HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-15 EO&WR Committee PacketOTAY WATER DISTRICT
ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING
and
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
Board Room
TUESDAY
April 21, 2015
11:30 A.M.
This is a District Committee meeting. This meeting is being posted as a special meeting
in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2) in the event that
a quorum of the Board is present. Items will be deliberated, however, no formal board actions
will be taken at this meeting. The committee makes recommendations
to the full board for its consideration and formal action.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JU-
RISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4289, FIXING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OWNED BY SBBT LCRE V, LLC,
APNs: 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-07-00; 644-
080-20, 21-00; AND 644-090-03-00 INTO THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVE-
MENT DISTRICT NOS. 22 AND 27 (MARTIN) [5 min]
4. AWARD A PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND
INSPECTION SERVICES CONTRACT TO ALYSON CONSULTING (ALYSON) IN AN
AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $350,000 FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) FISCAL YEARS,
FY 2016 AND FY 2017 (ENDING JUNE 30, 2017) (MARTIN) [5 min]
5. AWARD A PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES
CONTRACT TO RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-
EXCEED $175,000 FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) FISCAL YEARS, FY 2016
THROUGH FY 2018 (ENDING JUNE 30, 2018) (CAMERON) [5 min]
6. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON) [10 minutes]
2
7. ADJOURNMENT
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING:
Gary Croucher, Chair
Tim Smith
All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be delib-
erated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the Dis-
trict’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the
open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the
Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting
her at (619) 670-2280.
If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici-
pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to
the meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on April 17, 2015 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regular
meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 24
hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section
§54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on April 17, 2015.
/s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: May 6, 2015
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: Various DIV. NOs. 1&2
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Otay Ranch Village 3, Village 8 East, and Village 10 Annexation
Request into Improvement Districts 22 and 27 (APNs 644-060-25,
26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-07-00; 644-080-
20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-00)
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 4289, fixing terms and conditions for the
annexation of certain real properties owned by the SBBT LCRE V, LLC,
APNs: 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-
07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-00 into the Otay Water
District Improvement District Nos. 22 and 27 (see Exhibit A for
locations).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the proposed annexation is to provide water service to
parcels owned by SBBT LCRE V, LLC. (APNs 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-
030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-07-00; 644-080-20,21-00; and 644-
090-03-00).
ANALYSIS:
A letter and petition have been submitted by the owner, SBBT LCRE V,
LLC, for the annexation of APNs 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00;
644-070-21-00; 646-010-07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-00
2
into Improvement District Nos. 22 and 27 for water service. The
total acreage to be annexed is 1,766.37 acres. The properties are
within the sphere of influence of Otay Water District and will be
part of Improvement Districts 22 and 27 after the Board of Directors
approve this request. Village 3 is located east of Otay Valley Road
and north of Brown Field Airport. Village 8 East is located south of
Rock Mountain Road and west of CA-125. Village 10 is located east of
CA-125 and south of Hunte Parkway. All properties are located in the
City of Chula Vista in the County of San Diego.
The annexation of the Otay Ranch Village 3, Village 8 East, and
Village 10 parcels will create two island parcels inside Improvement
Districts 22 and 27 (see Exhibit A). Assessor Parcel Number 644-020-
10-00 is owned by Otay Landfill Inc. and is currently being used as a
landfill. This parcel has an area of 250.59 acres. The second
island parcel consists of seven parcels, see table below.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The property owners will pay the District's Annexation processing fee
of $763.83, which is subject to annual adjustment in accordance with
the District Code of Ordinances. At the time a water meter is
purchased, the owners will pay the then current meter and capacity
fees based on water meter size and annexation fees as established in
the attached Resolution. The owner will continue to pay availability
fees based on the current acres of 1,766.37, until such time that the
property is subdivided at which time the fees will be based on $10
per parcel or $30 per acre.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Provide water service to meet increasing customer needs.
LEGAL IMPACT:
No legal impact.
Parcel Acres Owner Current use
644-060-17-00 24.86 Florida Rock Industries, Inc Vacant Land
644-060-20-00 212.15 Brista Acquisitions, LLC Rock Quarry
644-060-21-00 3.36 Brista Acquisitions, LLC Vacant Land
644-060-22-00 5.68 Brista Acquisitions, LLC Vacant Land
644-060-23-00 0.45 Brista Acquisitions, LLC Vacant Land
644-060-24-00 166.06 Otay Valley Quarry, LLC Vacant Land
645-030-02-00 .25 General Telephone Co. of CA Vacant Land
3
DM/RP:jf
P:\Public-S\Annexation Requests\2015\Village 3, Village 8 East, Village 10\Staff Report\BD 05 06 15 - Annexation V3, 8E, 10\STAFF REPORT
Otay Ranch Village 3 Village 8 East Village 10 Annexation 5-6-15_rev1.Doc
Attachments: Exhibit A – Location Map
Attachment A - Committee Action
Attachment B – Resolution
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Various
Otay Ranch Village 3, Village 8 East, and Village 10
Annexation Request into Improvement Districts 22 and 27
(APNs 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00;
646-010-07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; 644-090-03-00)
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on
April 21, 2015. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation.
NOTE:
The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for board approval. This
report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
ATTACHMENT B
Page 1 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 4289
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
OTAY WATER DISTRICT APPROVING THE ANNEXATION
TO OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
NOS. 22/27 OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED AS "OTAY
RANCH VILLAGE 3, VILLAGE 8 EAST AND VILLAGE
10 WATER ANNEXATION REQUEST INTO IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICTS (IDs) 22 AND 27” (APNs 644-060-25,
26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-
010-07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-
00) (FILE NO. ENG70-10-143/DIVISIONS 1 AND 2)
WHEREAS, a letter and petition have been submitted by SBBT
LCRE V, LLC, c/o Q. SOPHIE YANG, the owner and party that has an
interest in the land described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto,
for annexation of said land to Otay Water District Improvement
District Nos. 22/27 pursuant to California Water Code Section
72670 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 72680.1 of said Water Code, the
Board of Directors may proceed and act thereon without notice and
hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER
DISTRICT FINDS, RESOLVES, ORDERS AND DETERMINES as follows:
1. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the
boundaries of IDs 22/27 following the annexation, is set forth on
a map in Exhibit “B” filed with the Secretary of the District,
which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed to
be annexed.
2. The purpose of the proposed annexation is to make water
service available to the area to be annexed, which availability
constitutes a benefit to said area.
3. The Board finds and determines that the area proposed
to be annexed to IDs 22/27 will be benefited by such annexation
ATTACHMENT B
Page 2 of 4
and that the property currently within IDs 22/27 will also be
benefited and not injured by such annexation because after the
annexation a larger tax base will be available to finance the
water facilities and improvements of IDs 22/27.
4. The Board of Directors hereby declares that the annexa-
tion of said property is subject to the owners complying with the
following terms and conditions:
(a) The petitioner for said annexation shall pay to
Otay Water District the following:
(1) The annexation processing fee at the time of
application;
(2) State Board of Equalization filing fees in
the amount of $5,000;
(3) The water annexation fees at the time of
connection to the Otay Water District water
system;
(4) Yearly assessment fees will be collected
through the County Tax Assessor’s office in
the amount of $10 or $30 for APNs 644-060-25,
26, 27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-
010-07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-
00;
(5) In the event that water service is to be
provided, Petitioners shall pay all
applicable water meter fees per Equipment
Dwelling Unit (EDU) at the time the meter is
purchased; and
ATTACHMENT B
Page 3 of 4
(6) Payment by the owner of APNs 644-060-25, 26,
27-00; 645-030-20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-
07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-090-03-00
of all other applicable local or state agency
fees or charges.
(b) The property to be annexed shall be subject to
taxation after annexation thereof for the purposes
of the improvement district, including the payment
of principal and interest on bonds and other
obligations of the improvement district, author-
ized and outstanding at the time of annexation,
the same as if the annexed property had always
been a part of the improvement district.
5. The Board hereby declares the property described in
Exhibit "A" shall be considered annexed to IDs 22/27 upon passage
of this resolution.
6. The Board of Directors further finds and determines
that there are no exchanges of property tax revenues to be made
pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 95 et
seq., as a result of such annexation.
7. The annexation of APNs 644-060-25, 26, 27-00; 645-030-
20-00; 644-070-21-00; 646-010-07-00; 644-080-20, 21-00; and 644-
090-03-00 to the District’s Improvement Districts 22/27 is hereby
designated as the “OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 3, VILLAGE 8 EAST AND
VILLAGE 10 WATER ANNEXATION”.
8. Pursuant to Section 57202(a) of the Government Code,
the effective date of the OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 3, VILLAGE 8 EAST
ATTACHMENT B
Page 4 of 4
AND VILLAGE 10 WATER ANNEXATION shall be the date this Resolution
is adopted by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District.
9. The General Manager of the District and the Secretary
of the District, or their respective designees, are hereby
ordered to take all actions required to complete this annexation.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 6th day of
May, 2015.
President
ATTEST:
__________________________________
District Secretary
EXHIBIT A – LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VILLAGE 3
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BEING PORTIONS OF LOTS 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42 AND 43 OF
MAP NO. 862, SITUATED IN THE OTAY RANCHO, CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOW:
PARCEL "A"
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 33, ALSO BEING THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (1) SOUTH 18°39'05" EAST, 725.29 FEET;
THENCE, (2) SOUTH 49°33'43" WEST, 3300.28 FEET;
THENCE, (3) SOUTH 10°47'43" WEST, 1662.34 FEET;
THENCE, (4) SOUTH 27°56'57" WEST, 1927.41 FEET;
THENCE, (5) NORTH 18°37'59" WEST, 2139.53 FEET;
THENCE, (6) SOUTH 71°58'20" WEST, 2576.37 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 95.00 FOOT RADIUS NON-
TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO WHICH BEARS SOUTH 86°23'52" WEST,
THENCE, (7) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 108°21'29" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 179.66 FEET;
THENCE, (8) SOUTH 75°14'39" EAST, 45.61 FEET;
THENCE, (9) NORTH 14°45'21" EAST, 62.00 FEET;
THENCE, (10) NORTH 75°14'39" WEST, 179.58 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 157.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (11) WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49°41'45" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 136.18 FEET;
THENCE, (12) NORTH 18°37'09" WEST, 49.45 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (13) NORTH 18°37'09" WEST, 1918.86 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (14) NORTH 60°02'08" EAST, 3064.28 FEET;
THENCE, (15) NORTH 02°20'50" WEST, 186.71 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (16) NORTH 83°25'04" EAST, 432.57 FEET;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE, (17) NORTH 78°24'41" EAST, 125.67 FEET;
THENCE, (18) NORTH 60°06'49" EAST, 301.89 FEET;
THENCE, (19) SOUTH 86°43'00" EAST, 313.96 FEET;
THENCE, (20) SOUTH 57°29'21" EAST, 245.28 FEET;
THENCE, (21) NORTH 71°57'57" EAST, 188.28 FEET;
THENCE, (22) NORTH 40°13'20" EAST, 358.46 FEET;
THENCE, (23) SOUTH 84°54'08" EAST, 480.07 FEET;
THENCE, (24) NORTH 71°57'57" EAST, 2640.32 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL "A" CONTAINING, 436.03 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL "B"
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 33, ALSO BEING THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (25) SOUTH 18°39'05" EAST, 5280.03 FEET TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 35;
THENCE, (26) SOUTH 18°39'29" EAST, 2945.12 FEET;
THENCE, (27) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 2831.05 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (28) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 2452.61 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (29) NORTH 18°37'59" WEST, 3499.98 FEET;
THENCE, (30) SOUTH 80°14'04" EAST, 600.89 FEET;
THENCE, (31) SOUTH 00°00'00" WEST, 280.40 FEET;
THENCE, (32) NORTH 90°00'00" EAST, 225.00 FEET;
THENCE, (33) SOUTH 00°00'00" WEST, 444.00 FEET;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE, (34) NORTH 90°00'00" EAST, 2010.44 FEET;
THENCE, (35) NORTH 30°05'08" EAST, 272.69 FEET;
THENCE, (36) NORTH 32°38'34" EAST, 983.31 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 220.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
THENCE, (37) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 44°38'09" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 171.39 FEET;
THENCE, (38) NORTH 77°16'43" EAST, 503.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 380.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE, (39) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°49'01" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 197.75 FEET;
THENCE, (40) NORTH 47°27'41" EAST, 1010.73 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 220.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
THENCE, (41) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°41'22" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 90.96 FEET;
THENCE, (42) NORTH 71°09'03" EAST, 27.82 FEET;
THENCE, (43) SOUTH 18°39'05" EAST, 119.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO PER
DEED RECORDED JUNE 24, 1912 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 33, ALSO BEING THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (25) SOUTH 18°39'05" EAST, 5280.03 FEET TO
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 35;
THENCE, (26) SOUTH 18°39'29" EAST, 2945.12 FEET;
THENCE, (27) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 2831.05 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (28) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 2452.61 FEET;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (44) NORTH 18°37'59" WEST, 1113.25 FEET TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE, (45) NORTH 18°37'59" WEST, 100.02 FEET;
THENCE, (46) NORTH 72°23'33" EAST, 690.84 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 306.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (47) EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14°30'00" AN
ARC DISTANCE OF 77.56 FEET;
THENCE, (48) NORTH 86°53'33" EAST, 491.40 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 266.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE, (49) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
60°01'41" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 279.19 FEET;
THENCE, (50) NORTH 26°51'52" EAST, 227.28 FEET;
THENCE, (51) NORTH 30°05'08" EAST, 858.20 FEET;
THENCE, (52) NORTH 90°00'00" EAST, 115.57 FEET;
THENCE, (53) SOUTH 30°05'08" WEST, 581.88 FEET;
THENCE, (54) SOUTH 59°54'52" EAST, 60.00 FEET;
THENCE, (55) SOUTH 30°05'08" WEST, 160.00 FEET;
THENCE, (56) SOUTH 80°03'19" WEST, 78.36 FEET;
THENCE, (57) SOUTH 30°05'08" WEST, 121.05 FEET;
THENCE, (58) SOUTH 26°51'52" WEST, 224.47 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 366.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY
THENCE, (59) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID, CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
60°01'41" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 383.96 FEET;
THENCE, (60) SOUTH 86°53'33" WEST, 491.40 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 206.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (61) WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14°30'00" AN ARC
DISTANCE OF 52.25 FEET;
EXHIBIT A – LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VILLAGE 8 EAST
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BEING PORTIONS OF LOTS 23, 24 AND 25, AND ALL OF LOT 26 OF
MAP NO. 862, SITUATED IN THE OTAY RANCHO, CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOW:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 23, ALSO BEING THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (1) SOUTH 18°40'35" EAST, 8171.36 FEET;
THENCE, (2) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 5283.51 FEET;
THENCE, (3) NORTH 18°39'29" WEST, 2945.12 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (4) NORTH 71°58'17" EAST, 2641.65 FEET;
THENCE, (5) NORTH 18°40'05" WEST, 4197.38 FEET;
THENCE, (6) NORTH 62°10'49" EAST, 1153.82 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 6500.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
THENCE, (7) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
02°43'27" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 309.05 FEET;
THENCE, (8) NORTH 20°05'27" WEST, 175.23 FEET;
THENCE, (9) NORTH 68°06'31" EAST, 26.62 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 590.55 FOOT RADIUS NON-
TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO WHICH BEARS SOUTH 67°55'01" WEST,
THENCE, (10) NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 32°19'04"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 333.10 FEET;
THENCE, (11) NORTH 10°14'05" EAST, 389.66;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (12) NORTH 71°57'57" EAST, 912.01 FEET; TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND GRANTED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PER DEED RECORDED JUNE 21, 2006 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2006-0437364, AND TO THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO PER DEED RECORDED JUNE 24, 1912 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 23, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EXISTING OTAY
WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY;
THENCE, (13) SOUTH 71°57'57" WEST, 22.33 FEET ALONG THE EXISTING BOUNDARY;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (14) SOUTH 71°57'57" WEST, 103.89 FEET TO THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF SAID EXCEPTION;
THENCE, (15) SOUTH 27°33'10" EAST, 300.99 FEET;
THENCE, (16) SOUTH 32°25'24" EAST, 200.66 FEET;
THENCE, (17) SOUTH 36°48'48" EAST, 103.07 FEET;
THENCE, (18) SOUTH 18°40'35" EAST, 2975.14 FEET;
THENCE, (19) SOUTH 07°59'39" EAST, 62.59 FEET;
THENCE, (20) SOUTH 11°40'53" EAST, 80.36 FEET;
THENCE, (21) SOUTH 16°27'16" EAST, 81.65 FEET;
THENCE, (22) SOUTH 20°31'45" EAST, 85.66 FEET;
THENCE, (23) SOUTH 20°53'25" EAST, 99.43 FEET;
THENCE, (24) SOUTH 04°19'35" WEST, 96.86 FEET;
THENCE, (25) SOUTH 06°03'54" WEST, 226.83 FEET;
THENCE, (26) SOUTH 79°30'28" EAST, 93.20 FEET;
THENCE, (27) SOUTH 02°23'12" EAST, 62.05 FEET;
THENCE, (28) SOUTH 01°33'20" WEST, 4.39 FEET;
THENCE, (29) NORTH 79°53'28" EAST, 89.26 FEET;
THENCE, (30) SOUTH 18°40'35" EAST, 101.13 FEET;
THENCE, (31) SOUTH 79°53'28" WEST, 126.70 FEET;
THENCE, (32) SOUTH 06°36'18" WEST, 16.91 FEET;
THENCE, (33) SOUTH 45°00'17" WEST, 100.80 FEET;
THENCE, (34) SOUTH 01°23'44" WEST, 254.14 FEET;
THENCE, (35) SOUTH 11°22'17" WEST, 98.82 FEET;
THENCE, (36) SOUTH 13°44'59" WEST, 93.60 FEET;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINED)
THENCE, (37) SOUTH 31°07'16" WEST, 92.60 FEET;
THENCE, (38) SOUTH 16°38'48" WEST, 74.80 FEET;
THENCE, (39) SOUTH 08°41'59" WEST, 84.09 FEET;
THENCE, (40) SOUTH 17°25'18" WEST, 91.60 FEET;
THENCE, (41) SOUTH 25°51'16" WEST, 85.46 FEET;
THENCE, (42) SOUTH 01°52'49" WEST, 296.08 FEET;
THENCE, (43) SOUTH 12°15'52" EAST, 114.59 FEET;
THENCE, (44) SOUTH 03°15'45" WEST, 104.75 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 208.85 FOOT RADIUS NON-
TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO WHICH BEARS SOUTH 77°41'31" EAST;
THENCE, (45) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
76°00'20" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 277.05 FEET;
THENCE, (46) SOUTH 16°12'01" WEST, 516.13 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 5124.33 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY;
THENCE, (47) SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°16'44"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 2081.99 FEET;
THENCE, (48) SOUTH 71°22'56" WEST, 269.10 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 5388.36 FOOT RADIUS
NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82°34'31" WEST;
THENCE, (49) NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°50'02"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 2241.46 FEET;
THENCE, (50) NORTH 16°21'17" EAST, 514.20 FEET;
THENCE, (51) NORTH 17°02'23" WEST, 144.58 FEET;
THENCE, (52) NORTH 12°54'18" EAST, 185.91 FEET;
THENCE, (53) NORTH 48°37'43" EAST, 24.40 FEET;
THENCE, (54) NORTH 46°00'30" EAST, 70.43 FEET;
THENCE, (55) NORTH 56°36'30" EAST, 23.20 FEET;
THENCE, (56) NORTH 07°07'55" EAST, 34.21 FEET;
THENCE, (57) NORTH 07°23'01" EAST, 669.55 FEET;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE, (58) NORTH 21°25'33" EAST, 151.67 FEET;
THENCE, (59) NORTH 08°31'16" WEST, 94.21 FEET;
THENCE, (60) SOUTH 71°41'28" WEST, 372.54 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 366.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY;
THENCE, (61) WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°32'56"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 176.21 FEET;
THENCE, (62) NORTH 80°45'36" WEST, 1642.06 FEET TO THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (63) NORTH 18°40'05" WEST, 113.16 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (64) SOUTH 80°45'36" EAST, 1695.02 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A 266.48 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY;
THENCE, (65) EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°32'56" AN
ARC DISTANCE OF 128.13 FEET;
THENCE, (66) NORTH 71°41'28" EAST, 389.79 FEET;
THENCE, (67) NORTH 08°31'16" WEST, 34.90 FEET;
THENCE, (68) NORTH 03°22'36" EAST, 409.30 FEET;
THENCE, (69) NORTH 06°16'18" WEST, 470.79 FEET;
THENCE, (70) NORTH 15°10'34" WEST, 376.40 FEET;
THENCE, (71) NORTH 09°51'12" WEST, 250.40 FEET;
THENCE, (72) NORTH 03°32'38" WEST, 12.23 FEET;
THENCE, (73) NORTH 01°56'51" WEST, 81.47 FEET;
THENCE, (74) NORTH 06°16'59" EAST, 21.48 FEET;
THENCE, (75) NORTH 10°08'21" EAST, 101.43 FEET;
THENCE, (76) NORTH 16°11'16" WEST, 23.17 FEET;
THENCE, (77) NORTH 27°57'54" WEST, 62.26 FEET;
THENCE, (78) NORTH 27°28'31" WEST, 81.51 FEET;
EXHIBIT A – LEGAL DESCRIPTION
VILLAGE 10
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BEING PORTIONS OF LOTS 13 AND 14, AND ALL OF LOT 15, OF MAP
NO. 862, SITUATED IN THE OTAY RANCHO, CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOW:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 13, ALSO BEING THE EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT
BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (1) SOUTH 18° 41'55" EAST, 8117.61 FEET TO THE
EXISTING OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY;
THENCE ALONG THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (2) SOUTH 71° 22'56" WEST, 841.02 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (3) SOUTH 71° 22'56" WEST, 1800.76 FEET;
THENCE, (4) NORTH 18° 41'14" WEST, 7168.62 FEET;
THENCE, (5) NORTH 46° 25'40" EAST, 495.29 FEET;
THENCE, (6) NORTH 34° 04'54" EAST, 732.68 FEET;
THENCE, (7) NORTH 42° 51'05" EAST, 265.78 FEET;
THENCE, (8) NORTH 50° 13'24" EAST, 315.59 FEET;
THENCE, (9) NORTH 41° 33'34" WEST, 72.14 FEET;
THENCE, (10) NORTH 71° 57'55" EAST, 1107.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO PER
DEED RECORDED JUNE 24, 1912 IN BOOK 570, PAGE 113 OF DEEDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 13, ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EXISTING OTAY
WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY;
THENCE, LEAVING THE EXISTING DISTRICT BOUNDARY, (11) SOUTH 18° 41'55" EAST, 3954.43 FEET TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE, (12) SOUTH 18° 41'55" EAST, 103.04 FEET;
THENCE, (13) SOUTH 85° 14'40" WEST, 37.52 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 206.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (14) WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20° 00'51"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 72.13 FEET;
THENCE, (15) SOUTH 65° 13'49" WEST, 465.15 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 206.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO OTAY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 22-27
GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
(CONTINUED)
(CONTINUED)
THENCE, (16) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°
00'14" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 36.05 FEET;
THENCE, (17) SOUTH 55° 13'35" WEST, 330.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 366.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE, (18) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°
00'10" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 127.94 FEET;
THENCE, (19) SOUTH 75° 13'45" WEST, 540.16 FEET;
THENCE, (20) SOUTH 79° 16'48" WEST, 605.95 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 149.18 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (21) WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19° 04'19"
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 49.66 FEET;
THENCE, (22) SOUTH 60° 12'29" WEST, 410.51 FEET;
THENCE, (23) NORTH 18° 41'14" WEST, 101.91 FEET;
THENCE, (24) NORTH 60° 12'29" EAST, 390.88 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 249.18 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
THENCE, (25) EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19° 04'19" AN
ARC DISTANCE OF 82.94 FEET;
THENCE, (26) NORTH 79° 16'48" EAST, 602.42 FEET;
THENCE, (27) NORTH 75° 13'45" EAST, 536.63 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 266.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE, (28) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°
00'10" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 93.03 FEET;
THENCE, (29) NORTH 55° 13'35" EAST, 330.20 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 306.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY;
THENCE, (30) NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°
00'14" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 53.51 FEET;
THENCE, (31) NORTH 65° 13'49" EAST, 465.15 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 306.48 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY;
EXHIBIT B – LEGAL MAP
VILLAGE 3
EXHIBIT B – LEGAL MAP
VILLAGE 8 EAST
EXHIBIT B – LEGAL MAP
VILLAGE 10
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: May 6, 2015
SUBMITTED BY:
Dan Martin
Engineering Manager
PROJECT: VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Award of As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection
Services Contract in an amount not-to-exceed $350,000 for
Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a professional As-Needed Construction Management and
Inspection Services (CMIS) contract to Alyson Consulting (Alyson)
and to authorize the General Manager to execute an agreement with
Alyson in an amount not-to-exceed $350,000 for a period of two (2)
fiscal years, FY 2016 and FY 2017 (ending June 30, 2017).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into
a professional As-Needed CMIS agreement with Alyson in an amount
not-to-exceed $350,000 for two (2) fiscal years, FY 2016 and FY 2017
(ending June 30, 2017).
2
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the services of a professional CMIS
consultant in support of the District’s Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) projects for two (2) fiscal years, FY 2016 and FY 2017 (ending
June 30, 2017).
The District has used an as-needed contract for construction
management and inspection over the last two fiscal years. The
annual effort of the As-Needed CMIS, used to support the District’s
CIP from January 2013 through January 2015, averaged hours that
equated to less than a full-time employee (FTE) at a rate of 0.4 FTE
per year. Use of the As-Needed CMIS will provide the District with
the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient
manner. An analysis of the CIP workload for FY 2016 and FY 2017
indicates a similar level of effort will be needed for construction
management services.
The District will issue task orders to the consultant for specific
projects during the contract period based on a detailed scope of
work. The consultant will then prepare a schedule, and fee estimate
for each task order assigned under the contract. Upon written task
order authorization from the District, the consultant shall then
proceed with the project as described in the scope of work.
The anticipated CIP projects that are estimated to require
construction management and partial inspection for the duration of
this contract are listed below:
CIP Capital Facilities Project
ESTIMATED
COST
P2267 36-Inch Main Pump Outs and Air/Vacuum
Ventilation Installations $10,000
P2529 711-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating $25,000
P2530 711-1 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating $30,000
P2537 Operations Yard Property Improvements $20,000
P2541 624 Pressure Zone Pressure Reducing Stations $15,000
R2110 944-1 Optimization and Pressure Zone
Modifications $10,000
S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation Rancho San Diego
Phase I $75,000
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Replacement $145,000
TOTAL: $330,000
The CMIS scopes of work for the above projects are estimated from
preliminary information and past projects. Therefore, staff
3
believes that a $350,000 cap on the As-Needed CMIS contract is
adequate, while still providing additional capacity for unforeseen
support needs by the District.
This As-Needed CMIS contract does not commit the District to any
expenditure until a task order is approved to perform work on a CIP
project. The District does not guarantee work to the consultant,
nor does the District guarantee that it will expend all of the funds
authorized by the contract on professional services.
The District solicited for Construction Management and Inspection
Services by placing an advertisement on the Otay Water District’s
website on January 27, 2015 with various other publications
including the San Diego Daily Transcript. Nine (9) firms submitted
a Letter of Interest and a Statement of Qualifications. The Request
for Proposal (RFP) for As-Needed CMIS was sent to the nine (9) firms
resulting in four (4) proposals received by February 27, 2015.
Alyson Consulting, San Diego, CA
Dudek & Associates, Inc., Encinitas, CA
Hill International, Inc., Ontario, CA
Bureau Veritas North America, Inc., Sacramento, CA
The five (5) firms located in San Diego that chose not to propose
are CALTROP Corporation, Hoch Consulting, Kal Krishnan Consulting
Services, Inc., Nuera Project Consulting, LLC, and Vali Cooper &
Associates, Inc.
In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals and interviewed the top three (3) firms
on March 26, 2015. Alyson received the highest score for their
services based on their experience, understanding of the scopes of
work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite
hourly rate. Alyson was the most qualified consultant with the best
overall rating or ranking score. A summary of the complete
evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
Alyson submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as required by
the RFP and staff did not find any outstanding issues. In addition,
staff checked their references and performed an internet search on
the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not
find any outstanding issues with the internet search. Alyson is
providing these services to the District under the District’s
current CMIS contract. Staff found that Alyson’s performance under
the current contract has been exceptional.
4
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The funds for this contract will be expended for a variety of
projects, as previously noted above. This contract is for as-needed
professional services based on the District’s need and schedule, and
expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by the
District for the consultant’s services on a specific CIP project.
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the
professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP
projects noted above.
The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover this
contract will be available as budgeted for these projects.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the
Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient
manner” and the District’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in
providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for
outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
General Manager
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Construction Management\As Needed CM & Inspection Svcs FY16, FY17\Staff Report\BD 5-6-15_As-Needed CMIS
FY16 - FY17_Staff Report\Staff Report, As-Needed Engineering Construction Management and Inspection Services 3-30-15.docx
DM:mlc
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
VARIOUS
Award of As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection
Services Contract in an amount not-to-exceed $350,000 for
Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee reviewed
this item at a meeting held on April 21, 2015. The Committee
supported Staff’s recommendation.
NOTE:
The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the
Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This
report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item,
or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed
from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board.
Qualifications of
Staff
Understanding of
Scope, Schedule
and Resources
Soundness and
Viability of
Proposed Project
Plan
INDIVIDUAL
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
AVERAGE
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
Proposed Rates*
Consultant's
Commitment to
DBE
AVERAGE
TOTAL
WRITTEN
Additional
Creativity and
Insight
Strength of
Project Manager
Presentation,
Communication
Skills
Quality of
Response to
Questions
INDIVIDUAL
TOTAL - ORAL
AVERAGE
TOTAL ORAL
30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 15 15 10 10 50 50 150
Poor/Good/
Excellent
Adolfo Segura 24 20 24 68
Armando Buelna 24 22 23 69
Steve Beppler 21 19 23 63
Brandon DiPietro 25 21 24 70
Kevin Cameron 24 20 23 67
Adolfo Segura 23 21 22 66 12 13 8 8 41
Armando Buelna 23 22 25 70 11 10 7 7 35
Steve Beppler 25 22 25 72 13 10 8 7 38
Brandon DiPietro 26 20 24 70 13 12 8 7 40
Kevin Cameron 25 22 24 71 13 12 8 8 41
Adolfo Segura 28 24 28 80 13 14 9 9 45
Armando Buelna 28 24 25 77 14 14 8 10 46
Steve Beppler 28 24 26 78 13 13 7 8 41
Brandon DiPietro 28 24 27 79 15 14 9 9 47
Kevin Cameron 26 24 28 78 14 14 8 8 44
Adolfo Segura 26 23 26 75 997732
Armando Buelna 26 23 26 75 12 12 7 7 38
Steve Beppler 27 23 25 75 12 10 6 6 34
Brandon DiPietro 27 21 25 73 12 12 7 7 38
Kevin Cameron 27 23 27 77 12 12 7 7 38
*The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for six positions. The sum of these six rates are noted on the table to the left.
Consultant Rate Position Score Note: The Review Panel does not see or consider rates when scoring other categories. Rates are scored by the PM, who is not on the Review Panel.
Bureau Veritas $820 3
Hill International $855 highest 1
Alyson Consulting $645 lowest 15
Dudek $825 3
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS
As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection Services
114
110
45 138 Excellent
TOTAL SCORE REFERENCES
ORAL
36
67
70
WRITTEN
93
70
39
NOT INTERVIEWED
ATTACHMENT B
MAXIMUM POINTS
Alyson Consulting
75 3
Y15
3
78
71
RATES SCORING CHART
Hill International
Bureau Veritas Y
Y 78
1 N
Dudek
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Construction Management\As Needed CM & Inspection Svcs FY16, FY17\Staff Report\BD 5-6-15_As-Needed CMIS FY16 - FY17_Staff Report\Exhibits\Exhibit B 3-26-15
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board
MEETING DATE: May 6, 2015
SUBMITTED BY:
Kevin Cameron
Associate Civil Engineer
PROJECT: VARIOUS DIV. NO. ALL
APPROVED BY:
Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering
German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager
Mark Watton, General Manager
SUBJECT: Award of As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services Contract to
Rick Engineering Company in an amount not to exceed $175,000
for Fiscal Years 2016 through 2018
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board)
award a professional As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services contract
to Rick Engineering Company (Rick Engineering) and to authorize the
General Manager to execute an agreement with Rick Engineering in an
amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for a period of three (3) fiscal years,
FY 2016 through FY 2018 (ending June 30, 2018).
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into a
professional As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services agreement with
Rick Engineering in an amount not-to-exceed $175,000 for a period of
three (3) fiscal years, FY 2016 through FY 2018 (ending June 30,
2018).
2
ANALYSIS:
The District will require the services of a professional traffic
engineering consultant in support of the District’s Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) for the next three (3) fiscal years, FY
2016 through FY 2018 (ending June 30, 2018). It is more efficient
and cost effective to issue an as-needed contract for traffic
engineering services which will provide the District with the ability
to obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient manner. This
concept has also been used in the past for other disciplines such as
engineering design, construction management, electrical, and
environmental services.
The District will issue task orders to the consultant for specific
projects during the contract period. The consultant will then
prepare a detailed scope of work, schedule, and fee estimate for each
task order assigned under the contract. Upon written task order
authorization from the District, the consultant shall then proceed
with the project as described in the scope of work.
The anticipated CIP projects that are estimated to require traffic
engineering services for the duration of this contract are listed
below:
CIP DESCRIPTION
ESTIMATED
COST
P2083 870-2 Pump Station Replacement $10,000
P2267 36-Inch Main Pumpouts and Air/Vacuum
Ventilation Installations $10,000
P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations $10,000
P2508 Pipeline Cathodic Protection Replacement
Program $20,000
P2528 30-Inch Potable Water Pipeline Manifold at
624 Reservoirs $15,000
P2552 South Barcelona Helix WD and Otay WD
Interconnection $10,000
P2553 Heritage Road Bridge Replacement and Utility
Relocation $5,000
S2024 Campo Road Sewer Main Replacement $20,000
S2033 Sewer System Various Locations Rehabilitation $35,000
TOTAL: $135,000
The traffic engineering scopes of work for the above projects are
estimated from preliminary information and past projects. Therefore,
staff believes that a $175,000 cap on the As-Needed Traffic
Engineering Services contract is adequate, while still providing
additional capacity for unforeseen support needs by the District.
3
This As-Needed Services contract does not commit the District to any
expenditure until a task order is approved to perform work on a CIP
project. The District does not guarantee work to the consultant, nor
does the District guarantee that it will expend all of the funds
authorized by the contract for professional services.
The District solicited traffic engineering services by placing an
advertisement on the Otay Water District’s website on January 14,
2015 and with various other publications including the San Diego
Daily Transcript. Eleven (11) firms submitted a letter of interest
and a statement of qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP)
for As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services was sent to all eleven
(11) firms resulting in nine (9) proposals received by February 12,
2015.
Advantec Consulting Engineers, San Diego, CA
Darnell & Associates, Inc., San Diego, CA
Dokken Engineering, San Diego, CA
Lin Consulting, Inc., San Diego, CA
Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers, San Diego, CA
Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc., San Diego, CA
Nasland Engineering, San Diego, CA
Rick Engineering Company, San Diego, CA
STC Traffic, Inc., Carlsbad, CA
The two (2) firms that chose not to propose were KOA Corporation, San
Diego, CA and LSA Associates, Carlsbad, CA.
In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, staff evaluated and
scored all written proposals. Rick Engineering received the highest
score for their services based on their experience, understanding of
the scope of work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their
composite hourly rate. Rick Engineering was the most qualified
consultant with the best overall rating or ranking. A summary of the
complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B.
Rick Engineering submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as
required by the RFP and staff did not find any significant issues.
In addition, staff checked their references and performed an internet
search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent
and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The funds for this contract will be expended for a variety of
projects, as previously noted above. This contract is for as-needed
4
professional services based on the District’s need and schedule, and
expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by the
District for the consultant’s services on a specific CIP project.
Based on a review of the financial budgets, the Project Manager
anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the
professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP
projects noted above.
The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover this
contract will be available as budgeted for these projects.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide
high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay
Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner”
and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the
forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable
rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.”
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
KC/RP:jf
P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Traffic Engineer\FY16-FY18\Staff Report\5-6-15-Staff Report-As-Needed
Traffic Engineer .docx
Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Various
Award of As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services Contract to
Rick Engineering Company in an amount not to exceed
$175,000 for Fiscal Years 2016 through 2018
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee
(Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on April 21, 2015.
The Committee supported Staff's recommendation.
NOTE:
The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee
moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent
to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any
discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to
presentation to the full Board.
ATTACHMENT B
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
Various
Award of As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services Contract to
Rick Engineering Company in an amount not to exceed
$175,000 for Fiscal Years 2016 through 2018
Qualifications of
Team
Responsiveness
and Project
Understanding
Technical and
Management
Approach
INDIVIDUAL
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
AVERAGE
SUBTOTAL -
WRITTEN
Proposed
Rates*
Consultant's
Commitment
to DBE
TOTAL
SCORE
30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 Poor/Good/
Excellent
Ming Zhao 25 23 22 70
Brandon DiPietro 26 21 24 71
Steve Beppler 21 19 25 65
Jeff Marchioro 24 17 25 66
Kent Payne 27 21 27 71
Ming Zhao 25 23 25 73
Brandon DiPietro 26 23 24 73
Steve Beppler 24 20 23 67
Jeff Marchioro 25 23 26 74
Kent Payne 24 19 24 67
Ming Zhao 28 25 26 79
Brandon DiPietro 28 24 28 80
Steve Beppler 28 24 27 79
Jeff Marchioro 28 24 28 80
Kent Payne 28 23 28 79
Ming Zhao 26 24 26 76
Brandon DiPietro 25 21 23 69
Steve Beppler 24 22 25 71
Jeff Marchioro 24 22 24 70
Kent Payne 26 23 27 76
Ming Zhao 25 22 23 70
Brandon DiPietro 25 21 23 69
Steve Beppler 22 21 23 66
Jeff Marchioro 22 20 24 66
Kent Payne 24 23 24 71
Ming Zhao 26 23 27 76
Brandon DiPietro 27 23 26 76
Steve Beppler 28 24 27 79
Jeff Marchioro 25 23 25 73
Kent Payne 24 23 27 74
Ming Zhao 25 20 25 70
Brandon DiPietro 24 20 23 67
Steve Beppler 24 22 24 70
Jeff Marchioro 24 23 26 73
Kent Payne 23 23 25 71
Ming Zhao 28 24 29 81
Brandon DiPietro 27 22 27 76
Steve Beppler 27 22 25 74
Jeff Marchioro 27 22 25 74
Kent Payne 29 24 27 80
Ming Zhao 26 23 26 75
Brandon DiPietro 26 21 24 71
Steve Beppler 25 23 24 72
Jeff Marchioro 24 23 26 73
Kent Payne 27 21 26 74
Rate Fee Position Score
1 $755 9
2 $650 12
3 $818 8
4 $630 12
5 $525 highest 15
6 $1,075 lowest 1
7 $670 11
8 $585 13
9 $600 13
*The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for six (6) positions. The sum of these rates are noted in the above table.
Note: Review Panel does not see or consider rates when scoring other categories. Rates are scored by the PM, who is not on Review Panel.
Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers
Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc.
Nasland Engineering
Rick Engineering Company
STC Traffic, Inc.
RATES SCORING CHART
Consultant
Advantec Consulting Engineers
Darnell & Associates, Inc.
Dokken Engineering
Lin Consulting, Inc.
ATTACHMENT BSUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS
As-Needed Traffic Engineering Services
Excellent
9 STC Traffic, Inc.73 13 Y 86
8 Rick Engineering
Company 77 13 Y 90
7 Nasland
Engineering 70 11 Y 81
6 Kimley Horn &
Associates, Inc.76 1 Y 77
5 Linscott Law &
Greenspan
Engineers
68 15 Y 83
4 Lin Consulting,
Inc.72 12 Y 84
3 Dokken
Engineering 79 8 Y 87
2 Darnell &
Associates, Inc.71 12 Y 83
MAXIMUM POINTS
1 Advantec
Consulting
Engineers
69 9 Y 78
WRITTEN
REFERENCES