Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-06 - AGENDA REPORTS - PLACERITA CYN SEWER CONTR (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT UNFINISHED BUSINESS DATE: September 6, 2001 City Manager Appro-, Item to be presented SUBJECT: PLACERITA CANYON SEWER BACKBONE, PROJECT NO. S2036 — AWARD DESIGN CONTRACT DEPARTMENT: Transportation & Engineering Services RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council award the contract to Tetra Tech ASL, Inc. for environmental, engineering design, and right-of-way services for the Placerita Canyon Sewer Backbone, Project No. S2036, in the amount of $345,000.00 and authorize a 15 percent contingency expenditure in the amount of $51,750.00; and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval. BACKGROUND On February 15, 2001, City staff prepared a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the subject project. Included in the RFP were the requirements to provide environmental, right-of-way, and design services for the construction of a mainline backbone sanitary sewer to service the Placerita Canyon area (see Exhibit "A"). The proposed sewer system is to serve properties as far easterly into the canyon as The Master's College and two residential tracts in the westerly portion of the canyon. The RFP was sent to firms on the City's Design Consultant List. The following two firms submitted proposals: Company Address 1. Tetra Tech ASL, Inc. Camarillo, California 2. Sikand Engineering Associates Van Nuys, California Based on technical qualifications and methodology for the project, Tetra Tech ASL, Inc. is the recommended firm. On June 18, 2001, staff attended a "Town Hall Meeting" to present the latest concept for the project and answer questions of the residents in attendance. This meeting was the first of several anticipated to discuss the concerns presented to the City Council at the May 8, 2001 regular meeting. Residents had concerns covering several areas, including the construction of the Placerita Canyon sewer backbone and the City's and community's Agenda Iteme.Aw PLACERITA CANYON SEWER BACKBONE, PROJECT NO. 52036 AWARD DESIGN CONTRACT September 6, 2001— Page 2 relationships with The Master's College. Staff made every attempt to address the issues presented to the City Council on May 8, 2001, as well as the additional concerns raised at the community meeting. Staff has prepared a brief list of some of the questions asked and answers provided, and has attached them to this report as Exhibit `B." Staff is committed to providing continued public participation meetings in order to incorporate issues and suggestions into the environmental and design phases of the project should it proceed. At the July 10, 2001 City Council meeting, the City Council continued this item for the award of a design contract to a special City Council meeting scheduled for September 6, 2001. ALTERNATIVE ACTION Other action as determined the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT The funds for the Placerita Canyon Sewer Backbone project have been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2000/2001 in the amount of $600,000.00 in Account No. 52036001-8001, and $308,735.00 in Account No. 52036457-8001, for a total of $908,735.00. ATTACHMENT Exhibit "A" — Project Area Map Exhibit "B"— Town Hall Meeting Questions and Answers CA:lkl eeend\placeritecy sewer backbone award.doc ' � U N O� a 0 N •O N CO U O co V;.q .a W � •O aw EXHIBIT "B" PLACERITA CANYON SEWER BACKBONE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Why did City Staff proceed with the feasibility study without having notified community that such action would be taking place? No such meeting took place. The Master's College has been involved with several meetings to discuss the development of their campus. The College has every right to do this. During those meetings, issues such as a public sewer system may have been brought up, but no formal agreements exist at this time. Why was it that the City had a meeting with The Master's College regarding this study? Who gave this direction? Why was the Placerita Canyon Homeowner's Association not notified of any meetings held with The Master's College regarding conceptual agreements that could potentially impact the residents of Placerita Canyon? No such meetings were held; however, it would not necessarily be appropriate to invite parties not involved in such agreements until the City Council first had a chance to review them. If the July 1999 meeting indicated that the residents did not support the construction of a sewer backbone, then why is this issue being revisited? Water quality concerns motivated the City Council to direct staff to begin working on a project again. When will the residents of Placerita Canyon receive written responses to the issues presented to the City Council at the May 8, 2001 City Council meeting? City Council did not direct staff to respond until after staff met with the public to have all available information. Is the total cost of the project $1.2 million or $2.1 million? It is anticipated that the estimated cost of the project would be the lesser of the two, because the City has scaled down the project to only include a portion of the sewer backbone and not the extension lines. What would be the cost that each homeowner would be responsible for? Would a reimbursement district be set up? A reimbursement district would be set up to allow for any homeowners directly adjacent to connect to the system. Estimates of this cost are not available at this time, as the project has not commenced. This information will be available after the completion of the environmental and design services. Which facilities would The Master's College be hooking up to the sewer backbone? According to Placerita Canyon residents, The Master's College should be conditioned to hook up all their facilities to the sewer backbone, since they produce the most sewage within the canyon and thus are more likely to contribute to groundwater contamination. Since no agreement has been drafted at this point, staff is unable to provide a concise answer to this question at this time. Will property owners be required to hook up to the sewer backbone when making additions to homes even if a septic tank was recently constructed? No resident will be required to connect to the system unless problems arise with their current system. Special cases will be addressed individually. Will all residents be required to pay a sewer tax? No, only those residents hooking up to the mainline will be annexed into the district and thus pay the annual sewer tax. Is the sewer tax based on water usage? No Where did the budgeted funds originate? There is approximately $300,000+ that was contributed by the developers of the most recent tracts. The City has contributed $600,000. These funds will be utilized in the environmental and design phases of the work with any remaining amount going toward the construction. Since the proposed project is a scaled-back version of the one analyzed in the sewer study, will the City participate in future sewer line extensions to assist those homeowners affected by said extension? The City Council has historically contributed to such projects, but no guarantee can be made at this time. How far will house laterals be extended? Sewer house laterals will be extended from the mainline to each respective property line to a depth below ground as specified in local standards. Is the Los Angeles County sewer line along San Fernando at full capacity? No. Why is the sewer backbone alignment proposed to be installed along Placeritos Boulevard / Placerita Canyon Road and not along Dockweiler where impacts would be minimized? The residents of Placerita Canyon do not need a sewer, since all their septic systems are in good operating condition. Installing any sewer system up a hill of any size requires mechanical lifting systems that are very expensive to maintain and present the possibility of failure. Gravity systems do not rely on any mechanical means and are therefore the standard worldwide. Why did City Council carry over $600,000 for a project that had no public support? City Councilmember Bob Kellar indicated that the potential for groundwater contamination is a Citywide issue since 50 percent of the City's drinking water comes from underground aquifers. Funds were re -budgeted to address potential groundwater contamination issues that could be mitigated by the installation of a sewer system. Why did the City consider building only part of the sewer when City staff has stated that overall groundwater contamination is their greatest concern? Without full community support, such an expensive and ambitious project would be very difficult. This smaller project will create the highest benefit for the least cost. Why is the City helping The Master's College, a private institution, pay for a sewer with taxpayer dollars? The City has assisted others on similar endeavors because installing a sewer serves the best interest of all. Groundwater resources make up a large part of the City's drinking water, and it goes without saying that eliminating groundwater contamination is in the best interest of the entire community. If the sewer backbone is constructed, The Master's College should be required to hook up all facilities. Since the impetus for the construction of the sewer backbone is The Master's College proposal for the addition of a dormitory, why are they not conditioned to fund the entire project? Because the project will benefit the entire community. The City has proposed assisting The Master's College with this first phase. The residents of Placerita Canyon think that the City Council may not be getting all the information they need from City staff. The City Council should have known that the residents indicated at the July 1999 meeting that there was no local support for this project. So, why has this come to surface again? Staff made it clear to the City Council that there was strong opposition to the project voiced at the first public meeting. No action has taken place since that time. The current City Council is concerned about water quality issues. Why is the City building just a portion of the sewer identified in the sewer study? Typically, projects of this nature (i.e., public utility) are built in stages because the costs involved in completely building one out would be enormous. The residents of Placerita Canyon want the ultimate construction of the sewer system, as identified in the sewer study, to be fair and equitable to all within the Canyon. The environmental phase of the project identifies various alignments, with the chosen alignment being the one that minimizes the environmental and economic impacts. CA:lkl co ncil\placeni cy sewerbackbone award.dw