 152.03$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8 1.5 Cubic Yard 1x week47.33$ 34.26$ 40.77$ 35.49$ 41.04$ 1 47$ 34$ 41$ 35$ 41$ 9 1.5 Cubic Yard 2x week71.01$ 51.63$ 61.44$ 53.49$ 61.85$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 10 1.5 Cubic Yard 3x week101.02$ 73.34$ 87.28$ 75.98$ 87.86$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 11 1.5 Cubic Yard 4x week118.64$ 86.37$ 102.78$ 89.48$ 103.47$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 12 1.5 Cubic Yard 5x week142.03$ 103.26$ 122.88$ 106.98$ 123.70$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13 1.5 Cubic Yard 6x week190.12$ 138.48$ 164.80$ 143.47$ 165.90$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 14 1.5 Cubic Yard 7x week222.43$ 162.12$ 192.93$ 167.97$ 194.22$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 15 2 Cubic Yard 1x week56.85$ 41.50$ 49.38$ 42.99$ 49.71$ 5 284$ 208$ 247$ 215$ 249$ 16 2 Cubic Yard 2x week87.64$ 63.69$ 75.79$ 65.99$ 76.30$ 4 351$ 255$ 303$ 264$ 305$ 17 2 Cubic Yard 3x week118.38$ 86.37$ 102.78$ 89.48$ 103.47$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 18 2 Cubic Yard 4x week149.13$ 108.56$ 129.20$ 112.48$ 130.06$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19 2 Cubic Yard 5x week175.22$ 127.38$ 151.59$ 131.97$ 152.61$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20 2 Cubic Yard 6x week201.28$ 146.68$ 174.56$ 151.97$ 175.73$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 21 2 Cubic Yard 7x week235.48$ 171.29$ 203.84$ 177.46$ 205.21$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 22 3 Cubic Yard 1x week66.24$ 48.25$ 57.42$ 49.99$ 57.81$ 4 265$ 193$ 230$ 200$ 231$ 23 3 Cubic Yard 2x week101.76$ 74.31$ 88.43$ 76.98$ 89.02$ 2 204$ 149$ 177$ 154$ 178$ 24 3 Cubic Yard 3x week137.33$ 99.88$ 118.86$ 103.48$ 119.66$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 3 Cubic Yard 4x week172.81$ 125.93$ 149.87$ 130.47$ 150.87$ 3 518$ 378$ 450$ 391$ 453$ 26 3 Cubic Yard 5x week208.29$ 151.51$ 180.30$ 156.97$ 181.51$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 27 3 Cubic Yard 6x week243.33$ 177.08$ 210.73$ 183.46$ 212.14$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 28 3 Cubic Yard 7x week285.22$ 207.96$ 247.48$ 215.46$ 249.14$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 29 4 Cubic Yard 1x week79.49$ 57.90$ 68.90$ 59.99$ 69.37$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 30 4 Cubic Yard 2x week122.14$ 88.78$ 105.65$ 91.98$ 106.36$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 31 4 Cubic Yard 3x week184.38$ 134.14$ 159.63$ 138.97$ 160.70$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 32 4 Cubic Yard 4x week207.65$ 151.02$ 179.72$ 156.47$ 180.93$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 33 4 Cubic Yard 5x week249.99$ 181.90$ 216.47$ 188.46$ 217.92$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 34 4 Cubic Yard 6x week292.58$ 213.27$ 253.80$ 220.96$ 255.50$ 4 1,170$ 853$ 1,015$ 884$ 1,022$ 35 4 Cubic Yard 7x week342.33$ 249.45$ 296.86$ 258.45$ 298.85$ 1 342$ 249$ 297$ 258$ 299$ 36 Total Recycling Bins32 37 Gross Monthly Revenue3,649$ 2,659$ 3,166$ 2,754$ 3,186$ 38 Months per year12 12 12 12 1239 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Bin Recycling43,788$ 31,908$ 37,992$ 33,048$ 38,232$ 40 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Bin Recycling*44,000$ 32,000$ 38,000$ 33,000$ 38,000$ (1) Recycling containers are priced at 50% of the refuse rate, with no AB 939 fees.* Rounded to the nearest thousand.Monthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesCurrent Rates Athens CDS Crown WM(2) No comparable refuse rate. 18-gallon rate is set at 64% of the 32-gallon recycling rate.Athens CDS Crown WMCommercial Service Rates - Recycling Bin Service RatesLine Service Category Monthly RatesBilling Units7/5/20124-9City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Cart, Recycling (1)1 18-gallon, 1x week (2) 6.95$ 7.41$ 8.82$ 7.68$ 8.88$ 2 14$ 15$ 18$ 15$ 18$ 2 32-gallon, 1x week16.21$ 11.58$ 13.78$ 12.00$ 13.87$ 14 227$ 162$ 193$ 168$ 194$ 3 32-gallon, 2x week27.78$ 20.27$ 24.12$ 21.00$ 24.28$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 4 32-gallon, 3x week39.36$ 28.47$ 33.88$ 29.49$ 34.10$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 5 32-gallon, 4x week50.93$ 37.15$ 44.21$ 38.49$ 44.51$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6 32-gallon, 5x week62.51$ 45.36$ 53.97$ 46.99$ 54.34$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7 32-gallon, 6x week74.08$ 54.04$ 64.31$ 55.99$ 64.74$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8 32-gallon, 7x week92.61$ 67.55$ 80.39$ 69.99$ 80.93$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9 64-gallon, 1x week25.46$ 18.34$ 21.82$ 19.00$ 21.97$ 287 7,307$ 5,264$ 6,262$ 5,453$ 6,305$ 10 64-gallon,2x week43.52$ 31.85$ 37.90$ 32.99$ 38.15$ 3 131$ 96$ 114$ 99$ 114$ 11 64-gallon, 3x week61.57$ 44.87$ 53.40$ 46.49$ 53.76$ 6 369$ 269$ 320$ 279$ 323$ 12 64-gallon, 4x week79.64$ 57.90$ 68.90$ 59.99$ 69.37$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 13 64-gallon, 5x week97.69$ 70.93$ 84.41$ 73.49$ 84.97$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 14 64-gallon, 6x week115.75$ 84.44$ 100.49$ 87.48$ 101.16$ 1 116$ 84$ 100$ 87$ 101$ 15 64-gallon, 7x week143.53$ 104.70$ 124.60$ 108.48$ 125.44$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 16 96-gallon, 1x week34.72$ 25.09$ 29.86$ 25.99$ 30.06$ 200 6,944$ 5,018$ 5,972$ 5,198$ 6,012$ 17 96-gallon, 2x week57.86$ 41.98$ 49.96$ 43.49$ 50.29$ 30 1,736$ 1,259$ 1,499$ 1,305$ 1,509$ 18 96-gallon, 3x week81.00$ 58.87$ 70.05$ 60.99$ 70.52$ 8 648$ 471$ 560$ 488$ 564$ 19 96-gallon, 4x week104.14$ 75.75$ 90.15$ 78.48$ 90.75$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 20 96-gallon, 5x week127.29$ 92.64$ 110.25$ 95.98$ 110.99$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 21 96-gallon, 6x week150.43$ 109.53$ 130.34$ 113.48$ 131.22$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 22 96-gallon, 7x week173.57$ 126.42$ 150.44$ 130.97$ 151.45$ 6 1,041$ 759$ 903$ 786$ 909$ 23 Total Recycling Carts557 24 Gross Monthly Revenue18,533$ 13,397$ 15,941$ 13,878$ 16,049$ 25 Months per year12 12 12 12 1226 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Cart Recycling222,396$ 160,764$ 191,292$ 166,536$ 192,588$ 27 Gross Annual Revenue - Commercial Cart Recycling*222,000$ 161,000$ 191,000$ 167,000$ 193,000$ (1) Recycling containers are priced at 50% of the refuse rate, with no AB 939 fees.* Rounded to the nearest thousand.Commercial Service Rates - Recycling Cart Service RatesLine Service Category Monthly RatesBilling UnitsMonthly Rate RevenueCurrent Rates Athens CDS Crown(2) No comparable refuse rate. 18-gallon rate is set at 64% of the 32-gallon, 1x week recycling rate.WMCurrent RatesAthens CDS Crown WM7/5/20124-10City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Current RateRoll-off Box Pulls1Standard Roll-off Box - 20, 30, 40 yd168.50$ 10.00$ 178.50$ 2Temporary Roll-off Box168.50$ 10.00$ 178.50$ 3Compactor Roll-off Box - 30 yd.336.99$ 7.50$ 344.49$ 4COD Roll-Off - Disposal included (up to 7 tons)420.16$ 10.00$ 430.16$ Roll-off Box Tons5Dump Fee35.95$ -$ 35.95$ 6Dump Fee, Compactor48.00$ -$ 48.00$ 7Temporary Bin 3 Cubic Yard80.99$ 0.75$ 81.74$ Proposed RatesRoll-off Box Pulls8 Standard Roll-off Box - 20. 30. 40 yd (1)171.60$ 160.24$ 165.00$ 278.48$ 10.00$ 181.60$ 170.24$ 175.00$ 288.48$ 9 Compactor Roll-Off Box - 20 yd193.52$ 204.96$ 242.00$ 533.40$ 5.00$ 198.52$ 209.96$ 247.00$ 538.40$ 10 Compactor Roll-Off Box - 30 yd193.52$ 204.96$ 242.00$ 533.40$ 7.50$ 201.02$ 212.46$ 249.50$ 540.90$ 11 Compactor Roll-Off Box - 40 yd193.52$ 204.96$ 242.00$ 533.40$ 10.00$ 203.52$ 214.96$ 252.00$ 543.40$ 12 Roll-off Box Tons - Dump Fee (2)55.56$ 44.32$ 42.00$ 54.95$ -$ 55.56$ 44.32$ 42.00$ 54.95$ 13 Temporary Bin 3 Cubic Yard99.60$ 80.99$ 125.00$ 128.46$ 0.75$ 100.35$ 81.74$ 125.75$ 129.21$ (1) Assumes all pulls are 40 cubic yards. AB 939 fees are $5.00 per pull for 20 yard standard roll-off box and $7.50 per pull for 30 yard standard roll-off box.(2) Estimated City facilities tons not included.(3) AB 939 fees are not collected on current roll-off rates.Roll-off Box and Temporary Bin Service RatesLineService CategoryContractor RateAB 939 FeeCustomer RateCurrent RatesAthens CDSWMCrown WMCurrent Rates (3)Athens CDS Crown7/5/20124-11City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Current Rate1Roll-off Box Pulls2Standard Roll-off Box - 20, 30, 40 yd178.50$ 23 4,106$ 3Temporary Roll-off Box178.50$ 26 4,641$ 4Compactor Roll-off Box - 30 yd.344.49$ 12 4,134$ 5COD Roll-Off - Disposal included (up to 7 tons)430.16$ 49 21,078$ 6Total Pulls110 Roll-off Box Tons7Dump Fee35.95$ 205 7,370$ 8Dump Fee, Compactor48.00$ 75 3,600$ 9Total Tons280 10Temporary Bin 3 Cubic Yard81.74$ 51 4,169$ Proposed RatesRoll-off Box Pulls11Standard Roll-off Box - 20. 30. 40 yd (1)181.60$ 170.24$ 175.00$ 288.48$ 98 17,797$ 16,684$ 17,150$ 28,271$ 12Compactor Roll-off Box - 20 yd198.52$ 209.96$ 247.00$ 538.40$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ 13Compactor Roll-off Box - 30 yd201.02$ 212.46$ 249.50$ 540.90$ 12 2,412$ 2,550$ 2,994$ 6,491$ 14Compactor Roll-off Box - 40 yd203.52$ 214.96$ 252.00$ 543.40$ - -$ -$ -$ -$ 15Total Pulls (2)110 16Roll-off Box Tons - Dump Fee55.56$ 44.32$ 42.00$ 54.95$ 485 26,947$ 21,495$ 20,370$ 26,651$ 17Temporary Bin 3 Cubic Yard100.35$ 81.74$ 125.75$ 129.21$ 51 5,118$ 4,169$ 6,413$ 6,590$ 18 Gross Annual Roll-off Box and Temporary Revenue49,098$ 52,274$ 44,898$ 46,927$ 68,003$ 19 Gross Annual Roll-off Box and Temporary Revenue* 49,000$ 52,000$ 45,000$ 47,000$ 68,000$ (1) Assumes all pulls are 40 cubic yards. AB 939 fees are $5.00 per pull for 20 yard standard roll-off box and $7.50 per pull for 30 yard standard roll-off box.(2) Estimated City facilities pulls not included.* Rounded to the nearest thousand.CDS Crown WMCrown WMCurrent RatesRoll-off Box and Temporary Bin Service RatesLineService CategoryCustomer RateBilling UnitsMonthly Rate RevenueCurrent RatesAthens CDSAthens 7/5/20124-12City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa BeachStandardized Rate Revenue ComparisonAttachment 4Option 1: Cart SystemOne refuse and unlimited recycling carts195-gallon cart993 331 250 64 409 2 64-gallon cart - Base Rate3,589 3,642 5,047 5,544 4,456 3 35-gallon cart1,986 1,655 1,324 838 1,451 4Unlimited refuse and recycling can collection (1)53 993 - 175 305 5Total Number of Customers 6,621 6,621 6,621 6,621 6,621 6 Backyard Service Charge39 39 39 39 39 Additional Refuse Cart Rates (for each refuse cart above one)795-gallon cart99 7 100 6 53 8 64-gallon cart- 73 1,500 554 532 935-gallon cart- 83 250 84 104 Opt-In Green Waste Program1095-gallon cart166 47 - 16 57 11 64-gallon cart331 514 450 893 547 1235-gallon cart166 234 50 91 135 Option 2: Single Stream13 Unlimited single stream refuse and recycling collection6,621 6,621 6,621 6,621 6,621 14Backyard Service Charge39 39 39 39 39 15Opt-In Green Waste Program662 795 500 n/a652 (1) For customers unable to accommodate carts.(2) Waste Management is not responding to Option 2.Residential Service Average UnitsProposers provided estimates of demand for various cart sizes and service levels anticipated under new programs. These estimates were averaged to facilitate a standardized comparison. Figures in bolded boxes were proposed; other figures were set by the RFP based on actual service statistics.Athens CDS Crown WM (2)LineService CategoryEstimated UnitsAverage Units (to Att. 4-3)7/5/20124-13City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa Beach7-Year Revenue Projections Residential Option 1Attachment 5Service DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueInitial Weightings77% 23% 100% 73% 27% 100% 77% 23% 100%76% 24% 100% 74% 26% 100%1/1/2013 $1,736,350 $518,650 $2,255,000 $1,719,880 $636,120 $2,356,000 $2,071,300 $618,700 $2,690,000 $1,745,720 $551,280 $2,297,000 $2,233,320 $784,680 $3,018,0001/1/2014 $1,788,441 $547,418 $2,335,859 $1,771,476 $670,761 $2,442,237 $2,133,439 $631,074 $2,764,513 $1,798,092 $567,818 $2,365,910 $2,300,320 $808,220 $3,108,5401/1/2015 $1,842,094 $574,789 $2,416,883 $1,824,620 $704,299 $2,528,919 $2,197,442 $643,695 $2,841,137 $1,852,035 $584,853 $2,436,888 $2,369,330 $832,467 $3,201,7971/1/2016 $1,897,357 $603,528 $2,500,885 $1,879,359 $739,514 $2,618,873 $2,263,365 $663,006 $2,926,371 $1,907,596 $602,399 $2,509,995 $2,440,410 $857,441 $3,297,8511/1/2017 $1,954,278 $633,704 $2,587,982 $1,935,740 $776,490 $2,712,230 $2,331,266 $682,896 $3,014,162 $1,964,824 $620,471 $2,585,295 $2,513,622 $883,164 $3,396,7861/1/2018 $2,012,906 $665,389 $2,678,295 $1,993,812 $815,315 $2,809,127 $2,401,204 $703,383 $3,104,587 $2,023,769 $639,085 $2,662,854 $2,589,031 $909,659 $3,498,6901/1/2019 $2,073,293$698,658$2,771,951$2,053,626$856,081$2,909,707$2,473,240$724,484$3,197,724$2,084,482$658,258$2,742,740$2,666,702$936,949$3,603,651Total $13,304,719 $4,242,136 $17,546,855 $13,178,513 $5,198,580 $18,377,093 $15,871,256 $4,667,238 $20,538,494 $13,376,518 $4,224,164 $17,600,682 $17,112,735 $6,012,580 $23,125,315Service Component Increase Assumption: 3%Annual Disposal Adjustment Assumption for Crown and WMLA, and CDS beginning year 4:3%Athens' Annual Disposal Adjustment:5%Athens Estimated Annual Green Waste Rate Increase at Puente Hills Closure: 2,700$ (added to disposal component at 1/1/2014 adjustment)CDS's disposal increase in years 2 & 3: 2.0%Service DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueInitial Weightings77% 23% 100% 73% 27% 100% 77% 23% 100%76% 24% 100% 74% 26% 100%1/1/2013 $1,736,350 $518,650 $2,255,000 $1,719,880 $636,120 $2,356,000 $2,071,300 $618,700 $2,690,000 $1,745,720 $551,280 $2,297,000 $2,233,320 $784,680$3,018,0001/1/20143.0% 5.5% 3.6% 3.0% 5.4% 3.7% 3.0% 2.0% 2.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20153.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.0% 2.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%7/1/20143.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 3.6% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20173.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 3.6% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20183.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 3.6% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20193.0% 5.0% 3.5% 3.0% 5.0% 3.6% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%Rate EffectiveAthens - BaseCDSCrownWMLAAthens - AlternativeWMLARate EffectiveAthens - BaseCDSCrownAthens - Alternative7/5/20125-1City of Hermosa Beach
City of Hermosa Beach7-Year Revenue Projections Residential Option 2Attachment 5Service DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueInitial Weightings64% 36% 100% 61% 39% 100%72% 28% 100%71% 29% 100%1/1/2013 $1,420,160 $798,840 $2,219,000 $1,415,200 $904,800 $2,320,000 $1,991,520 $774,480 $2,766,000 $1,651,460 $674,540 $2,326,0001/1/2014 $1,462,765 $864,612 $2,327,377 $1,457,656 $975,870 $2,433,526 $2,051,266 $789,970 $2,841,236 $1,701,004 $694,776 $2,395,7801/1/2015 $1,506,648 $907,843 $2,414,491 $1,501,386 $1,024,664 $2,526,050 $2,112,804 $805,769 $2,918,573 $1,752,034 $715,619 $2,467,6531/1/2016 $1,551,847 $953,235 $2,505,082 $1,546,428 $1,075,897 $2,622,325 $2,176,188 $829,942 $3,006,130 $1,804,595 $737,088 $2,541,6831/1/2017 $1,598,402 $1,000,897 $2,599,299 $1,592,821 $1,129,692 $2,722,513 $2,241,474 $854,840 $3,096,314 $1,858,733 $759,201 $2,617,9341/1/2018 $1,646,354 $1,050,942 $2,697,296 $1,640,606 $1,186,177 $2,826,783 $2,308,718 $880,485 $3,189,203 $1,914,495 $781,977 $2,696,4721/1/2019 $1,695,745$1,103,489$2,799,234$1,689,824$1,245,486$2,935,310$2,377,980$906,900$3,284,880$1,971,930$805,436$2,777,366Total $10,881,921 $6,679,858 $17,561,779 $10,843,921 $7,542,586 $18,386,507 $15,259,950 $5,842,386 $21,102,336 $12,654,251 $5,168,637 $17,822,888Service Component Increase Assumption: 3%Annual Disposal Adjustment Assumption for Crown and WMLA, and CDS beginning year 4:3%Athens' Annual Disposal Adjustment:5%Athens Estimated Annual Green Waste Rate Increase at Puente Hills Closure: 24,600$ (added to disposal component at 1/1/2014 adjustment)CDS's disposal increase in years 2 & 3:2.0%Service DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueService DisposalAnnual RevenueInitial Weightings64% 36% 100% 61% 39% 100%72% 28% 100%71% 29% 100%1/1/2013 $1,420,160 $798,840 $2,219,000 $1,415,200 $904,800 $2,320,000 $1,991,520 $774,480 $2,766,000 $1,651,460 $674,540 $2,326,0001/1/20143.0% 8.2% 4.9% 3.0% 7.9% 4.9%3.0% 2.0% 2.7%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20153.0% 5.0% 3.7% 3.0% 5.0% 3.8%3.0% 2.0% 2.7%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%7/1/20143.0% 5.0% 3.8% 3.0% 5.0% 3.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20173.0% 5.0% 3.8% 3.0% 5.0% 3.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20183.0% 5.0% 3.8% 3.0% 5.0% 3.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%1/1/20193.0% 5.0% 3.8% 3.0% 5.0% 3.8%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% 3.0% 3.0%Athens - AlternativeAthens - AlternativeRate EffectiveAthens - BaseCDSCrownRate EffectiveAthens - BaseCDSCrown7/5/20125-2 City of Hermosa Beach
Attachment 6Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage % Tonnage %Source Separated RecyclingResidential 2,160 12.8% 2,160 12.8% 1,728 10.0% 2,160 12.7% 1,713 10.1%1,713 10.1%Commercial488 2.9%567 3.3% 488 2.9% 430 2.5% 488 2.9%567 3.3% 488 2.9% 116 0.7%Roll-off8 0.0%8 0.0%6 0.0%8 0.0%61 0.4%8 0.0%8 0.0%6 0.0%8 0.0%15 0.1%Subtotal: Source Separated Recycling2,656 15.8% 2,168 12.9% 2,301 13.3% 2,656 15.6% 2,204 13.0% 496 2.9% 8 0.0% 573 3.3% 496 2.9% 1,829 10.8%Mixed Waste Processing - Residential Cart- - - 2,234 13.2% - 3,430 20.4% 3,430 20.4% 2,336 13.5% 2,904 17.1% - Green WasteResidential Green Waste 416 2.5% 416 2.5% 575 3.3% 50 0.3% 268 1.6% 416 2.5% 416 2.5% 575 3.3% 350 2.1% 73 0.4%Roll-off Green Waste38 0.2% 38 0.2% 36 0.2% 38 0.2% 64 0.4% 38 0.2% 38 0.2% 36 0.2% 38 0.2% 76 0.4%Other 50 0.3%50 0.3%28 0.2%- 18 0.1%50 0.3%50 0.3%28 0.2%- - Subtotal: Green Waste504 3.0% 504 3.0% 639 3.7% 88 0.5% 350 2.1% 504 3.0% 504 3.0% 639 3.7% 388 2.3% 149 0.9%Commercial Food Waste- - - 3,420 20.1% - - - - 3,420 20.1%Commercial - separated, transformation, other1,913 11.3%Mixed Waste Processing - Commercial- 2,905 17.2% 524 3.0% 1,144 6.7%- - 2,905 17.2% 524 3.0% 1,144 6.7%- C&D Processing199 1.2% 199 1.2% 207 1.2% 187 1.1% 261 1.5% 199 1.2% 199 1.2% 207 1.2% 187 1.1% 77 0.5%Transformation2,540 15.1% 1,380 8.2% 1,719 10.0% 1,685 9.9% 1,697 10.0% 2,100 12.5% 1,380 8.2% 1,719 10.0% 1,685 9.9% 150 0.9%Roll-off/Other Processing- - - 616 3.6%- - - - 616 3.6% 203 1.2%Total Projected Annual Tons Diverted5,899 35.1% 7,156 42.5% 5,390 31.2% 12,030 70.7% 4,512 26.6% 6,729 40.0% 8,426 50.0% 5,998 34.7% 10,840 63.7% 2,408 25.6%Total Projected Annual Tons Collected16,848 16,848 17,257 16,977 16,966 16,848 16,848 17,257 16,977 16,956 Planned Diversion Percentage35%42.5%31%71%27%40%50%35%64%Guaranteed Hauler Diversion Percentage35%42.5%31%65%27%40%50%35%60%Athens - BaseCDS CrownDiversion Plan Comparison - Projected Year-One Diversion of Hauler-Collected Solid WasteDiversion ProgramOption 1Option 22010 ActualAthens - Base CDS Crown WMLAAthens - AlternativeAthens - Alternative7/5/20126 - 1City of Hermosa Beach
Attachment 7
Athens’ StopAthens.org Response
You have asked us to respond to some “blog” information that provides misinformation and
absolute falsehoods. We are not typically asked to respond to information disseminated about our
company from anonymous sources, but we are happy to reply in this instance because we are
confident our response will provide the city a more accurate representation of Athens Services if this
issue arises. In addition, HF&H has evaluated Athens Services on several occasions and has
recommended us as a potential waste hauler to several cities as a result of this evaluation. We
certainly believe that these evaluations have been vetted out and HF&H would not recommend a
hauler if these issues were current, or even fact. As a case in point, we have been awarded a waste
contract where this very issue arose and once the final decision was made by the City Council, the
issue never manifested itself during contract implementation or service. The competitors simply
went away and will again possibly surface during the contract deliberation in Hermosa Beach. This
is a typical behavior that our competitors and local unions use to try and discount the fact that
Athens Services is one of the most qualified waste haulers in Southern California. Most City Officials
and Staff Members see right through this “anonymous” attack on an outstanding municipal vendor
like Athens. During our consultant-participant relationship in the past 3 years you (HF&H) have not
experienced anything the like of what this blog has indicated. Also remember that this blog has no
“new information”, and is simply a byproduct of misinformed competitors that can mask their
identity by using the internet. This behavior is one of the unfortunate consequences of the
anonymous internet use. I am sure anyone looking at this will understand, can appreciate, and
probably has experienced this internet style assault, especially elected officials and City Staff.
The information you have asked about is garnered from a website that claims to be maintained by,
“Montebello Residents for Honest Government.” This website is actually maintained by the main
consultant to several of our waste company competitors. As would be expected of a website
constructed and maintained by industry competitors, under the guise of a grassroots group of
concerned citizens, the website is replete with inaccurate and blatantly false information about
Athens Services. It is most unfortunate that competitors and special interest can take a “free shot”
via this horrible website which demonstrates truly the worst the internet has to offer. The owners of
Athens Services have built a tremendous value add company based on family values and service,
both to our customers and employees. Athens demonstrates to all of our contracted cities these
values on a daily basis, and when asked, each city will give us the highest regards for our attention
to detail and service model. Most important is that our partner City’s Staff and Elected Officials are
reminded that they made the right decision by selecting Athens as their waste hauler and landfill
avoidance business partner. Following are some examples of the erroneous information
disseminated to you in the past by an anonymous party or parties:
The website states, under a heading "Montebello Superfund Site," that Athens operated one of the
region's worst landfills, now a major federal Superfund cleanup site, while doing business as the
"Operating Industry" company. This statement is false. Athens has never done business as
“Operating Industry Company,” owned any such entity, nor played any role whatsoever in the
operation of the so-called "Montebello Superfund Site.” Rather, the site was operated for years as a
mining related venue, later opened as a landfill in 1948 by the City of Monterey Park and a private
operator, subsequently taken over by Operating Industries, Inc., and eventually shut down and
labeled a Superfund Site. Jack Arakelian had a partnership interest in Operating Industries in the
early 1970’s. Jack Arakelian never had any ownership of Arakelian Enterprises dba Athens Services,
Athens’ StopAthens.org Response Attachment 7
July 5, 2012 7 - 2 City of Hermosa Beach
nor did Athens Services take waste to this facility.
The website refers to antitrust allegations. This case dates back over 23 years to an alleged incident
between one of our senior executives at the time, and another business associate. Our firm chose to
enter a no contest plea, not admitting any wrongdoing but not contesting the allegations in a public
forum. As such, and since that incident there have been no violations and Athens Services has a
spotless record versus the majority of our competitors in the industry.
The website further states, under the heading "Operational Safety Violations," that OSHA has cited
Athens for illegally forging a CHP officer's signature of "scores of fake vehicle repair certifications"
and further lists a host of other serious safety violations attributable to Athens. It even purports to
cite to a Los Angeles Times story to corroborate the allegations. In reality, the cited article indicated
West Covina Disposal, not Athens, was the operator who committed such acts -- a completely
separate company which, at the time, Athens was not affiliated with in any fashion. Indeed, in part
to try and solve these very problems, which the website accuses Athens of committing, the City of
West Covina later worked with Athens to take over the waste hauling contracts at issue in order to
remedy this situation. Indeed, Athens still has a contract with the City of West Covina and we have
a very good working relationship with and positive reputation in the city, which we are confident
both city staff and council will verify. In addition Athens Services currently received a “Certificate
of Achievement” from the California Highway Patrol for consecutive satisfactory ratings on our
motor carrier safety and terminal inspections, a far cry from this anonymous internet assault.
The website additionally cites, under the heading "Environmental Violations," various SCAQMD
violations. Athens’ state of the art materials recycling facility utilized a series of highly innovative
technologies that initially created various issues, but such temporary problems were remedied in
full and the issues abated. The reason for these temporary issues and problems was twofold: one,
the design, construction, and utilization of a groundbreaking and state of the art materials recycling
facility created a host of new challenges for Athens and its team. Second, such issues may have been
minor indeed but for the efforts of a plaintiff's class action firm that utilized a "phone tree" for the
surrounding citizens to constantly call the SCAQMD to claim the presence of various "odors" in the
area and alleged resulting "harm" to the community. Based in large part on these complaints,
Notices of Violation were routinely issued based on such simple calls and complaints without any
form of environmental or scientific testing. As to the multiple Notices of Violations, those were
almost entirely created by a small group of residents that sued Athens and then routinely called the
SCAQMD in the hopes of adding some validity to their lawsuit – and, with no testing or
environmental equipment of any kind, the SCAQMD would often issue the notices based solely on
such calls. Our last Notice of Violation of this type was received in October of 2007. Theses NOV’s
and the lawsuit were later remedied and dismissed following an inspection of the facility by a panel
of AQMD officials. Since that time our MRF has been operating virtually NOV free and the
SCAQMD issues have also been fully resolved. A very important point here is that some of the
equipment purchased and installed was later found to be defective and the contractor and
manufacturer of the equipment took responsibility for correcting those issues. The Athens Material
Recovery Facility (MRF) is a fully enclosed facility that employs the most technologically advanced
environmental impact mitigations. It is the highest diverting mixed waste MRF in California and we
invite City Staff, City Council and Residents to tour the facility at any time to form their own
opinion.
Athens’ StopAthens.org Response Attachment 7
July 5, 2012 7 - 3 City of Hermosa Beach
Finally, with respect to our company’s reputation- Athens Services has provided exemplary waste
collection and recycling services to cities throughout Southern California for 53 years. The
allegations regarding political manipulation and pricing are absolutely false. We have exclusive
contracts in 20 cities, some dating back to the 1960’s, and non-exclusive contracts in many more. Our
reputation for providing consistently excellent service at highly competitive rates has earned us the
trust of these communities to continually meet and exceed ever-more stringent AB 939 mandates.
Our long history of community involvement and philanthropy has solidified positive relationships
in each of our stakeholder communities as we are confident will be verified through our references.
This should address your questions regarding the stopathens.org website.
Unfortunately we cannot control internet postings or anonymous information disseminated to cities
about our company. However, because of our proven record of being an industry leader with
respect to service, innovation and community support, we are confident our well-earned, positive
reputation continues to be the standard by which we are judged in our communities and our
industry. Athens Services will add value to your community so both City Staff and Elected Officials
can focus on the Mission, Goals, and Objectives while implementing your daily action plans.
Advantages of Separate Residential gpRecycling Program vs. Single Stream CollectionOption #1: Separate Recyclables CollectionOption #2: Single Stream Collection of Refuse&Recyclables(1)p pyRefuse & Recyclables (1)•No change for customers –current method.•No need for residents to sort material –everyone “participates.”Ridtf“titi i ti ”FlidttkCittt•Residents may favor “active participation” in a separate collection program.•Fewer solid waste trucks on City streets and reduced truck traffic and street maintenance costs. Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from fewer trucks.g•Current residential diversion rate of 24% may be increased further with recycling carts.•Proposers may guarantee higher diversion than current program through processing.•May be more cost effective for proposers that do not operate mixed waste processing facilities.•Potentially lower cost due to collection efficiencies.8-1(1) Co-collection of trash and recyclables in one container, one truck, to be processed for removal of recyclables at a materials recovery facility (“MRF”)
Advantages of Cart vs Barrel/Bag CollectionCart vs. Barrel/Bag CollectionCart CollectionBarrel/Bag Collection•Uniform look for collection set‐outs•Unlimited refuse set out permitted•All waste containerized with attached lids*; reduced litter•More flexibility in residents’ containers (continued use of bags and residents’ i)own containers)•Allows volume‐based rate structure, if desired by City •No need to distribute refuse containers•Allows automated or semi‐automated collection, resulting in reduced worker injuries –no need to lift containers•No change to customers existing solid waste setout practices•Potentiallyhigherrecyclingquantitiesdue•Emptytrashbarrelsmay be“nested”or•Potentiallyhigher recycling quantities due to larger capacity recycling containers•Empty trash barrelsmay be nested or stacked for storage* Hauler will remove residents’ unwanted, previously-used barrels when new carts are distributed.8-2
Example of Volume-Based Rate Structure(“Pay As You Throw”)(Pay As You Throw)Waste Stream Rate StructureRefuse •96‐gallon cart: base rate plus $4.00*gp•64‐gallon cart: base rate•35‐gallon cart: base rate minus $4.00*RecyclingNo additional charge Green Waste (if requested) Monthly fee based on size of cart requested**fS35, 64 and 96 gallons8-3* Updated from September 13, 2011 presentation to reflect rate structure in RFP.
Example ofVolumeBased Rate StructureVolume-Based Rate StructureExample “Pay As You Throw” RatesFirst Refuse CartAdditional Refuse Carts$$$$$$$$$$$$Additional Recycling and Green Waste Carts at no additional charge35-gal35-gal 64-gal 96-gal96-gal64-galAdditional Recycling and Green Waste Carts at no additional charge 8-4
Advantages of Volume-Based Rates(“Pay As You Throw”) vs Flat Rate(Pay As You Throw ) vs. Flat RateVolume‐Based Rates Flat Rate•Financial incentive to recycle – choice of smaller or larger refuse carts•Simplicity of billing•Improved public perception of “fairness”•Customer convenienceGtbdN h f t•Generators pay based upon usage•No change for customers8-5
July 16, 2012
Dear Hermosa Beach City Councilmembers:
On July 24th the City Council faces the challenging decision of selecting the City’s waste hauler
for the next seven years. Republic is excited and prepared to renew its ten-year relationship
with the City, its residents, and business owners.
To refresh and enhance the City Council’s understanding of Republic’s Proposal, we would like
to remind the City Council that the benefits of Republic’s incumbent position in Hermosa Beach
combined with Republic’s facilities infrastructure, financial strength, and its sustainability and
program initiatives combine to create an integrated waste services solution that other bidders
are not in the position to provide. Please consider these points as you prepare to make this
important decision.
Proven Reliability and Consistency
Republic’s Proposal features are based on its total familiarity and experience in Hermosa
Beach. A contract award to Republic means that residents and business owners will be spared
the inconvenience, disruption, and all of the uncertainty associated with transition to a new
service provider. As the City has been able to witness through the transparent process it is
conducting, there is strong base of support amongst Hermosa Beach residents in retaining
Republic as the City’s waste hauler. Not only will implementation be seamless with Republic,
but Republic’s staff and resources will be freed to focus on increasing diversion and enlivening
the community through stronger customer messaging and community involvement instead of
being focused on transition logistics.
Low and Sustainable Rates
Hermosa Beach residents enjoy some of the lowest rates in Los Angeles County. Republic has
a proven track record of maintaining low rates and consistently providing high quality, reliable
services in the City for ten years. This history provides reassurance to the City and service
recipients that Republic has not submitted pricing with the unspoken intention of raising rates to
make up for the inevitable losses that go along with unsustainable initial pricing. Republic has
submitted competitive but realistic and stand-alone rates that can be tied out to the actual costs
of providing service.
Food Waste Collection – Advanced, Convenient Collection Services
Republic is the only bidder to have developed residential and commercial food waste collection
programs that do not require an additional container and specific, separate rates, or an involved
procurement process in order to fully implement. For many Hermosa Beach residents and
businesses, space is a concern. To address that, Republic has proposed its Bag-It organics
collection program for residents, whereby Republic will provide residents with a supply of
brightly-colored plastic bags with preprinted instructions for food waste collection. Any resident
who wants to participate simply places full bags in their trash container or yard waste container
if they opt in for one. Bags are then removed from trash loads at Republic transfer facilities and
combined with loads of organics materials going to its organics processor, Farm Share.
Similarly, commercial customers can place bagged food waste in their trash containers under
Republic’s One-Bin Plus system, which was successfully piloted in Santa Clara County and now
being implemented city-wide in San Jose.
These convenient and revolutionary organics collection programs—which are not pilot programs
but actual programs that Republic will implement for the low rates proposed, will help make
Hermosa Beach a model of sustainability and efficiency.
Farm Share/Food Share
After trash loads are offloaded at a Republic transfer station, food waste will be transloaded into
organics transfer trucks and brought to Farm Share for processing and composting. Farm
Share is an agricultural and environmental program designed to utilize organic waste to help
local growers amend their soil, increase the quality and quantity of their crops and, give back to
hungry families and help them put food on their tables.
Farm Share recycles green waste and some food wastes into compost. Farm Share compost is
then provided to local farmers at low or no cost. In exchange for receiving Farm Share compost,
the farmers agree to donate a portion of the food they grow to Food Share, Ventura County’s
largest food bank and Feeding America, the nation’s largest network of food banks.
For each ton of green waste and food waste recycled; farmers donate enough organic produce
to provide up to 5 meals to local food banks.
Safety
Each year Republic Services sets aggressive safety goals for its collection divisions and proudly
Republic has an experience modification rate of .83—well below the industry average. This
accomplishment is due to Republic’s strong culture of safety and its behavior-based approach in
the development and administration of the Company’s safety training programs. Republic is
proud of its track record knowing how important a high level of safety means to Republic’s
municipal clients.
Quiet, Safe Collection in Congested Areas
Republic is the only waste hauler to introduce a small, fully electric waste collection vehicle on
the West Coast. This vehicle will be used in congested areas and will fully mitigate the noise
and all emissions associated with standard refuse collection. Republic has specified this green
vehicle for use in narrow areas with tight turning radii since it is the most quiet, environmentally
friendly, safe, and efficient way of servicing these unique areas. Additionally, a smaller pick-up
truck can be dispatched to extremely impacted areas as needed.
Downtown Commercial Collection Challenges
Initial commercial recycling opportunity assessments will be conducted of all commercial
businesses to ensure that services are right-sized to each individual commercial customer,
recycling opportunities are highlighted, and food waste/organics customers are identified and
enrolled. As the incumbent service provider, Republic has crafted a comprehensive program to
address downtown business challenges that includes tools for continual monitoring, immediate
action, and follow up reporting to ensure that all areas are kept tidy and sanitary. Furthermore,
as stated in Republic’s proposal, the Company will work with the City and businesses in a
consultative manner to coordinate the necessary improvements to accomplish the City’s goals.
This could include, among other things, the installation of stationary compactors of any type and
size along with the implementation of a fair, distributed rate amongst users.
Summary
A contract renewal with Republic as the incumbent service provider is an important step in
moving forward with velocity to meet the City’s diversion objectives and reliably maintaining
collection services as new programs are implemented in Hermosa Beach. Hermosa Beach
customers will receive proven and progressive sustainable collection services at highly
competitive rates that are guaranteed to remain competitive over the term of the Agreement.
We appreciate the Council’s work in sorting through the various options this competitive process
has made available to the City and would be honored to continue our long-term and productive
relationship with the City of Hermosa Beach to green the City, keep it beautiful, enhance the
quality of life for residents and increase the attractiveness of the business environment for both
existing and incoming businesses.
Sincerely,
KURT BRATTON
Kurt Bratton
Area President
AGENDA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 – 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
MAYOR
Jeff Duclos
CITY CLERK
Elaine Doerfling
MAYOR PRO TEM
Patrick ‘Kit’ Bobko
CITY TREASURER
David Cohn
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Michael DiVirgilio
Howard Fishman
Peter Tucker
INTERIM CITY MANAGER
John Jalili
CITY ATTORNEY
Michael Jenkins
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
INTERVIEW APPLICANTS FOR:
PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA PACKET FOR JULY 24, 2012 UNDER
ITEM 8a
APPOINTMENTS WILL BE MADE AT THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THAT FOLLOWS THIS INTERVIEW MEETING.
ADJOURNMENT