Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 5, 2005MEETING AGENDA Arcadia City Council/Arcadia Redevelopment Agency TUESDAY, 7ANUARY 4, 2005 C'oNTln1UE.~ '!2~ Vq~u/~~2~ ~, 2UOS This agenda contains a summary of each item of business which the Council may discuss or act on at this meeting. The complete staff report and all other written documentation relating to each item on this agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the reference desk at the Arcadia Pubiic Li6rary and are available for public inspection and review. If you have any question about any matter on the agenda, piease call the office of the City Clerk at (626) 574-5455. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Council meeting, please contact the City Manager's Office at (626) 574-5401 at least three (3) working days before the meeting or time when special services are needed. This notification will heip City staff in making reasonable a cra ngements-to-provide-you-with-access-to-the-meeting. 7:00 p.m. - City Council Chamber INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL City Council/Agency Members: Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS REPORT BY THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE READING IN FULL PRESENTATIONS a. Award of Meritorious Service Medal to Lieutenant Bob Anderson; Award of Medals of Merit to Sergeant Tom LeVeque, Dispatcher Pam McGinnis, and Dispatcher Lisa Gonzales AUDIENCE Time reserved for comments by the public (Five minutes per person) PARTICIPATION ELECTED OFFICIALS - City Council/City Clerk Reports/Announcements/Statements/Future REPORTS Agenda Items 1. CONSENT CALENDAR - ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Minutes of the December 7. 2004 Regular Meeting Recommendation: Approve CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL b. Minutes of the December 7. 2004 Regular Meetinq Recommendation: Approve c. Ordinance No. 2202 amendina Article III, Chapter 1. Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code relating to emerqencv medical and ambulance transport services and the Paramedic Membership Program. Recommendation: Adopt LASER 11~AGED d. Desiqn of a new well Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $254,300 to design a new ground water well and wellhead facilities at Baldwin and Colorado. e. Rehabilitation of Peck and Orange Grove 2A wells Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with General Pump Company in the amount of $207,539.00 for the rehabilitation of Peck and Orange Grove 2A wells. f. Award of Contract -.lanitoriai and porter services Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $318,344 to Grace Building Maintenance Company, Inc, for janitorial and porter services at various City facilities and appropriate $6,169 from the General Fund. g. Maintenance Contract for Pavement Reoair of Utility Cuts Recommendation: Aware a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Paveco Construction Inc. for the Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts Maintenance Contract. h. Acceptance - 2D03-2004 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay Proiect Recommendation: Accept all work performed by Silvia Construction, Inc. for the 2003-2004 and 2004-Z005 Annual Asphait Concrete Overlay and Rehabilitation Project as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. i. Acceotance - Recommendation: Accept all work perFormed by Shawnan Inc. as complete and authorize final payment, subject to a retention of $89,900.78, appropriate Sewer funds in the amount of $10,000 and additional Water funds in the amount of $12,000. 2. CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR a. Resolution No ARA-212 - A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelooment Aqency (I) adoptina a Mitiqated Neaative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Proaram for a Land Assembly and Develooment A9reement with Paul P Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia, and lII) approving a Land Assemblv and Development Aqreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak Arcadia. Approvina a~roiect budaet of $13 4 million with a maximum Agency contribution of ~8 miliion and aeprooriatina funds for certain consultinq services and relocation benefits. Citu Council Resolution No 6452 - A Resolution of the Citv Council of the City of Arcadia making_certain findings pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 33433 in connection with and approvina the sale of pro~ertv oursuant to a Land Assembly and Develooment Aareement among the Arcadia Redevelopment Aaencv Paul P Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia. Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. ARA-212 and City Council Resolution No. 6452. : _ - b. Rejection of the low bid submitted by Sojitz/Turboflo Engineers, LP, JV, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a contrad with SEMA Construction for the constructio~ of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 in the amount of $5,255,555.55. Authorize an additional appropriation of $250,000 to be added to the construdion portion of the project budget. AD]OURNMENT The City Council will adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 6:00 p.m., City Council Chamber Conference Room. ~- _~ ANNOTATED COUNCIL AGENDA - CITY OFARCADIA TUESDAY, 7ANUARY 4, 2005 (CONTINUED MEETING) SANUR~-Y S, Z60~ ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION ACTION M07ION - ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS TO BE READ BY TITLE ONLY ! Approve that Ordinances and Resolutions be read by title only and that the Approved reading in full be waived. 5- 0 1. a. CONSENT AGENDA (ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIn: Approved Minutes of the December 7, 2004 Regular Meeting 5- 0 1. b. CONSENT AGENDA ~CITY COUNCILI: Approved S-0 Minutes of the December 7, 2004 Regular Meeting 1. c. Ordinance No. 2202 amending Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Approved Municipal Code relating to emergenty medical and ambulance transport 5- 0 services and the Paramedic Mem6ership Program. 1. d. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement Approved with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $254,300 to design a 5- 0 new ground water well and wellhead facilities at Baldwin and Colorado. 3. e. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with General Pump Approved Company in the amount. of $207,539.00 for the rehabilitation of Peck and 5- 0 Orange Grove 2A wells 1. f. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $318,344 to Grace Approved Buifding Maintenance Company, Inc. for janitorial and porter-services at 5-0 various City facilities and appropriate $6,169 from the General Fund. 1.g. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Approved Paveco Construction Inc. for the Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts Maintenance 5- 0 Contract 1. h. Accept all work performed by Silvia Construction, Inc. for the 2003-2004 and Approved 2004-2005 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay and Rehabilitation Project as 5- 0 complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. 1. i. Accept all work pertormed by Shawnan Inc. as complete and authorize final Approved payment, subject to a retention of $89,900.78, appropriate Sewer funds in the 5- 0 amount of $10,000 and additional Water funds in the amount of $12,000. 2. a. Adopt Resolution No. ARA-212, the pro}eet budget; and City Councif Approved Resolution No. 6452. 5- 0 2, b. Rejection'of the low bid submitted by SojitzlTurboflo Engineers, LP, JV, and Approved authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with SEMA Construction for 5- 0 the construction of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 in the amount of $5,255,555.55. Authorize an additional appropriation of $250,000 to be added to the construction portion of the project budget. Page 1 of 1 LASER {Mr~GED -~~ 47:0001 ^ MINUTES ~^~ .~µacon,va Arcadia City Council/Arcadia Redevelopment Agency CONTINUED MEETING M~° TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2005 (]anuary 5, 2005) \ ~ m~' This agenda contains a summary of each item of business which the Council may discuss or act on at this meeting. The complete staff report and all other written documentation relating to each item on this agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the reference desk at the Arcadia Public Library and are available for public inspection and review. If you have any question about any matter on the agenda, please call the office of the City Clerk at (626) 574-5455. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Council meeting, please contact the City Manager's O~ce at (626) 574-5401 at least three (3) working days before the meeting or time when special services are needed. This notification will help City staff in making reasonable arrangements to provide you with access to the meeting. 7:00 p.m. - City Council Chamber INVOCATION Reverend Gene Wallace, Arcadia Police Department Chaplain PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ed Butterworth, former City of Arcadia Mayor ROLL CALL City Council/Agency Members: Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM STAFF REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS None. REPORT BY THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS None. MOTION TO READ ALL ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE READING IN FULL MOTION It was moved by Council Member Chandler, seconded by Council Memher Marshall and then carried without objection that Ordinances and Resolutions be read by title only and that the reading in full be waived. PRESENTATIONS a. Award of Meritorious Service Medal to Lieutenant Bob Anderson; Award of Medals of Merit to Sergeant Tom LeVeque, Dispatcher Pam McGinnis, and Dispatcher Lisa Gonzales; and certificates to Bonnie Cudlip and Omar Velasquez. AUDIENCE Time reserved for comments by the public (five minutes per person) PARTICIPATION The following persons appeared to speak in opposition to item 2.a. LASER IMAGED 01-°4-°5 5~ : _~ ., ELECTED OFFICIALS- REPORTS James Helms, 2220 Sewanee Lane Georae Fasching, former Mayor of the City of Arcadia Floretta Lauber, former Mayor of the City of Arcadia Edward Butterworth. former Mayor of the City of Arcadia Griff Morrison. Member of the Arcadia Elks Lodge Don Albree, Arcadia resident 47:0002' Edward Chardavedian, representative from TurboFlo, appeared to speak to request that the City Council award the contract in item 2.b. to Sojitr/Turboflo Beth Costanza, Chamber of Commerce, appeared to make the Council aware of the Chamber's upcoming Health Expo on Saturday, ]a~uary 29, 2005 at Westfield Shopping Center. City Council/City Clerk Reports/Announcements/Statements/Future Agenda Items COUNCIL MEMBER Asked fellow Council Members to support his desire to make a$500 CHANDLER contribution in support of the representation of our City by the Arcadia High School band at the upcoming Presidential Inauguration. He received the support of Council Member Marshall and Mayor Kovacic - to place this item on an upcoming agenda. COUNCIL MEMBER WUO Wished all a Happy New Year and acknowledged the former Arcadia Mayors who participated in tonighYs meeting. COUNCIL MEMBER Wished all members of the public a Happy New Year; congratulated MARSHALL the recipients of the awards from the Police Department; congratulated the USC fans on their Orange Bowl win. COUNCIL MEMBER SEGAL Wished all members of the public a Happy and Healthy New Year; his top new year's resolution is to continue to make every effort to increase the availability of senior housing in Arcadia. MAYOR KOVACIC Showed the news clips of the Phun family who were reunited with their son Clayton during the Christmas season; Clayton was home from his service in Iraq; he also featured a montage of the Arcadia Beautiful Holiday Decoration award winners. CITY CLERK BARROWS Wished all members of the public a Happy New Year; invited all members of the public to the annual Arcadia High School band/color guard spaghetti dinner. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR - ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY a. Minutes of the December 7. 2004 Reqular Meeting Recommendation: Approve MOTION It was moved by Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Agency Member Marshall and carried by roll call vote to approve the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency consent calendar. ROLL CALL AYES: Agency Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None O1-04-OS 47:0003 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL b. Minutes of the December 7, 2004 Regular Meeting Recommendation: Approve c. Ordinance No. 2202 amending Article III. Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code relatina to emerc~ency medical and ambulance transoort services and the Paramedic Membership Program. Recommendation: Adopt d. Design of a new well Rewmmendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amounY of $254,300 to design a new ground water well and wellhead facilities at Baldwin and Colorado. e. Rehabilitation of Peck and Oranae Grove 2A wells . Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with General Pump Company in the amount of $207,539.00 for the rehabilitation of Peck and Orange Grove 2A wells. Award of Contract - Janitorial and porter services Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $318,344 to Grace Building Maintenance Company, Inc. for janitorial and porter services at various City facilities and appropriate $6,169 from the General Fund. g. Maintenance Contract for Pavement Reoair of Utility Cuts Recommendation: Award a one (1) year contrect extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Paveco Construction Inc. for the Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts Maintenance Contract. h. Acceotance - 2003-2004 Annual Asohalt Concrete Overlav Project Recommendation: Accept all work performed by Silvia Construction, Inc. for the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay and Rehabilitation Project as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. Acceotance - Street Imorovement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue Recomrriendation: Accept all work performed by Shawnan Inc. as complete and authorize firSal payment, subject to a retention of $89,900.78, appropriate Sewer funds in the amount of $10,000 and additional Water funds in the amount of $12,000. MOTION It was moved by Council Member Chandler, seconded by Council Member Marshall and carried by roll call vote to approve the City Council consent calendar. ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None 01-04-OS -_-=~ 47:0004 2. a. CITY a. Mr. Kelly, Executive Director, noted that this item was a continuation MANAGER/ of the discussion by the City Council regarding a closed public hearing EXECUTIVE conducted on December 7, 2004 on the matter of a Land Assembly DIRECTOR and Development Agreement and its various components with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia. He also noted that two (2) emails from , private citizens and a letter from the City of Pasadena were submitted today as part of the official record of this matter. Mr. Don Penman, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Director responded to several question from members of the City Council regarding this item including projections of sales tax revenue from the project, the expenditure of the twenty (20%) percent housing set-aside funds and their availability, and the guarantees regarding payback to the Agency for the eight (8) million dollar cammitment. Agency Member Marshall read from a prepared statement noting her position on the item. In response to a question from Agency Chair Kovacic, Mr. Penman noted that Council's action in this item tonight is not an action of eminent domain. MOTION It was moved by Agency Member Chandler, seconded by Agency Member Marshall and carried by roll call vote to Adopt Resolution No. ARA 212 - a Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency 1) adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for a Land Assembly and Development Agreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia, and 2) approving a Land Assembly and Dev,elopment Agreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia; and approving a project budget of $13.4 million, with a maximum Agency contribution of $8 million, and appropriating funds for certain consulting services and relocation benefits. ROLL CALL AYES: Councif Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None MOTION It was moved by Council Member Chandler, seconded by Council Member Segal, and carried on roll call vote to adopt Resolution No. 6452 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia making certain findings pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 33433 in connection with and approving the sale of property pursuant to a Land Assembly and Development Agreement among the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency, Paul P. Rusnak, and Rusnak/Arcadia. ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None b. Reiection of the low bid submitted by Soiitr/Turboflo Engineers. LP. JV. and authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with SEMA Construction for the construdion of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 in the amount of $5,255,555.55. Authorize an additional approoriation of $Z50,000 to be added to the construction portion of the oroject budaet• 01-04-OS 47:0005 Mr. Pat Malloy, Public Works Diredor, presented the staff report and noted the major finding that the bid submitted by Soji~/Turboflo was unresponsive by exceeding the limits in the bid documents; he further noted that staff recommends that the project be awarded to the second lowest bidder and provided data regarding staff's desire not to open another bid process on this project. , MOIION It was moved by Council Member Chandler, seconded by Council Member Segal, and carried on roll call vote to reject the low bid submitted by Sojitz/Turboflo Engineers, LP, JV, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with SEMA Construction for the mnstruction of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 in the amount of $5,255,555.55. Authorize an additional appropriation of $250,000 to be added to the construction portion of the project budget. ROLL CALL AYES: Council Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None AD]OURNMENT Noting no additional business, the City Council adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m., in memory of Alene Finch, to Tuesday, ]anuary 18, 2005 at 6:00 p.m., City Council Chamber Conference Room. James Barrows, City Clerk by: V~~~ Vida Tolman, Chief Deputy City Clerk 01-04-OS .~.a ~:::~ i: . , STAFF REPORT Fire Department DATE: January 4, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David R. Lugo Jr., Fire Chief,/~j('~ By: Heather McDowell, Management Analyst SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt Ordinance No. 2202, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, Amending Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code Relating to Emergency Medical & Ambulance Transport Services and Paramedic Membership Program Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance No. 2202 SUMMARY Ordinance No. 22~2 was Introduced to the City Council on December 7, 2004. At the time of that presentation, the Ordinance was scheduled for adoption at the ' December 21, 2004 Council meeting. Because the December 21, 2004 meeting was cancelled, the Fire Department presents Ordinance No. 2202 for adoption at this time. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: Adopt Ordinance No. 2202, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, Amending Articie III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code Relating to Emergency Medical & Ambulance Transport Services and Paramedic Membership Program. Approved: ~" ~~-• ~ William R. Kelly, City Manager LASER(MAGED l,c, 3P STAFF REPORT Fire Department DATE: December 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: David R. Lugo Jr., Fire Chief~~ By: Heather McDowell, Management Analyst SUBJECT: Recommendation to Introduce Ordinance No. 2202, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, Amending Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code Relating to Emergency Medical & Ambulance Transport Services and Paramedic Membership Program Recommendation: Introduce Ordinance No. 2202 SUMMARY In 1994, the City Council authorized impiementation of the Voluntary Emergency Medica! Subscription Program. Authority for this program exists in Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. in 1996, the City Council approved adoption of a new title for the program, and from that point forward, the program has been referred to as the Paramedic Membership Program. The Fire Department wishes to update and modify the Municipal Code to include the proper reference to this program. Amending Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 will update the title of the existing Paramedic Membership Program and clarify the intent of the language contained therein. DISCUSSION The Fire Department is in the process of modifying and updating the Arcadia Municipal Code for the purpose of language clarification and to modify the title of the Paramedic Membership Program, approved by the City Council in 1996. The proposed amendments are administrative in nature and will neither change the level of service provided to the public, nor will it modify existing fees charged for Emergency Medical Services, Ambulance Transport Services, and the Paramedic Membership Program. Specificaliy, the following changes are being proposed: The Title of Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 has been modified from Voluntary Emergency Medica! Subscripfion Program to Emergency Medical & Ambulance Transport Services. Mayor and City Counci! December 7, 2004 Page 2 Section 3170.6 Authorizafion for Fees• has been moved to the beginning of Part 7 and has been renumbered as a new section number 3170 Authorization of Fees. The language related to fees has been clarified to clearly break out the types of services authorized to be charged for within the City, and to whom. The language modification does not expand or modify fees in any way from what has previously been authorized by Council. Section 3170 through 3170.12 of the existing Municipal Code, with the exception of 3170.6 Aufhorization of Fees, remain in their original order following the new section number 3170 Aufhorizafion of Fees and are numbered as new sections 3170.1 Paramedic Membership Program - Purpose through section 3170.12 Paramedic Membership Program Termination. There are global changes throughout Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 modifying language from the Volunfary Emergency Medical Subscription Program to the Paramedic Membership Program or portions thereof. These changes are for consistency and the outdated references haye been replaced with the appropriate program title and/or reference. Staff recommends the City Council introduce Ordinance No. 2202 at this time setting the adoption for December 21, 2004. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City in adopting this Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: Introduce Ordinance No. 2202, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcadia, California, Amending Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code Relating to Emergency Medical & Ambulance Transport Services and Paramedic Membership Program. Approved: ~ William R. Kelly, City Manager , ~ .; ~~,~.C,~, `~ 2(y~ ° s" ORDINANCE NO. 2202 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIF012NIA, AMENDING ARTICLE III, CHAPTER 1, PART 7 OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO EMERGENCY MEDICAL & AMBULANCE TR.ANSPORT SERVICES AND PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIl' PROGRAM THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION l. Article III, Chapter 1, Part 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and a new Part 7 is hereby added to read as follows: "PART 7. EIVIERGENCY MEDICAL & AMBULANCE TRANSPORT SERVICES 3170. AUTHORIZATION OF FEES. Fees for emergency paramedic and ambulance services are authorized and shall be charged for basic and advanced life support services provided by the Fire Deparhnent within the City. The amount of such fees shall be set periodically by resolution of the City Council. The "fee for services" shall be a user fee designed to recover costs associated with the delivery of emergency medical care and ambulance transport services. Such fees shall be based upon: Emergencies requiring basic life support service (BLS); Emergencies requiring advanced life support services (ALS); and Emergencies requiring ALS and/or BLS ambulance transportation. LASER IMAGED _ , ~'' Non-residents in the City of Arcadia shall be subject to and charged a fee for receipf of the following services: a. Basic life support paramedic services; b. Advanced life support paramedic services; and/or c. Transport services. Residents of the City of Arcadia shall be subject to and charged a fee for receipt of the following services: a. Advanced life support paramedic services; and/or b. Transport services. Fees for the City's voluntary Paramedic Membership Program are authorized and shall be charged for enrollment in this program. The membership period for which the fee is charged is twelve (12) months from the date of enrollment. The amount of the annual membership fee for this program shall be set periodically by resolution of the City Council. a. The Paramedic Membership Program is a membership program offered to Arcadia residents and businesses, protecting pennanent household members (related or not) and employees of businesses within the City of Arcadia. This program is offered to residents and businesses within the incorporated area of Arcadia. Fees paid by businesses entitle membership to owners and employees only. Unless 2 residentiai members desire to purchase visitor coverage at an additional nominal fee, guests, customers, patrons, and visitors or others using the facilities of such households and businesses shall be charged directly for emergency paramedic and ambulance transportation services. b. The visitor coverage fee is an oprional benefit to provide coverage for visitors of a member of the Program in good standing, at an additional nominal fee, as set by resolution of the City Council. 3170.1. PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGR.AM - PURPOSE. It is the intent of this Part to reduce loss of life and disability by implementing a program which provides funding for paramedic training, equipment repair, replacement and maintenance, and other additional expenses necessary to maintain and enhance the cunent level of service, while continuing to maintain or improve response time standards. A fee for service and a paramedic membership program are recommended to meet these goals by offering a mechanism for both Arcadia residents and businesses to limit their paramedic and ambulance transport costs, while supplementing the conrinued expansion and improvement of equipment and service the City's paramedic program provides. 3 3170.2. DEFII~TITIONS. Unless a different meaning is appazent from the context or is specified elsewhere in these guidelines, the following definitions shall be used: (a) "Advanced life support (ALS)" means any ALS medical treatment performed by paramedics (EMT-P) outside of a hospital. (b) "Ambulance" means the Arcadia Fire Department Rescue units and/or designated ambulance companies contracted for service. (c) `Basic life support (BLS)" means any BLS treatment which is authorized by the State of California Department of health to be performed by emergency medical technicians (EMT-1) and/or paramedics (EMT-P) at the scene of a medical emergency (d) "Paramedic Membership Program" means a voluntary membership plan where its rr-embers shall pre-pay, at a fixed price, the uninsured portion of emergency medical and ambulance services provided by the Arcadia Fire Deparhnent. (e) "Member" means residents of households within the incorporated area of Arcadia and commercial residents (businesses) within the incorporated area of Arcadia, and their owners and employees, who have registered with the City and pre-paid the voluntary membership fee. 4 3170.3. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM. The Fire Chief or designee shall be responsible for the implementation and administration of the Paramedic Membership Program., The Fire Chief shall report on a yearly basis to the City Manager and City Council on the status of the Paramedic Membership Program. The report shall include a financial statement which sets forth the Program's financial status. 3170.4. ELIGABILITY OF PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM. The Paramedic Membership Program is open to all residents and commercial residents (businesses) located in the incorporated area of the City of Arcadia. Paynnent of the voluntary membership fee by households shall entitle membership to permanent residents of that household, related or not. Membership fees paid by businesses entitle membership to owners and employees only. Guest and visitor coverage is provided for residential memberships at an additional fee as set by resolution of the City Council. Guests, customers, patrons, visitors or others using the facilities of business memberships shall be charged directly for paramedic and ambulance services. 3170.5. ENROLLMENT IN THE PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM. Each resident and commercialxesident (business) of the City has the opportunity to enroll in the Program at any time during the calendar year. 5 (1)Residents receiving a utility billing from the City will have the option of automatic enrollment in the Paramedic Membership Program if they signify approval on the City water billing. Membership may be ternunated at any time by notifying the City in writing. (2)Households and businesses not receiving an Arcadia utility bill may enroll by corr-pleting and submitting to the City an enrollment form at any rime during the year. Each of these groups will receive enrollment forms via the mail or may obtain one at various City facilities. Households not receiving a urility bill and businesses have the option of paying the subscription fee one time annually or bi- monthly. (3) Residents and businesses declining membership are eligible to enroll in the Program anytime during the calendar year. Coverage under the Paramedic Membership Program shall not predate. the actual enrollment date. (4) Residents and businesses who leave the City prior to the end of the coverage period, shall not be eligible for a refund of any portion of the total fee. (5)Existing members who move within the City limits during the coverage period, will not be required to pay an additional fee, but 6 must subinit a change of address to the Fire Departrnent to ensure coverage is transferred to the new address. (6) An owner of an aparhnent, retirement home, or other mulrifamily complex, has the option to pay the membership fee for each of its tenants. 3170.6. PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS. Members shall receive the following benefits by enrolling in the Paramedic Membership Program: Prepayment of the uninsured portion of: (1)BLS paramedic charges; (2) ALS paramedic charges; . (3)Emergency ambulance transportation; and (4)Any additional member benefits added at the Fire Chief's discretion, subject to City Manager approval. The Paramedic Membership Program only applies to emergencies that occur within the City limits. Employees and owners of businesses that are members are covered for emergencies at any locarion within the City of Arcadia. 3170.7. THIRD PARTY REIMBURSEMENT. The City reserves the right to seek from a member's insurer, health maintenance organization, or health care plan, reimbursement for emergency paramedic and ambulance transportation services; provided, however, that a member in good standing would not incur or be 7 held responsible for any fees resulting from the services rendered to the members or others covered under their membership. 3170.8. IMPLEMENTATION. Implementation of user fees for paramedic services and the Paramedic Membership Program shall begin August 19, 1994. The Fire Chief or designee shall be authorized to administer the Paramedic Membership Program, beginning thirty (30) days after its adoption. 3170.9. EXEMPTION AND REDUCTION OF CHARGES. Deternunation of an exemption or reduction of fees for services or of the membership fee to be paid by individuals claiming a hardship shall be made by. the City Manager or his/her designee, in his/her sole and absolute discretion, and shall be based on guidelines established by resolution of the City Council. 3170.10. DUTY TO RESPOND. Under no circumstances will the delivery of emergency medical service and ambulance transportation be delayed or refused on the basis of whether the injured party is a member of the Paramedic Membership Program, or on the basis of, or perception of, actual ability to pay. Membership in the program does not create a guarantee or duty to respond; or create performance requirements that differ from or in any way alter the usual and customary emergency response function and duties of the City. 3170.11. ABUSE OF PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM. Where a member or a person covered under the membership program repeatedly 8 utilizes, or attempts to utilize, the Paramedic Membership Program in an inappropriate manner, as determined by the Fire Chief in his/her sole and absolute discretion, the City retains the right to declare the member's membership in the program cancelled. In this event, the City will refund to the member the prorated portion of the one (1) year membership fee applicable to the remaining period of membership for which the member has made payment. In cases of a dispute, the Fire Chief's deternunation shall be binding on all parties to such a dispute. 3170.12. PARAMEDIC MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM TERMINATION. The Paramedic Membership Program may be ternunated at any time by the City Council. If the City Council ternunates the program, the City shall refund to program members a prorated portion of their one (1) year membership fee applicable to the remaining period of inembership for which the member has made payment. The City shall provide at least thirty (30) days written notice to all members prior to program termination." SECTION 3. "The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause a copy of the same to be published in the official newspaper of said City within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 9 Passed, approved and adopted this atn ATTEST: C12y Of January , 2005. ~S/ GARY ~~ KOV~CIC Mayor of the City of Arcadia ~sr ~A~~ s ~ ~ ~ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: C'v"~.y~x.~„~ 1'' _" ""v°'~-'I'~ City Attorney 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2202 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular mPating nf cair~ C.nnnr'1 hPlt~ nn the 4th ria~ nf 7an~_rs ~, 2005 and that said Ordinance was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmember Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None ABSENT: None ~ / ~~ . 6°~ ~ City Clerk of the City of Arcadia 11 ~ ~ ~ January 4, 2005 S'~AFF REPORT Public Works Services Department TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direct r~ Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Services M nager Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award - Desiqn of New Well Recommendation: Authorize the.City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $254,300 to design a new ground water well and wellhead facilities SUMMARY The 2001 Water Master Plan recommends the construction of several new domestic water wells in the upper water zones to meet the growing demand for water in the City and to replace existing wells that are reaching the end of their productive life. The 2004- 2005 Capital Improvement Program provides for the design and construction of a new well in Zone 4. After careful consideration of several possible well locations and the efficient use of current pumping rights in the three Groundwater Basins, staff concluded that the best location for the new well is in Zone 2 of the West Raymond Basin. Staff is proposing to construct a new well in the transition median between Colorado St. and southbound Baldwin Ave. (See the attached map and computer-enhanced photo) Staff conducted a Qualification Based Selection (QBS) process and received several proposals to provide engineering design services for the new well and wellhead facility design. Boyle Engineering Corporation submitted the successful proposal for the project. Staff has evaluated Boyle's qualifications and found them to be satisfactory. Boyle has successfully completed similar projects for numerous cities in Southem California as well as for the City of Arcadia, including the recently completed Chapman Well. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $254,300 for the design of a new well and wellhead facility. LASE~ IMaGED l.r~~ ~"P~ Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 DISCUSSION The City of Arcadia typically depends entirely on groundwater, pumped from local wells, to meet the water system demands. The City presently operates 13 wells that supply water to seven primary pressure zones. The source of water for these wells is from three (3) groundwater basins, which lie beneath the City. The Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin, lying in the southeastern portion ot the City has a stable, sufficient supply of water and accounts for approximately 73% of the water pumped into the distribution system. The East Raymond Basin located in the north portion of the City and the West Raymond Basin located in the west portion of the City supply the balance of the City's water needs. One of the welis located in the West basin is deteriorating rapidly requiring abandonment within the next three (3) years. The proposed well is intended to replace this well. In reviewing possible locations to place the new well, staff considered the availability of water, available pumping rights for each basin and available land owned by the City or within the public right-of-way. The location of the transition median from Colorado Street to southbound Baldwin Ave. provided the most satisfactory solution to these criteria. The project design will set the new we{I facility into the natural slope of the media. Landscaping to minimize the visual impact from passing motorists on Baldwin Ave., as well as providing additional landscaping to the median will screen the well facility. Request for proposals were requested and sent to five (5) quatified engineering firms. Of the five (5), three (3) proposals were received, ,reviewed, evaluated, and ranked by staff in accordance with Chapter 10 of the California Government Code, Section 4526- 4529 with the following results: RANK FIRM LOCATION 1 Boyle Engineering Newport Beach 2 RBF Consulting Engineers Irvine 3 Lee and Ro, inc. City of Industry Staff reviewed the proposals according to experience, approach, and understanding of the project. All three (3) firms were also invited for oral interviews. Boyle Engineering Corporation was rated the most qualified with the lowest price and have demonstrated their qualifications through successful completion of numerous water well design projects, superior knowledge of Arcadia's water system and a thorough approach and understanding of the project. The final phase of the selection process included staff review of the cost proposal and negotiation of a satisfactory agreement with the consultant. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $254,300 for the design of a new well and wellhead facilities and construction support services during the actual construction. Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 3 ,\ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Environmental evaluation of the project will be conducted during the well design Phase I. FISCAL IMPACT: Water Funds in the amount of $1,500,000 are budgeted in the 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program for the design and construction of a new well. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Award a Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $254,300.00 to Boyle Engineering Corporation for design services for the new well and wellhead facilities project. 2. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. Approved: ~~~ William R. Kelly, City Manager ' PM:GFL:KH:dw Attachments ~, CITY OF ARCADIA 2004 - 05 NEW WELL ~ ~~° ~ ~ P EI Yis~i pw. GqnOVb.vAw. bl NEW WELL PROJECTLOCATION . s.,, a ue.+~. NORTH Sq~ x.m~a.wro.~~ omn~m Fm.Ni ei. ~'PV ~ iNZiovmmur ~ caa.do sem. ~ ~~~~ ~ : ; a 9 h~ 9 Y FULL a a a i+e~mR&+ ~ e a P a HuNrqlmO~. E F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 3^ om~."a' J 6 a ~.~,~a..~A ~ ~ s i ` 3' 5 F ~ 3 a Lonp]enn~a. `F y ~r ..m.sso~. w.o.xn. ~ ~ ~ 3~ n' p'*s` r .v~.e ~ ~/ ~ ~.~ LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department January 4, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Direct r~ Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Servicei Manager Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award - Rehabilitation of Peck and Oranae Grove 2A wells Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with General Pump Company in the amount of $2~7,539.00 for the Rehabilitation of Peck and Orange Grove 2A Wells. SUMMARY The 2004-05 Capital Improvement Program provides funding for the rehabilitation of the Orange Grove Well No. 2A and Hugo Reid Well. After the completion of the budgeting process for the 2004-05 Capital Improvement Program, and prior to developing this project, the Peck Well began exhibiting increased pump vibration. The Peck Well is the second largest producing groundwater well in the City's water system. Having this well out of service, during the. summer_months would have a significant.impact on our_water production capability. Therefore, staff considers rehabilitation of the Peck Well at this time to be a greater priority than the Hugo Reid Well, and recommends that the City Council approve the substitution of the Peck Well in place of the Hugo Reid Well. On November 23, 2004, sealed bids were opened for the Rehabilitation of Peck and Orange Grove 2A Wells. Three (3) bids were received with Generaf Pump Company submitting the lowesf bid. Staff has reviewed their bid and found it to be satisfactory. Staff recommends that a contract in the amount of $207,539.00 be awarded to General Pump Company for this project. BACKGROUND The City of Arcadia's water system supplies water used for domestic and fire purposes from local groundwater wells. The City's dependence on groundwater welis makes the regular maintenance of wells extremely important to the reliable and safe supply of water to City residents and businesses. LASER IMAGED ~ ,~, ~c~ ~~.~ Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 The long term Capital Improvement Program plans for the rehabilitation of two domestic groundwater supply wells each year. This allows each of the 13 wells within the City's water production system to be rehabilitated every seven (7) years, which is the standard recommendation within the water utility industry. The Orange Grove 2A Well and the Hugo Reid Well were identified as those wells scheduled for rehabilitation in 2004-05. The last time the Orange Grove 2A well was rehabilitated was in 1995. Since that time the water level at this well has dropped approximately SO feet which, combined with the age of the well and wear on the pump, have caused the eff+ciency of the overall wetl system to drop severely. Rehabilitation of this well and lowering the intake of the pump will increase the efficiency of the well and lower operating costs of the well. StafF is recommending the substitution of the Hugo Reid Well with the Peck Well, due to the deteriorati~g co~dition of the Peck Well. The Peck Well operates 24 hours per day, seven days per week; and supplies approximately 25% of the water drawn from Arcadia wells in the Main San Gabriel Basin. Since this well is critical to the City's reliable supply of water, it is important to ensure that the well only comes out of service during scheduled events and during periods of low demand within the system. A scheduled rehabilitation of the Peck Well at this time would allow the continued operation during the upcoming summer manths. DISCUSSION A Notice Inviting Bids for this project was advertised and published in local papers and distributed to five bidders from previous well rehabiiitation projects. The City Clerk publicly opened three (3) responses on November 23, 2004, with the following results: Bidder Location Bid Amount General Pump Company San Dimas $207,539.00 Layne Christensen Company Fontana $239,310.50 South West Pump & Drilling, Inc. Coachella $431,237.00 Staff has reviewed the bid documents for content and has investigated the low bidder's background and recent projects for competency. It is staffs opinion that the General Pump Company can satisfactorily perform the work required. :, ~,_ . Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 3 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT This project is categorically exempt per Section 15301 Class 1(d) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $300,000 is budgeted in the 2004-05 Capital Improvement Program to cover the cost of rehabilitation, inspections, management and contingencies for the rehabiiitation of two (2) wefls. RECOMMENDATION 1. Award a contract in the amount of $207,539.00 to General Pump Company for the rehabilitation of the Orange Grove Well 1A and the Peck Well. 2. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney 3. Waive any informalities in the bid or bidding process Approved by: ~ 1~ William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:GL:KH:dw Attachment REHABILITATION OF PECK AND ORANGE GROVE WELL 2A WELLS Public Works Services Department January 4, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Dir or~ Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Servi s Ma ager Cfement L. F(ores, Maintenance Contracts Officer SUBJECT: Award of Contract - Janitorial and Porter Services Recommendation: Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount af $318,344 to Grace Building Maintenance Company Inc. for janitorial and porter services at various City facilities and appropriate $6,169 from the General Fund SUMMARY On November 18, 2003, the City Council approved a one-year contract extension with Grace Building Maintenance Company (Grace Building) for $267,776 to perform janitorial and porter services at City facilities. This is the second extension request, and if approved, wifl be effective on January 5, 2005. The conVactor's offer of e~ension inGudes: •$8,033 or 3.0°r6 cost of living adjustment (COLA) to offset higher insurance cost. •$4,305 for a salary rate adjustment of $.50 cents per hour to retain three well- trained porters and maintain continuity of service at the Library, Community Center and City Hall. o One (1) change order in the amount of $35,360 far an additional janitor at the new police facility to replace a retired City empfoyee. •$2,870 for a salary rate adjustment of $1.00 per hour for one (1) janitor at the Police Department to reduce tumover and maintain a qualified janitorial personnei. Staff recommends that the City Council approve a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $318,344 with Grace Building Maintenance Company for janitorial and porter services at City facilities. LASER IMAG~D ~, f'. 3P Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 DISCUSSION The Pubkic Works ServECes Department is responsible for the janitorial and porter services at City facilities. Janitorial services include cleaning all common areas, restrooms and offices at City Hall, Community Center, Library, Police Department and the Public Works Service Center. The contractor is also responsible for porter services to clean light fixtures, sanitize public restrooms, set-up for various City meetings and heip office staff with routine service requests (e.g., moving heavy boxes, taking records to s#orage, special cleanups, etc). Grace Building has submitted a wri4ten offer to renew their contract on accordance with the existing Agreement. The offer includes an increase of $8,033 or a 3.0°~ cost of living adjustment based on the August 2003 to August 2004 Consumer Price Index of 3.32%. The offer of extension also inGudes a wage increase of $.50 cents per hour for the current porters at the Library, Community Center, and City Hall at an annual cost of $4,305. This increase is necessary to retain well-trained personnel for continuity of service. In 200312004-budget year, a new janitor was added to the Police Department to supplement fheir janitorial services at the new police facility. Since then, with the retirement of the Police Department maintenance worker, a second janitor was budgeted in the 2004l2005-budget year at a cost of $35,360. bn the previous contracts, retaining experienced jartitors in the Palice Department was very difficult resulting in a high levei of tumovers. This required an excessive amount of staff time to train replacements. The new contract reflects an increase of $1.00 per hour satary wage increase for janitorial personnel. This wage modification reflects an increase of $2,870 forjanitorial service for the Police Department. The following reflects the changes in contract costs associated with the contract: Amendment Desc~ption 1 Cost of Living Adjustment 2 Additional Janitor for Police Department 3 Wage Adjustmerrt for other Porters 4 Wage Adjustment for a P. D. Janitor Total Contract Adjustment Amount $ 8,033.00 $35,360.00 $ 4,305.00 $ 2.870.00 $50,568.00 Staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension, in the amourrt of $318,344 to Grace Building Maintenance Company. Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 -, Page 3 1 FISCAL IMPACT $306,000 is appropriated in the 2004-05 budget to provide janitorial and porter services at various city facilities. To keep our high level quality of mainfenance, staff is requesting an additional appropriation o~ $6,169 to cover the rate ad}'ustments for the bakance of this fiscal year. Appropriate budget adjustments will be included in the 2005/06 annual budget for the final six (6) months of the Contract. RECOMMENDATION 1. Appropriate an additional $6,169 for fiscal year 2004-05 from the General Fund. 2. Award a one-year contract extension in the amount of $318,344 to Grace Buitding Rllamtenance Company for janitoriaf and porter services at various City facilitiss for fiscal year 2004-2005. 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. ~ Approved by: _~~ William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:GFL:dw .~ _. _L Public Works Services Department January 4, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Directo Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Services Ma ager Mark Rynkiewicz, Associate Civil En ineer SUBJECT: Extend - Main4enance Contract for Pavement Repair of Utilitv Cuts Recommendation: Award a one year contract extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Paveco Construction Inc. for the Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts Maintenance Contract SUMMARY On August 19, 2003, the City Council approved a one (1) year Agreement with optional contract extensions to Paveco Construction Inc. for the on-call pavement repair of utility cuts. Paveco has reached the end of its first year of the contract and has submitted a written offer to extend the existing contract for an additional one year in accordance with the existing Agreement. Paveco Construction Inc. has agreed to hold firm the current unit price for the one-year term of the contract. Based on the excellent service provided by Paveco Construction Inc. from the previous year, staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Paveco Construction Inc. for Maintenance Contract for Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts. DISCUSSION City street crew's current workload prohibit timely repair of utility cuts within the roadway. The logistical complexity of dealing with perishable hot mix asphalt paving material, labor intensity of the work, combined with relatively small isol,ated repairs results in a highly unproductive operation for City street crews. Private companies who, on a daily basis, deal with pavement repair of utility cuts for other utility companies and municipalities in adjacent cities are readily mobilized and tooled to provide this service at cost effective rates. Contracting this type of work to a private contracting company had provided complete utility cut asphalt repairs in a timely and cost efFective manner. LASER IMAGED ~,g- ~P J :. i . ~ Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 On August 19, 2003, the City Council approved a one (1) year Agreement with optional contract extensions to Paveco Construction Inc. in the amount of $144,504 for the Maintenance Contract for Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts. During the previous year, the City spent an average of $88,000 for pavement repairs of utility cuts and it is anticipated that the City will maintain the same level of activity. Paveco has agreed to hold firm the current unit prices for the next year's cycle. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $90,450 to Paveco Construction Inc. for Maintenance Contract for Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Pursuant to Section 15302, Replacement or Reconstruction, of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, this project is categorically exempt. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact on the budget. This work is funded from the fee deposit collected from each permit. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Award a one (1) year contract extension in the amount of $90,450.00 to Paveco Construction Inc. for Maintenance Contract for Pavement Repair of Utility Cuts. 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. Approved: PM:GFL:MR:dw =-1~ `~ William R. Kelly, City Manager .~~- ; \ - ~ January 4, 2005 STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Director ~ Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Services Manager Mark Rynkiewicz, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Acceptance - 2003-2004 Annual Asohalt Concrete Overlav Proiect Recommendation: Accept all work perFormed by Silvia Construction Inc. for the 2003-2004 and 2004-2405 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay and Rehabilitation Project as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79 ' SUMMARY On August 17, 2004, the City Council awarded a contract to Silvia Construction Inc. in the amount of $337,054.56 for the construction of the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay and Rehabilitation Project. The terms and conditions of this project have been complied with and the work has been performed to staff's satisfaction for a total project cost of $360,077.90. This amount reflects the original contract amount of $337,054.56 plus two (2) contract change orders (CCO) totaling $23,023.34 or 7% above the original contract amount. Staff recommends that the City Council accept all work performed by Silvia Construction Inc. as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. DISCUSSION The Public Works Services Department is responsible for the maintenance and repair of approximately 147 miles of pavement within the community. In 1999, as part of the City's Pavement Management Program, staff prioritized the condition of all City streets and estabiished a Five (5) Year Pavement Management Plan to rehabilitate many of the lowest rated streets. The 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 Capital Improvement Program included the design and rehabilitation of these streets with approximately 14,645 lineal feet of asphalt. LASER IMAGED ~'~' ~R ~~~ "'" ~ Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 The streets were paved or overlaid with a rubberized asphalt material. A rubberized asphalt overlay is the application of a 2" thick mixture of Y:" and smaller aggregate, asphalt material and rubber crumbs are applied over the existing street pavement. The rubber crumbs add elasticity to the mixture, which extends the life of the asphalt overlay. This mixture, when combined with edge cold milling, is designed to rehabilitate older pavement surfaces where surtace cracks are prevalent and loss of material are evident. In addition to the work originally covered by the contract, there were two (2) contract change orders due to an item that was not covered in the original contract plus the cost associated with the actual tonnage of asphalt used by the contractor. The work was bid with the lowest cost per ton of asphalt so the contractor is only paid for the actual tonnage used. Inspection was also done by staff at the asphalt plant and verified the tonnage used. The following reflects the change orders associated with the project: CCO # Description Amount 1 Removal of a Pressure Activated Signal Detector $ 505.49 2 Change Order to reflect final asphalt tonnage $22,517.85 Total Change Orders $23,023.34 Staff recommends that the City Council accept all work performed by Siivia Construction Inc. as complete and authorize the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. This amount reflects the original contract amount of $337,054.56 plus two (2) contract change orders (CCO) for $23,023.34 or 7°/a above the original contract amount for a total contract amount of $360,077.90. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This project is categorically exempt per Section 15301 (c) replacement from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $215,920 were budgeted in the 2003/2004 Capital Improvement Program and $200,000 for 2004/2005 Capital Improvement Program for the design and rehabilitation of streets. The two (2) project budgets ($415,920) were combined to provide the greater economic advantage of a larger project. ` "` Mayor and City Council January4, 2005 Page 3 ' RECOMMENDATION 7. Accept all work performed by Silvia Construction Inc. for the 2003-2004 Annual Asphalt Concrete Overlay Project as complete. 2. Authorize final payment to be . made in accordance with the contract documents, subject to a retention of $36,007.79. Approved by: ._!~! ~~'~ William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:GFL:dw Attachment UAL ASPHALT CONCRETE OVERLAY AND RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT PROJECT NO'S:5433015, 5433154, 5433014 CITY OF ARCADIA ~ 003/2004 AND 2004/2005 ANN NO SCALE . ~SITY 4F VO +~c~Rt'ORATE9~M1~og STAFF REPORT Development Services Department DATE: January 4, 2005 70: Mayor and City Council FROM: . Don Penman, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Directoi~ Philip A. Wray, City Engineer/Engineering Services Administrator pR~ SUBJECT: Acceqtance - Street Imarovement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue Recommendation: Accept and authorize final payment, subject to a retention of $89,900.78, appropriate Sewer funds in the amount of $10,000 and additional Water funds in the amount of $12,000 ~ SUMMARY On March 16, 2004, the City Council awarded a contract to Shawnan in the amount of $786,621 for the street improvement and widening of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue. Change orders were issued during this project in the amount of $112,386.75. The terms and conditions of this project have been complied with and the required work has been performed to staff's satisfaction for a final project cost of $899,007.75. Staff is recommending that the City Council accept the project as complete and authorize the final payment in accordance with the approved contract documents. Additional appropriations are necessary in the amount of $10,000 from the Sewer fund and $12,000 from the Water fund to cover project expenses. DISCUSSION This project is a part of the City's on-going plan to upgrade and improve the commercial areas of the City by improving the streets and public parkways. The project was initially funded in the FY 2002/03 Capital Improvement Program to improve the one block segment of the Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue. The purpose of the project was to make appropriate trafFic improvements; to provide additional parking for the commercial area; and rehabilitate and beautify the street and the parkway. LASER IMAGED ' + f~ P `"_ ~taff Report , Acceptance - Street Improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue January 4, 2005 Page 2 The project included: . New asphalt pavement overlay • Right turn lanes and longer left turn lanes approaching both intersections • 6us turn-out lane on both north and south bound direction • A larger curb return radius at the southwest corner of Baldwin Avenue and Duarte Road • A raised median to restrict mid-block !eft turns • Widening of the west side of the street to add on-street parking • Construction of mid-block "bow-outs" with decorative seat-walls, benches and trash receptacles connected by a decorative crosswalk . Installation of traffic signal interconnect conduit for the entire block . Installation of new landscaping in parkway planters and the raised median • New street trees on both side of the street and the raised median • New street light poles • New banner pole on the west side of the street to replace the connection to the building The construction contract was awarded to Shawnan on March 16, 2004 and the I construction commenced in mid April. The initial phase of the project involved all the underground work necessary to widen the paved roadway. The contractor experienced several problems due to unforeseen conditions that lead to significant change orders addressed below. The City also realized some cost savings from Southern California Edison Co. (SCE) that was applied to the project to install underground conduit for the streetlights. The additional work items are addressed below. Relocation of Water Vaults and Water Services The widening of the street required the relocation of several vaults and water service connections. During the design process, the design engineer obtained all underground utility information and locations from the utility companies. The water services were designed around the existing utilities accordingly. When the contractor began the excavation, he discovered a telephone line that was not in accordance with the information provided by the telephone company. The conflict caused the relocation of the water vaults and services into more confined spaces requiring more pipe, turns, thrust blocks, and connections. Other options were considered but were either more expensive or would delay the project much longer. The work also included removing and relocating more water lines and relocating gas meters in the process. This work ' -- 3taff Report Acceptance - Street Improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue January 4, 2Q05 Page 3 was relatively extensive and caused several weeks of delay. The final cost for the relocation /replacement of the water facilities and other utilities is $53,597.67. Installation of Underqround Street Liqht Conduit: Installation of underground streetlight conduit and wires was originally considered in the project to save the City from having to cut the street in the future. However, due to the high estimated cost the item was removed from the project before bidding. The project did include the cost of purchasing and installing new street light poles, but was separate from the construction contract and was intended for installation by Southern California Edison. After the construction started SCE informed the City that the streetlight poles would be purchased and installed at no cost to the City. Staff proceeded to negotiate with the contractor to install underground conduit for the streetlights using the savings from the poles. Accordingly, due to the timing of the request, the City was able to negotiate a very reasonable cost for the work. The final cost to the construction contract is $31,623.99, but with a savings of $13,000 from SCE, the net cost to the project is $18,623.99. Relocation and Reconstruction of a Sewer Manhole The design engineer originally designed the raised median so that it avoided a sewer manhole by curving the median curb around the sewer manhole cover. During construction, City staff requested that the manhole cover be relocated into the median island out of the tra~c lane for ease of future access. Because of the condition and age of the manhole, the entire manhole had to be reconstructed. The final cost is $9,224.36 and will be paid for out of the Sewerfund. Relocation of Storm Drain Pipe The project included the relocation of a storm drain catch basin in order to widen the street. During construction, the contractor found an additional connection to the catch basin from the adjacent building. There was no previous record, documentation or knowledge of the connection. In order to relocate the catch basin, the contractor was required to reroute the storm drainpipe and reconnect it to the new catch basin. The final cost for this work is $3,125.16 Additional Pedestrian Button and Pole The project included the relocation of a traffic signal pole at the northwest corner of Baldwin Avenue and Naomi Avenue. Afte~ the pole was relocated, staff requested an additional pole be installed closer to the curb ramp to accommodate the pedestrian -- Staff Report Acceptance - Street Improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue January 4, 2005 Page 4 button. Although the relocated pole could accommodate the button, the additional pole provides aesthetics and easier access to pedestrians. The final cost for this work is $1,574.57. Excavation to lower the Cobble Stone Pavinq in the Median The project was designed with the Cobble Stone paving in the median raised approximately four inches above the top of the curb. During construction, staff requested that the grade be lowered to place the cobble surFace at the top of curb to be less of a tripping hazard for pedestrian safety. This required the contractor to remove more dirt from the median. The final cost for this work is $1,763.14. Installation of Additional Siqns and Pavement Markinqs Upon completion of the work, staff reviewed the signing and striping and requested two additional items. Reflective markers were added along the median curb edge to delineate the median and to improve driver awareness of the median curb, and two "Pedestrian Crossing" signs were added to complement the two existing signs to alert drivers of the crosswalk. The final cost for this work is $1,108.80. Final Quantities Adiustment The City bid this project with individual items and estimated quantities. The contractors submitted their bids based on the unit prices for the items. This change is the result of comparing the final measured quantities with the estimated bid quantities using the contractor's unit prices. The final adjustment is $10,369.06. The summary of change order costs is as follows: Relocation of Water Vaults and Services $53,597.67 Installation of Streetlight Conduit $31,623.99 Relocation of Sewer Manhole $9,224.36 Relocation of Storm Drain Pipe $3,125.16 Additional Pedestrian Button and Pole $1,574.57 Excavation of Median for Cobble $1,763.14 Installation of Signs and Pavement Markings $1,108.80 Final Quantities Adjustment $10,369.06 TOTAL $112, 386.75 The project budget was approved on March 16, 2004 at the time of award of the construction contract. On September 7, 2004, the City Council approved an ' , Staff Report Acceptance - Street Improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue January 4, 2005 Page 5 amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Anderson Consulting Services (ACS) for additional inspection services in the amount of $9,700. However, the final expenses of ACS were less than the contract amount. Additionally, more staff time was necessary to deal with the changes and the extended construction period. The final project expenses are slightly over the appropriated funds, so additional appropriations are necessary. The following is a comparison of the previously approved appropriations to the final: Construction Final Item Budqet Expenditure Construction Contract $786,621 $786,621 Contingency $ 81,063 -- Change Orders -- $112,387 Street Light Relocation $ 13,000 0 Inspection & Testing $ 55,000 $ 52,000 Construction Administration 1$ 0,000 15 000 TOTAL $945,684 $966,008 The project will require an additional appropriation from the Sewer fund in the amount of $10,000 and from the Water fund in the amount of $12,000 to cover the additional costs. The final funding appropriations are as follows: Previous Fund Appropriation Capital Outlay $394,234 Proposition C $376,450 Proposition A $ 12,000 County Aid-to-Cities $ 13,000 Water $150,000 Sewer 0 TOTAL $945,684 FISCAL IMPACT Final Appropriation $394,234 $376,450 $ 12,000 $ 13,000 $162,000 10 000 $967,684 Funds were budgeted for the construction of the Baldwin Avenue Improvements from Proposition C Transportation funds in the amount of $376,450, Capital Outlay funds in the amount of $394,234, Proposition A Transportation funds in the amount of $12,000, ~ ' Staff Report Acceptance - Street Improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue January 4, 2005 Page 6 Water funds in the amount of $150,000 and L.A. County Aid-to-Cities funds in the amount of $13,000. The total construction cost of the original contract is $786,621. With the total changes in the amount of $112,387, the final construction contract cost is $899,008. Additional appropriations of $10,000 from the Sewer fund and $12,000 from the Water fund are recommended to cover the contract cost, construction administration, material testing, inspections and contingencies. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council accepts the work performed by Shawnan for the street improvement of Baldwin Avenue between Duarte Road and Naomi Avenue, authorizes the final payment to be made in accordance with the contract documents and appropriates Sewer funds in the amount of $10,000 and additional Water funds in the amount of $12,000. Approved By: ~~~ WILLIAM R. KELLY, CITY MANAGER . DP:PAW:pa ~e A \ / STAFF REPORT Development Services Department January 4, 2005 TO: Chairman and Members Mayor and City Council FROM: ~on Penman, Deputy Executive Director ~y: Pete Kinnahan, Economic Development Administrator SUBJECT: Morlan Place Automobile Dealership Expansion Proiect (Rusrtak Arcadia Redevelopment Aqencv 1. Resolution No. ARA-212 - A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment Aqencv (i) adoptinq a. Mitiqated Neqative Declaration and a Mitiqation Monitorin4 Proqram for a Land Development Aqreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia 2. certain consultinp services and relocation benefits Citv Counci! 1. Citv Council Resolution No. 6452 - A Resolution of the Citv Council of the Citv of Arcadia makinq certain findinqs pursuant to Califomia Health and Safetv Code Section 33433 in connection with and approvinq the sale of proqertv pursuant to a Land Assemblv and Development Apreement amonq the Arcadia Redevelopment Aaencv. Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia Recommendation: Adopt Agency Resolution No. ARA-212, City Counci) Resolution No. 6452, approve project budget of $13.4 million and appropriation of $1,908,000 SUMMARY The Redevelopment Agency Board and the City Council at their December 7, 2004 joint public hearing on the proposed Morlan Place Project heard the staff report, took public comment and closed the public hearing. After discussion with and advice from the City Attorney, the Agency Board and City Council directed staff and the City Attorney to LASER IMAGED a. a . 1 `~ P ~ Chairman and Members Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 respond in writing to.certain environmental issues raised at the December 7 public hearing. This response is provided as Attachment 1. In addition, the City Attorney recommended that the Agency respond to certain redevelopment-related issues raised by the public, even though a written reply is not required. This response is provided as Attachment 2. The entire staff report and exhibits from the December 7, 2004 meeting were provided to the Agency/Council prior to the December 7 meeting. Because of the size of the numerous documents, staff requests that you bring the December 7 Morlan Place report with you to the meeting. Please contact Development Services, if you need, for another copy. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that: Agency: Adopt Agency Resolution No. ARA-212 - A Resolution of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency (i} adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for a Land Assembly and Development Agreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia, and (ii) approving a Land Assembly and Development Agreement with Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia. - 2. Agency: Approve project budget of $13:4 million (with a maximum Agency contribution of $8 million), appropriate $1,908,000 for the above listed activities/consultants, and authorize the Executive Director to implement the LADA. 3. City Council: Adopt City Council Resolution No. 6452 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arcadia making certain findings pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 33433 in connection with and approving the sale of property pursuant to a Land Assembly and Development Agreement among the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency, Paul P. Rusnak and Rusnak/Arcadia. Approved: """'~ William R. Kelly, Executive Director Responses to Topics of Environmental Concern in Comments to Arcadia (Morland) Mitigated Negative Deciaration An Environmental Impact Report Should Have Been Prepared Because the Applicant's Environmentallnformation Form Contains Inaccurate Information Regarding Solid Waste/Litter That Would Be Generated [See, e.g., David K. W. Chang s 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption ofMitigated Negative Declaration, p. 3.J Response: 'The project applicant will provide for commercial trash collection by one of the City's four approved vendors. Solid waste from the project area primarily is taken to the Puente Hills landfill which has capacity to serve the area for approximately 10 additional years. Solid waste from the project area can also be taken to private landfills. For example, Waste Management, the predominant solid waste hauler in the city, uses its own private land fills located all over the state to accept hauled solid wastes. Solid waste from the project area can also be taken to the Al1en Company facility, a material recovery facility (MRF) in the City of Industry that separates solid waste into recyclable materials or to the solid-waste-to-energy conversion facility in the City of Commerce. Also, section 6434 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that any waste hauler operating within the city shall be permitted. The subparts of Municipal Code section 5130.1 requires, in relevant part, that any such pemvtted hauler: (a) Work with customers in the City to recycle and educat~ customers about the need to recycle. Within ninety (90) days of the issuance of the hauler's business license, the hauler shall submit to the Public Works Services Director a strategy and methodology for increasing diversion and recycling within the City; (b) Achieve annual diversion rates, as provided under applicable state law, for all commercial waste as defined in the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element including, but not limited to, varieties of paper, plastics, glass, as well as wood, yard and other greenwaste, manure, and construction and demolition debris, collected or removed within the City; (c) Report to the City all materials considered diverted or recycled resulting in source reduction, recycling, composting and/or transformation from the commercial and industrial 1 Attachment 1 RVPi1B~DJ5\686I18.1 ~ waste stream by using the diversion formula set forth in Section 5130.1(d); (~ Each pernutted commercial hauler servicing an entity shall provide a recycling container for the customer's source separated recyclables at no additional charge to the commercial customer upon request of the commercial customer. Municipal Code section 5130.4 establishes repercussions for waste haulers that do not comply with the recycling requirements established by section 5130: If a commercial hauler fails to reach the diversion rates as specified by Section 5130.1(c), then the City shall, consistent with Arcadia Municipal Code Section 6216.7, consider aetion to suspend or revoke the applicable business license permit or direct nonrenewal of the permit and/or application, or d'uect the imposition of civil penalties and fines pursuant to a duly promulgated ordinance to implement the provisions of tlvs Part 3 ofthe Code. The Initial Study recognizes that the project applicant will comply with City waste recycling requirements per AB 939 and City of Arcadia Municipal Code section 5130. Based upon the existence of a mandated recycling program and the abundance of landfill capacity to accommodate the solid waste that would be generated by the ongoing operation of the proposed project, there would be no impacts from solid waste. 2. An Environmentallmpact Report Should Have Been Prepared Because the Applicant's Environmental lnformation Form Contains Inaccurate Information re the Series of Projects/Need to Analyze Foreseeable Future Series of Projects (That the Dealership Will Necessarily Expand Again in the Foreseeable Future) (See, e.g., David K W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption of'tLfitigated Negative Declaration, p. 3.J Response: Pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project to be analyzed is the whole of the action that is the proposed project. (Pub. Res. Code section 21065; CEQA Guidelines secfion 15378(a).) While an agency is not entitled to segment a project into smaller parts to avoid a fmding of significant environmental impacts (see, e.g., Bozune v. Local A e~ncv Formation _ RVPUB~DJS\6861 I8.1 Commission (1975) 13 Ca1.3d 263), only actions related to the project that aze reasonably foreseeable need be included in the project and analyzed in the CEQA document. (See Laurel Heiphts Improvement Ass'n v. ReQents of the Universitv of California (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376.) Actions that aze related to the proposed project that aze remote or speculative need not be included in the analysis of the project. (Id.) Where meaningful information about a future action related to the proposed project is not capable of being obtained, such potential future action need not be analyzed as part of the proposed project. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los An¢eles (1987) 196 Ca1.App3d 223.) CEQA does not require a"crystal ball" analysis of the environmental impacts of future actions that aze of speculative feasibility. (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (1988) 197 Ca1.App.3d 1167, 1177-78.) The project description in the Initial Study accurately represents the whole of the currently-proposed project. The existence, nature, and extent of any future expansion of the dealership is not now reasonably foreseeable. While the commentor's assertion that a future expansion of the dealership may occur cannot be ruled out, the nature, timing, and certainty of any such expansion is not known and therefore is not reasonably foreseeable. Put another way, meaningful information regazding any future expansion of the dealership is not currently lrnown nor could it be and any attempt to forecast any such expansion would be completely speculative. As such, it is both impossible to include analysis of any future expansion of the dealership in the current analysis nor is there any duty to do so pursuant to the law set forth above. The Environmental Checklist Form (Initial Study) Fails to Address Signif:cant Impacts re Population and Housing Because the Relocation of the Church Will Cause Movement of Population and Housing Patterns [See, e.g., David K. W. Chang s 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption ofMitigated Negative Declaration, p. 4.J Response: As noted in the Initial Study, the proposed project would have no impact upon population or housing. The facility does not provide housing for the church members. Moreover, there is no logical connection beriveen the relocation of the place where the church members meet and any appreciable impact to population and housing concerns that are relevant under CEQA. The movement of the church facility to another location within Arcadia, only a short distance away, would not reasonably cause an appreciable change in the locations where the church members live, nor any appreciable change in the population of the city. Moreover, the commentor's statement seems to be made primarily to support an assertion that pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law, the City is RVPLB\D7S\686118.1 required to locate replacement facilities for affected persons. No environxnental issue is raised within that comment and therefore no additional response is necessary. The Environmental Checklist Form (Initial Study) Fails to Address Significant Impacts re Hazards & Hazardous Materials Because the Dealership (Including Mechanical Service Bays) Wi11 Contain Hazardous Materials [See, e.g., David K. W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption ofMitigated Negative Declaration, p. 4.J Response: The Initial Study identifies as less than significant the impact based upon the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (IS, p. 10.) The commentor's assertion that the dealership would handle a significant amount of hazardous materials in such a way as to cause a significant impact to the environment is factually unsupported and speculative. The ongoing operation of the dealership, including mechanics operations, would not cause an appreciable hazard to the public or environment caused by hazards or hazardous materials. The proposed expansion of the Rusnak dealership will include approximately 30Q000 sq ft ofbuilding, including approximately 110 automobile maintenance bays. The dealership, however, will be required to continue to comply with all regulations and statutes relating to operation of the dealership, including the maintenance and handling of hazardous materials that are used in the dealership's operations. These operations would include the continued use of a licensed vendor to pick up and dispose of any hazardous waste generated at the dealership. The dealership cunently utilizes the services of a service to collect and recycle much of the hazardous waste generated by the operation of the dealership, including the operarion of the maintenance bays. The nse of such a recycling service would continue, avoiding impacts caused by hazazdous materials. As such, any potential impacts would be fully mitigated and no additional impact will be caused by hazardous materials. 5. The Environmental Checklist Fo»n (Initial Study) Fails to Address Significant Impacts re Public Services Because the Church Provides a Significant Public Service to the Community [See, e.g., David K W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration, p. 4; Wenn Chyn 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. 1; Michael G. Keith 12/6/04 Comment Letter, p. l.J Response: 4 RVPUB~DIS\686178.1 The services provided by a church are not public services for the purposes of CEQA analysis. The Initial Study checklist makes it clear that the public services contemplated within CEQA are fire protection, police protection, schoois, pazks, and other public facilities. In fact, the relevant analysis is whether the proposed project will result in substantial adverse physical effects , from construction of new or altered government facilities needed to maintain acceptable service ratios for fire/police/schooUpark services, etc. Churches by their very nature are not public facilities. Public agencies do not - and cannot - provide church services. 6. The Environmental Documents Must Propose Mitigation Measures to Minimize the Impact to Communiry Members ofNot Having a Church to Attend, Including the Identification of a New Church for Relocation and the Impacts Caused By that Church (Where is the new site? How to relocate? YVho will pay for it? Are the community members satlsfied?) (See Wenn Chyn 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. 1; Michael G. Keith 12/6/04 Comment Letter, p. l.J Response: First, mitigation measures are required for each significant impact idenrified in the CEQA document. (CEQA Guidelines section 15071(e).) As analyzed in the IS/MND and discussed in these responses to environmental issues, there aze no potentially significant impacts related to the relocation of the church facility for the purposes of CEQA. A significant effect on the envirorunent is defined as a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in the area affected by the proposed project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and obj ects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. CEQA Guidelines sections 15002(g}, 15382, and 15131(a). As such, mitigation measures relating to the relocation of the church aze not required. Also, the City has made it cleaz to church members inquiring about the project that their church would not be demolished until a suitable replacement for the church is located in Arcadia. As such, it is premature to consider the loss of the current church meeting hall as an impact to the church members when there will be no loss of the ability to assemble as a church. Moreover, even assuming impacts were caused by the church relocation that necessitated mitigation measures, the incomplete status of the ongoing inquiry to fmd a suitable replacement location for the church means that it is premature to consider the potenfial impacts of the church replacement. Only feasible mitigation measures should be included in CEQA analysis. A RVPCB~D7S16861 I8.1 mitigaUon measure is feasible if it is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable amount of time, taking into consideration economic, environxnental, legal, social, and tecluiological factors. (CEQA Guidelines, section 15364.) Despite the City's inquiry, it is not yet known how and where a replacement church could be located in Arcadia. It is therefore not known which sites would be feasible for purposes of CEQA. The loca6on and potential impacts of the replacement church will be analyzed separately when the locarion of the replacement church is known. It has not yet been possible to identify a location to relocate the church because only after the proposed project is approved can the city work with the church to investigate and decide upon alternative locations for the church. Prior to project approval, it would be, premature to identify sites for the church relocation. The timing of the project proposal- and the time necessary for project review including the analysis ofpotential environxnental impacts pursuant to CEQA - would not have allowed for meaning analysis of potential impacts caused by possible church relocation sites identified during the early stages of project and impact review. The city could not have committed to the acquisition of any of those sites during prior to project approval, and it is unprobable that the relocation sites would srill have been viable relocation sites after project approvaL The analysis of future speculative actions is not required by CEQA. (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (1988) 197 Ca1.App3d 1167, 1177-78.) Therefore, for the sake of azgument, eVen if mitigation measures were required to mitigate the impacts of church relocation, an analysis of the impacts caused by highly speculative relocation plans is not required under CEQA. RVPUB~D7S\686ll 8.1 Responses to Topics of Concern Regarding Redevelopment Law in Comments to Arcadia (Morlan) Disposition and Development Agreement The Propased Taking of Church Property is Not for Public Use as Required by the United States Constitution [See, e.g., David K W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration, p. 4.J Response: The proposed Morlan Place project ("Project") is being undertaken by the Agency as a redevelopment project pursuant to provisions of the Agency's redevelopment plan and the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code §§ 33000, et• sea. ("CRL").) Implementation of the Project will require the assemblage of numerous pazcels of irregulaz shape and size in multiple ownership and will result in physical and economic benefits to the community. The assembly of land for redevelopment purposes is expressly authorized under the CRL (CRL section 33391). Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court has upheld the use of eminent domain for redevelopment purposes. (Berman v. Pazker (1954~ 348 U.S. 26.) The Supreme Court detemuned that redevelopment was a proper public purpose for purposes of eminent domain, even as to properties within a redevelopment area that were, in and of themselves, not blighted. (Id. at 32). Moreover, nothing in the Disposition and Development Agreement authorizes the Agency to acquire any property for the proposed Proj ect by condemnation or othenvise. Although the Agency has chosen to address this objection now, the Agency also maintains thaf the objection is premattzre and unrelated to the issues and findings which the City Council must make in connection with the consideration of the Disposition and Development Agreement. 2. The proposed Taking of Church Property is Not for Public Use as Required by the United Sfates Constitution (See, e.g., David K. W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration, p. 3; Dean Dennis' 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. I.J Response: See Response No. 1 above. Attachment 2 RVPUBUCKR\686236.t 3. The Praject Violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act (RLUIPA- 42 U.S. C. sections 2000cc - 2000cc-1) (See, e.g., David K. W. Chang's 12/7/04 Objections to Adoption ofMitigated Negative Declaration, p. S.J Response: The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act ("RLiJIPA") has never been interpreted by any appellate court as precluding a redevelopment agenc}?s right to acquire religious property through eminent domain. The Agency aclmowledges the case of Cottonwood Christian Center v. Cypress Redevelonment A~encv (C.D. Cal. 2002) 218 F.Supp. 2d 1203, where a federal district court enjoined the Cypress Redevelopment Agency's emiuent domain proceedings against a local church on the grounds that there were remaining issues of fact to be tried before condemnation could proceed. It is important to note that there was no ruling on the merits of the church's claim in the Cottonwood Christian case and the case was never submitted to an appellate court for review since the parties in that case settled their dispute. Moreover, similar to the concerns raised in Objections No.1 and 2 above, Objection No. 3 is not relevant to the issues and matters to be determined by the City Council in its deliberations conceming the Disposition and Development Agreement. 4. The Property Owned by 25 W. Huntington Partners (Arcadia Self Storage) is Not Blighted Physically or Economically as Defined by Health and Safety Code section 33030 [See, e.g., Dean Dennis' 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. I.J Response: The Agency respectfully disagrees with the objection's conclusion that the Arcadia Self Storage project is not physically or economically blighted. The condition described in CRL section 33031(a)(2) is particularly applicable to the Arcadia Self Storage property. That condition describes physically blighted properties as property affected by factors which prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or cavacitv of buildings or lots, caused by inadequate size given present standazds and market conditions or other similaz factors. Furthermore, what the City Council must determine, pursuant to CRL section 33433(b), is that the sale or lease of the site proposed for the Project will "assist in the elimination ofblight". The Council's analysis is not whether each particulaz pazcel within the site for the proposed Project is blighted; the CRL does not require that each particular parcel of land within a proposed redevelopment project be blighted any more than the law requires that the Agency may only acquire blighted properties through condemnation. The Agency believes that the staff report and the summary report required by CRL section 33433, both of which were publicly available, contain substantial information that sale of the site for the Project will assist in the elimination of blight. RVPUB\KKR\686236.1 5. With Respect to the Morlan Place Project, the Proposed Plan Lacks Substantial Evidence to Support the Plan's Conclusions ofHow the Goals, Objectives, Programs, and Expenditures Will Eliminate Blight Within the Project Area, and Specifically Fails with Regard to Arcadia Self Storage - Health and Safety Code section 33031 [See, e.g., Dean Dennis' 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. 2.J Response: We understand the objection to be primarily a restatement of Objection No. 4, i.e., that the Arcadia Self Storage project is not blighted and therefore could not be included as one of the pazcels being considered for use within the Project. In response, the Agency incorporates its response to Objection No. 4 above. With respect to the objection's general and non-specific observation that the Implementation Plan which was approved by the City Council on December 7`h lacks substantial evidence to support the Ixnplementation Plan's concluaions regarding the elunina6on of 6light, the Agency respectfully disagrees with the author's conclusion. Moreover, the Agency rejects the author's contention that the Implementation Plan's conclusions must be supported by substanUal evidence. Substantial evidence is the standazd employed when a hearing body is required to receive and consider evidence and then make determinations based on the evidentiary record. Although the Agency was required to hold a pubiic hearing and receive public testimony concerning the Implementation Plan, CRL section 33490(a) does not require the Agency to make any findings based upon the evidentiary record. Accordingly, the appropriate standazd against which to measure the Agency's decision to approve the Implementation Plan is whether the action was arbitrary, capricious and completely unsupported by the record. 5. It Does Not Appear That Notice Identifying the Five Year Implementation Plan as being Considered Along With the Morlan Plan Project Was Mailed to Affected Property Owners [See, e.g., Dean Dennis' 12/7/04 Comment Letter, p. 2.J Response: The Agency's consideration of the Disposition and Development Agreement was appropriately noticed once per week for two successive weeks prior to the public hearing by publication in the Arcadia Weekly as required by CRL section 33433(a) and Government Code section 6066. Neither the CRL nor the Government Code require the Agency to mail individual notices of the Disposition and Development Agreement public hearing to affected property owners, as the author of the obj ection states. Furthermore, the Agency's adoption of the Implementation Plan was govemed by CRL section 33490. CRL section 33490(d) requires that the notice of the Agency's consideration of the Implementation Plan be published pursuant to Government Code section 6063, posted at four places within the redevelopment project azea for a period of three weeks, and "mailed at least three weeks in RVPUBV{KR~686236.1 advance to all persons and agencies that have reauested notice." CRL section 33490 does not require mailed notice to persons other than those who have specifically requested notice. To the Agency's knowledge, none of the property owners within the planned Proj ect site requested mailed notice under CRL seclion 33490 ~ RVPUBV{KR\686236.] 4 F-~ -t2~.~,-.,x.~ `c.~--~' c~c~.;,~-' Mayor Gary Kovacic and Members of the City Council City of Arcadia P. O. Box 60021 Arcadia, CA 91006 December 23, 2004 Re: Proposed Redevelopment - Rusnak Motors Dear Mayor Kovacic and City Council Members: ~ RECEIVED JAN 17 2005 CITY OF ARCADIA CffY CLERK The undersigned are all former members of the Arcadia City Council and past Mayors. We aze concerned about the proposed use of the redevelopment resources and authority to expand the Rusnak Motors business interests in Arcadia. While our issues with respect to this proposal may varyby individual, we are all united in the belief that this is not a proper use of the redevelopment authority in Arcadia. As concerned citizens of Arcadia, we urge you, as members of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency, to vote against this proposal. Very truly yours, ~ ~. ~~~ Edwazd L. Butterworth ~i~' ~,P~ c~,~c.2,~-- Chazles Gilb ~;~es R. Helms, Jr. - ~~~~~~ y ung _ ~ -~ . o asching ,~ ~?~~~~ Robert Hazbicht ~-~~~~~w--~:~- Floretta Lauber See December 7, 2004 City Council Meeting Item i.a. for public correspondence on Public Hearing for Resolution No. ARA-212 and Resolution No. 6452 Re: Morlan Place Automobile Dealership Expansion Project (Rusnak) ~-~ ~::~._.1 RESOLUTION NO. ARA-212 A RESOLUTION OF THB ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (i) ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A MTTIGATION MOIVITORING PROGRAM FOR A LAND ASSEMBLY AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH PAUL P. RUSNAK AND RUSNAK/ARCADIA, AND (ii) APPROVING A LAND ASSEMBLY AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH PAUL P. RUSNAK.AND RUSNAK/ARCADIA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arcadia ("City'~ approved and adopted a redeyelopment plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the redevelopment project azea lrnown as the "Central Redevelopment ProjecY' ("Project Area"), on December 26, 1973, by Ordinance Number 1490, as last amended on October 7, 2003, by Ordinance Number 2181; and WHEREAS, the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency ("Agenc}~') is engaged in activities to implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area, pursuant to the provisions of California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) ("CRL"); and WHEREAS, Paul P. Rusnak, as trustee of the Paul P. Rusnak Family Trust dated November 18, 1988 ("Owner"), and Rusnak/Arcadia, a Califomia corporation ("Operator"), own and operate a new and used automobile dealership and automobile service.center located at 55 West Auntington Drive in the Project Area ("Dealership"); and WHEREAS, the Owner and the Operator desire to acquire and develop five (5) parcels of property located within the Project Area in proximity to the existing Dealership ("Expansion Site") in order to expand the existing Dealership facilities and services ("Expansion ProjecY~; a~id WHEREAS, the Agency has determined that the redevelopment of the Expansion Project on the Expansion Site will assist the community in eliminating and preventing conditions of blight on the Bxpansion Site and prevent the spread of conditions of blight into other areas of the community, including areas within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, Agency staff, the Owner and the Operator have negotiated the terms of a proposed 2004 Land Assembly and Development Agreement ("AgreemenY') that proyides, among other things: (i) that the Agency will use its reasonable best efforts to acquire the Expansion Site and convey the Expansion Site to the Owner, and (ii) that the Owner will acquire the Expansion Site from the Agency and develop the Expansion Project on the Expansion Site, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement; and WHEREA5, a copy of the Agreement is and has been on file with the Agency Assistant Secretary, at the Agency's office, at the Arcadia Public Library, and available to the public for inspection since November 11, 2004; and , LASERIMAGED ~P WHEREAS, Enviromnenfal Quality Act ("CEQA") and the Agency has prepared an initial study ("Initial Stud}~') to assess potential environmental impacts of the development of the ExpansionProject; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study indicates that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that may result from implementation of the Expansion Project can be mitigated to a level of insignificance, pursuant to a Mitigation Monitoring Program ("MMP"), and a Mitigated Negative Declazation ("MND") has been prepazed; and WHEREAS, the MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Agency's Local CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Agency made the MND and MMP available to the puUlic and to all interested agencies for review and comment by: (i) publishing notice of its intent to adopt the MND ("Notice of Intent to Adopt") in the Arcadia Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, on November 11, November 18, November 25, and December 2, 2004; (ii) posting a copy of the Notice of Intent to Adopt on the public notice bulletin boazd at the Agency's office; and (iii) submitting the Notice of Intent to Adopt to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles County, Califomia, on November 4, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Agency considered and responded to any and all comments received from the public and interested agencies regarding the Initial Study, the MND and the MMP; and WHEREAS, the Agency carefully reviewed and considered the Initial Study, the MND, the MMP, all comments received and all other relevant information contained in the administrative record regarding the Agency's consideration of the Agreement and the Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, CRL Section 33430 authorizes the Agency to sell real property it owns or acquires for redevelopment purposes and the Agreement is consistent with the intent and purpose of CRL Section 33430; and WHEREAS, CRL Section 33431 requires the Agency to hold a duly noticed public hearing before any potential sale of real property pursuant to CRL Section 33430, without public bidding; and WHEREAS, on December 7, 2004 the Agency held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the approval of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CRL Section 33433, the Agency has prepared a summary report ("Report") setting forth, among othei tlungs, the cost of the Agreement to the Agency, and the Report is and has been on file with the Agency Assistant Secretary at the Agency's office and available to the public for inspection since November 11, 2004, in accordance with CRL Section 33433; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CTTY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION i. The Agency finds and determines that all of the recitals set forth above are true and correct. SECTION 2. The Agency has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study, the MND, the MIvIP, all comments received relating thereto and the administrative record regazding the Agency's consideration of the Agreement. The Agency hereby finds and determines that the MND and Initial Study contain a complete and accurate assessment of the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the Agreement and the Expansion Project. The Agency further fmds and deternnnes that the Initial Study, the MND and the MMP have been completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Agency's Local CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 3. Based on the Initial Study, the MND, the MMP and all written and oral evidence presented to the Agency prior to or at the public hearing at which this Resolution is adopted, the Agency hereby finds and determines that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts of the Agreement and the Expansion Project can be mitigated to a level of insignificance pursuant to the mitigation measures outlined in the MND and the MMP. The Agency further finds and determines that: (i) there is no substantial evidence in the administrative record supporting a fair argument that either the Expansion Project or the Agreement, as mitigated, may result in significant environmental impacts, and (ii) the IvIND contains a complete, objective and accurate assessment of the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the Agreement and the Expansion Project and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Agency. SECTION 4. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on . which the findings in Sections 2 a~id 3 of this Resolution aze based are located at the Agency office located at the Development Services Department, Arcadia City Hall, 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, Califomia 91007. SECTION 5. Tl~e Agency approves and adopts the MND and the MMP relative to the Agreement and the Expansion Project. SECTION 6. The Agency finds that the sale of property pursuant to the terms of the Agreement will assist in the elimination of blight within the Project Area, as set forth in the Report. SECTION 7. The Agency further finds that the sale of property pursuant to the Agraement is consistent with the Implementa6on Plan adopted by the Agency regarding the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33490. 3 • . SECTION 8. The Agency further finds that the consideration to be paid by Paul P. Rusnak to acquire the subject property from the Agency pursuant to the terms of the Agreement is not less than the fair reuse value for the subject property at the use and with the covenants and conditions and development costs authorized by the sale pursuant to the Agreement. SECTION 9. The Agency approves the Agreement in the form submitted to the Agency at the public hearing at which this Resolution is adopted and as on file with the Assistant Secretary of the Agency. SECTION 10. The Agency authorizes and directs the Executive Director of the Agency to: (i) execute and deliver the Agreement, subject to such non-substantive modifications to the Agreement as the Executive Director of the Agency deems necessary and appropriate and (ii) to execute and deliver such other documents. and instnunents as may be reasonably necessary or convenient to implement or cany out the Agency's obligations under the Agreement. SECTION I1. The Agency authorizes and directs Agency staff to file a Notice of Determination regarding the approval of the Agreement in this Resolution with the Clerk of the Boazd of Supervisors of Los Angeles County, Califomia, within five (5) days of the date of adoption of this Resolution. SECTION 12. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Passed, approved and adopted this 4th day of ,Tanuary , 2045. /S/ ~ARY A. !(OVACIC Chairperson Arcadia Redevelopment Agency ATTEST: ISI J~- E . ~~R Secretary Arcadia Redevelopment Agency APPROVED AS TO FORM C~L~. ~. ~Cti~ Stephen P. Deitsch Agency Counsel 4 ~ -v . ~ STATE OF CALIFO1tNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, Secretary of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Resolurion No. ARA-212 was passed and adopted by the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Chairperson and attested to by the Secretary at a regular meeting of said Agency held on the 4th day of January, 2005 and that said Agency Resolurion was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Agency Members Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo andKovacic NOES: None ABSENT: None ~Si ~A ES H. ~~RR~~S Secretary of the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency 5 ~= "l:' . . _ ~ ..w>. . RESOLUTION NO. 6452 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, MAICING CERTAIN FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33433 IN CONNECTION WTTH AND APPROVING THE SALE OF PROPERTY PURSUANT TO A LAND ASSEMBLY AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMONG THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PAUL P. RUSNAK ,AND RUSNAK/ARCADIA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arcadia ("City") approved and adopted a redevelopment plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the redevelopment project area lrnown as the "Central Redevelopment Project" ("Project Area"), on December 26, 1973, by Ordinance Number 1490, as last amended on October 7, 2003, by Ordinance Number 2181; and WF3EREAS, the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") is engaged in activities to execute and implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area pursuant to the provisions of Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seg.) (°CRL°)> and WHEREAS, Paul P. Rusnak, as trustee of the Paul P. Rusnak Family Trust, dated November 18, 1988 ("Owner"), and Rusnak/Arcadia, a California corporatiom("Operator"), own and operate a new and used•automobile dealership and automobile service center located at 55 West Huntington Drive in the Project Area ("Dealership"); and WIIEREAS, the Owner and the Operator desire to acquire and develop five (5) parcels of property located within the Project Area in proximity to the existing Dealership ('Bxpansion Site") in order to expand die existing Dealership facili6es and services ("Expansion ProjecY'); and WHEREAS, the Agency, the Owner and the Operator have negotiated the terms of a proposed 2004 Land Assembly and Development Agreement ("Agreement") that provides, among other things: (i) that the Agency will use its reasonable best efforts to acquire the Expansion Site and convey the Expansion Site to the Owner, and (ii) that the Owner will acquire the Expansion Site from the Agency and develop the Expansion Project on the Expansion Site pursuant to the terms and condirions of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Agency has presented the Agreement to the City Council for consideration pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33433; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Agreement is and has been on file with the Agency Assistant Secretary, at the Agency's office, and available to the public for inspection since November 11, 2004; and 1 LASER IMAGED K~ WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 33433 requires that the City Council first approve any sale of properiy by the Agency, where the property was or is to be acquired, directly or indirectly, with t~ increment monies; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CRL Section 33433, Agency has prepared a suxnmary report ("Report") summarizing, among other things, the cost of the Agreement to Agency, the estimated value of the interest to be conveyed, and an explanation of how the acquisition and conveyance of the Expansion Site will assist in the elimination of blight within the Project Area and including a copy of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Report is and has been on file with the Agency Assistant Secretary at the Agency's office and available to the public for inspection since November 11, 2004, in accordance with CRL Section 33433; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CRL Section 33433, the City Council held a duly noticed joint public hearing with the Agency, on December 7, 2004, to consider the proposed Agreenient; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCII, OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORIVIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the recitals set forth above aze true and correct. SECTION 2. Prior to the public hearing following which this Resolution was adopted, the City Council received and reviewed the Initial Study, the Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MIv'D") and Mitigation Monitoring Prograzn (°MMP") prepared by the Agency regazding the Agreement and Expansion Proj ect contemplated under the Agreement. SECTION 3. The City Council finds and detertnines that the Initial 5tudy, MND and MMP were all prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Agency's I.ocal CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 4. The City further finds and determines that it is a"responsible agency" under CEQA, puxsuant to Public Resources Code Section 21069 and Title 14 California Code of Regulations Secfion 15381. SECTION 5. The City further finds and determines that there are no significant environmental effects or any differences in the severity of environniental effects associated with the Agreement or the Expansion Project contemplated under the Agreement from those assessed in the MND that would require additional environmental review; pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21060 or Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15162 or 15163. 2 SECTION 6. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21069 and Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15381, the City independently reviewed the Inirial Study, MND and MIvvIP prepared by the Agency. The City hereby finds that the Initial Study and MND adequately describe the Expansion Project contemplated under the Agreement and assess a1T of the potential significant environmental effects or impacts of the Expansion Project. SECTTON 7. The City Council authorizes and directs the City Clerk to file a Notice of Determination regazding the approval of the Agreement in tlus Resolufion with the Clerk of the Boazd of Supervisors of Los Angeles, County, California, within five (5) days of the date of adoption of this Resolution. SECTION S. The City Council finds and determines that the Agreement will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions within the Project Area, as set forth in the Report. SECTION 9. The City Council fmds and determines that the Agreement is consistent witH the implementation plan adopted for the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to CRL Section 33490. SECTION 10. The City Council finds and detemunes that the consideration to be paid by Paul P. Rusnak to the Agency for the purchase of the subject property pursuant to the terms of the Agreement is not less than the fair reuse value of the subject proper[y at the use and with the covenants and conditions and development costs authorized hy the sale pursuant to the temis of the Agreement. SECTION 11. The City Council approves the Agreement and the Agency's entry into the Agreement. SECTION 12. This Resolution shall take effect nnmediately upon its adoption. Passed, approved and adopted this 4th day of January ,.'PQOS. 9S/ GARY ~ KOV~CIC Mayor of the City of Arcadia ATTEST: /S/ JAMES m ~ RO~NS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ~~~ p ~~~ Stephen P. Deitsch CiYy Attomey STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LO5 ANGELES ) SS: CITY OF ARCADIA ) I, JAMES H. BARROWS, City Clerk of the City of Arcadia, hereby certifies that the foregoing Resolution No. 6452 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Arcadia, signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 4th day of January, 2005 and that said Resolution was adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Chandler, Marshall, Segal, Wuo and Kovacic NOES: None ABSENT: None ISl JA ES C~. ~~RRO~S City Clerk of the City of Arcadia 4 jJ l ~ . J*c~8poaea'efl~,eo9 STAFF REPORT Public Works Services Department January 4, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Pat Malloy, Public Works Services Dire or Prepared by: Gary F. Lewis, General Services Ma ager Ken Herman, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award - Construction of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 Recommendation: Reject the low bid submitted by SojitrJTurboflo Engineers, LP, JV, authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with SEMA Construction for the construcfion of the Santa Anita Reservoir No. 4 in the amourrt of $5,255,555.55 and aufhorize an additional appropriation of $250,000 to be addsd to the project budget. SUMMARY The 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program provides for the construction of a new 3.5 million gailon reservoir fo replace two (2) one million gallon reservoirs. The Ciry has received $5,126,049 grant funding for the period of 2000-2004 from the U.S. Environmentat Protection Agency (USEPA) for water system improvements for seismic reliability. This year, the City is eligible to receive $2,010,740 in federal funds toward this particular project. On IVovember 23, 2004, sealed bids were opened for the Construction of the Santa Mita Reservoir No.4, Project No.6272083. Seven (7) bids were received. Statf has reviewed the {owest bid, which was submitted by SojitrJTurboflo Engineers, LP, JV, and has considered that bid non-responsive due ta the distribution of costs. Staff has reviewed the second lowest bid, which was submitted by SEMA Construction, and has found that bid to be satisfac;tory. Therefare, stafF recommends that a contraet in the amount of $5,255,555.55 be awarded to SEMA Construction for this project. DISCUSSION The replacement of Reservoirs No. 1 and 2 with Reservoir Na. 4 is the third phase of an overall program ot facility improvements at this site. Phase 1 was completed in 2003 and involved upgrading the Santa Anita Booster Pump Station. Phase 2 was recently completed the seismic rehabilitation of Santa Anifa Reservoir No. 3. Phase 3 invofves the construction of a new reservoir with a capacity of approximately 3.5 mi~lion gallons (MG), replacing the two existing 1.0 MG reservoirs at this facility. The size of the new reservoir and the ability to maximize the full storage capacity of the site was limited by the geography of the proQerty and is govemed by its cfose proximity to the Sierra Madre earthquake fault. LASER l~AGED ~ ~' u~ Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 2 On February 11, 2004 bids were received for the construction of Reservoir No.4 but all had exceeded the approved budget. On March 16, 2~4 the City Council rejected the bids and instructed staff to reduce the scope of the project in an attempt to bring Ehe cost within budget limits. The reservoir was re-designed to allow bidders more cost effective options for shoring and for the pricing of reinforcing steel, in addition to simplifying the piping alignment to the reservoir. The re-designed reservoir will have a capacity of approximately 3_5 MG, which will still provide an adequate supply to the water distribution system. Notices Inviting Bids for this project were published in the adjudicated paper and trade journals. Eleven (11) Class A Engineering construction firms attended .the mandatory pre-bid conference with seven (7} firms submitting bids. As advertised, the City Clerk publicfy opened the sealed bids oR November 23, 2004 with the fotlowfng results: RANK F1RAA 4 Sojitz / Turboflo Engineers, LP, JV, Pasadena, CA 2 SEMA Construction, Lake Forest, CA 3 Gri~th Company, Santa Fe Springs, CA 4 Schuler Engineering Corp., Corona, CA 5 Pacific Hydrotech Corp., Perris, CA 6 SSC Construction, Inc., Corona, CA 7 WM Klorman, EI fUlonte, CA PRICE $ 5,019,000.00 $ 5,255,555.55 $ 5,471,227.00 $ 5,475,214.00 $ 5,526,900.00 $ 5,743,320.00 $ 5,973,720.00 Following the opening of sealed bids, and within the time allowed by the bid docucnents, SEMA Construction fited a Bid Protest against the low bidder. They cited, in their opinion, a lack of experience on behalf of SojitzlTurboflo Engineers and an imbalanced distribution of costs in the Bid Schedule submitted by SojitrJTurboflo Engineers. SEMA Construction specifically pointed to SojitzlTurboflo Engineers 10%+ bid for cost of mobilization which exceeds the limit of 6%o specifed in the bid documents. Staff has reviewed the bid iriformation submitted by SojitrJTurboflo Engineers and has co~rmed that the total lump sum price for mobilization submitted by Sojitz/Turboflo Engineers exceeds the limit established in the bid documents. Part D(Technical Specifications) of the bid documents specify that the total lump sum priee for mobilization shall not exceed 6% of the total bid schedule price. The purpose of this limit is to maintain a balanced distribution of profit and oyerhead throughout the project, and to avoid payment to the Contractor ahead of actual work performed. The amount for mobilization submitted by SojitrJTurboflo Engineers was slightly over 10% of the total bid schedule price, which exceeds the established Iimit. Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 3 Staff has conferred with the City Attomey on this bid informality. The City Aftorney concurs with staff that the bid submitted by SojitzJTurboflo Engineers be considered non-responsive. The low bid subrnitted by Sojitz(Curboflo Engineers gives them an unfair advantage over the ofher bidders, in tfiat foilowing their bid submittal, they could later choose to withdraw their own bid based on this error in mobilization costs, or stay the course and erifer into a confractual agreement wifh the City. In essence, it gives them the opportunity and urrEaic advantage of comparing their bid with other bidders and then the opportunity to decide whether to withdraw their bid or nat. The four percent (4°~) above the not to exceed 6°~ calculates to $200,740, giving their company additional up fronf money before actual construction begins. Therefore,_in accordance with the lnstructions To Bidders-from the-bid documents, staff recommends thaf the bid submitfed by SojibJTurbaflo Engineers be considered nQn- responsive. Staff has reviewed the bid documants submitted by the second lowr bfdder, SEMA Construction, for content and investigatecf the contractors' background and recent projects for competency. Staff has concluded that SEMA Construction is the lowest responsive bidder to perForm the construction of this project. Staff recommends that the City Council award a Contract in the amount of $5,255,555.55 to SEMA Construction for construction of the Santa Anita Reservoir No.4 project. Staff will make recommendation for the award of Construction Management and Inspection and for Material Testing Services to be utilized during the construction of this project, at the City CounaE meeting scheduled for January 18, 2005. ENVIRONIVIENTAL IMPACT The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration for this project on November 21, 2000, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmenfal Quality Act. Staff c~id not find substantial evidence that fhis project wauld have a significant or potentialty significant adverse e#fect on the environment. As a condition of the federal grant approval, the USEPA also completed an Environmental Assessment under the I~ational Environmental Poficy Act and did not find this project to have a significant env~ronmental impact. Therefore, no further action is necessary for approval of entering into a professional services agreement. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $5,750,000 are budgeted in the 2003-2004 Capital Improvement Program for construction, proje~t management and inspection. The distribution of funds provides $5,000,000 towards Construction and $750,000 towards Inspection, Material Testing and Contingencies. Therefore, staff requests additional funds in the amount of Mayor and City Council January 4, 2005 Page 4 $250,000 be appropriated to the project budget to support the construction portion of this work. This project has qualified for federal reimbursement of $2,010,740 for project related expenses from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), with the balance funded by fhe City. RECOMMENDATION 1, Reject the bid submitted by Sojit7JTurboflo Engineers, LP, JV as non- responsive. 2. Award a contract in the amount of $5,255,555.55 to SEMA Construction, for the construction of the Santa Anita Reservoir No.4. 3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute a contract in a form approved by the City Attomey. 4. AppropriaEe an additional $250,000 to the Project Budget. Approved by: ~ v~~ William R. Kelly, City Manager PM:GL: KH:dw