Business Case Evaluation – Existing Park Facility Outdoor Refuse and Recyclables Collection 
2
3.
Purchase a Split Body Truck:
Purchase a split body collection truck that has the
capacity for the collection of refuse and recyclables in a single trip to park facilities to
eliminate the additional trip by SWS for the collection of recyclables.
-
This option would continue the current level of service for refuse and
recyclables collection, delivered using one split body truck and one standard
refuse collection truck.
Financial Analysis
A financial analysis was completed to compare the net present value for the total cost of each
option for the collection of refuse and recyclables at City park facilities. Table 1 presents the
total future costs for each option and Table 2 presents the results of the net present value
analysis. The evaluation period for the financial analysis is from 2012 through 2024, the current
collection trucks are assumed to require replacement in 2015 at the end of their 10-year life
cycle. Attachment B contains the primary financial assumptions used in the net present value
analysis. Future year cash flow charts can be found in Attachment C.
TABLE 1
Summary of Total Future Year Costs (Calendar Year (CY) 2012 – CY2024)
Option
Capital
Cost
Fuel
Costs
Maintenance
Costs
Labor
Costs
Total
Costs
1
$0.28M
$0.28M
$0.50M
$3.3M
$4.4M
2
$0.19M
$0.18M
$0.29M
$2.6M
$3.3M
3
$0.24M
$0.19M
$0.31M
$3.2M
$3.9M
Note: Costs in this table have not been discounted.
TABLE 2
Summary of Net Present Value Analysis (Discount Rate = 4%) (CY2012-CY2024)
Option
Net Present Value Total Costs
Equivalent Annual Costs
1
$3.4M
$0.34M
2
$2.6M
$0.26M
3
$3.1M
$0.31M
Non-Financial Considerations
The financial analysis addressed the capital and operating costs of each option. These costs do
not include the consideration of non-financial factors that represent potential benefits to the City
that are not as easily monetized. To account for these non-financial considerations a value-
based approach using a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) was utilized. The methodology used for
the evaluation of non-financial considerations for this BCE is the same approach used for the
strategy prioritization work completed as part for the City’s Climate/Energy Action Plan (CEAP).
Figure 1 presents the total benefit score for each option. The higher an option’s total benefit
score the greater the contribution to the non-financial decision criteria. Attachment D provides
additional details on the non-financial evaluation; including the definition and weighting of the
decision criteria and definition of the performance scales.