The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-23-06 E&O Committee PacketOTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETIN-G and SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY,CALIFORNIA Board Room Friday June 23,2006 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. ". 1.ROLL CALL AGENDA 2.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA INFORMATION /ACTION ITEMS 3.APPROVE UTILITY AGREEMENT NO.31755 WITH CALTRANS FOR SR 905 UTILITY RELOCATIONS (RIENDEAU)[5 minutes] 4.AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO ZONDIROS CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $930,316 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SR 905 UTILITY RELOCATIONS,ALTA ROAD VAULTS AND METER BYPASS PRO- JECT (RIENDEAU)[5 minutes] 5.AWARD A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT TO PBS&J IN THE AMOUNT OF $119,580 FOR THE REVISION OF THE WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT FOR THE DISTRICT'S RECYCLED WATER DISTRIBU- TION SYSTEM (SCHOLL)[10 minutes] 6.ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.4082 AMENDING POLICY 26,DISTRICT ADMINI- STRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS (POSADA)[10 minutes] 1 7.AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO BLAIR RASMUSSEN CON- STRUCTIONIN THE AMOUNT OF $60,747 FOR THE REMODEL-OF THE ME- TER SHOP (RIPPERGER)[10 minutes] 8.APPROVE THE DISTRICT'S PARTICIPATION IN A JOINT WATER RECY- CLING FACILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $80,000 (KLAAHSEN)[10 minutes] 9.ADOPT THE OTAY MESA VALUE ENGINEERING STUDY (KLAAHSEN)[10 minutes] 10.ACCEPT MR.JOSE RODRIGUEZ'S REQUEST FOR A WAIVER OF FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,617 FOR AN UNAUTHORIZED SEWER CONNECTION (PORRAS)[10 minutes] 11.ADJOURNMENT BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: Gary Croucher Jose Lopez All items appearing on this agenda,whether or not expressly listed for action,may be deliberated and may be subject to action by the Board. If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to participate 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 June 21,2006,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 June 21,2006. 2 AGENDA ITEM 3 STAFF REPORT July 5,2006 2DIV. NO. P2440/ W030128 MEETING DATE: C.I.P.I G.F.NO: Regular Board /-:J'"..\ Marta ~~~~eau/Ron Ripperger ~ Mehdi Arbabian~~ Chief,Engineering and Planning Manny Magana Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations APPROVED BY: (Asst.GM): APPROVED BY: (Chief) SUBMITTED BY: TYPE MEETING: SUBJECT:Approve Utilty Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for SR 905 Utility Relocations GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorize the General Manager to execute Utility Agreement No 31755 with Caltrans for SR 905 Utility Relocations. (See attached Exhibit A for the project location,and Exhibit B for the Utility Agreement) COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization to execute Utility Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for relocation of District facilities 'within SR 905 right-of-way. ANALYSIS: Caltrans is currently in the process of completing land acquisition and design for SR 905 located within Otay Mesa.Part of this process is to relocate existing utilities where conflicts exist.The District's existing pipelines within public streets or easements will need to be relocated to accommodate the new freeway. Responding to a request from Caltrans,staff submitted claim letters for all five (5)crossings where the District has utility conflicts. Subsequently,the District received notices to relocate along SR 905. The District has prior and superior rights at each crossing.Three (3)of these crossings,at Gailes Boulevard/Dublin Drive,Pacific Rim Court,and Cactus Road have already been approved by the Board and General Manager.The agreement for relocations at Airway/Harvest Road is included in Exhibit B and ready for Board Approval.T~e last remaining agree~ent for utility relocations at Britannia Boulevard will be presented to the Board for approval in the near future. Caltrans will be performing the utility relocations at Airway/Harvest Road and Britannia Boulevard. Utility Agreement #31755: The scope of work for Utility Agreement No.31755 includes removing approximately 2,200 linear feet of 12-inch ACP,1,100 linear feet of 18-inch ACP,and 2,800 linear feet of 18-inch CCP located on Airway Road and Harvest Road within the SR 905 right-of-way.The work is necessary due to the lower finished grade elevations for the proposed freeway. This work also includes installation of approximately 600 linear feet of 12-inch CML&C,1,500 linear feet of 18-inch CML&C,and 2,800 linear feet of 20-inch CML&C pipe within the 871 pressure zone.The new pipeline will be installed inside a 60-inch steel casing for the protection of the carrier pipe as required by Caltrans.The installation of the pipeline,including the tie-ins,will not adversely affect any District customers.Staff will coordinate the necessary short-term shutdowns to minimize the impact on system operations. The calculated depreciation cost for the existing pipe and appurtenances is $89,778.The total design and inspection costs to be incurred by the District for this relocation is estimated at $125,081.The estimated construction cost for the new pipeline relocation is $2,929,650.However,the relocation includes betterment to the District's facilities by extending outside of the right of way and also an increase in size from the existing pipeline. The District is responsible for the cost of the betterment estimated to be $97,500.The District has prior rights,therefore Caltrans is responsible for the design,inspection,and construction costs:minus depreciation and betterment.The total District's liability is $62,197. Consistent with the conditions of all other utility agreements between the District and Caltrans,actual costs may not exceed 125 percent of the estimated cost in the agreement without a revised amendment being executed. FISCAL IMPACT: The total budget for ClP P2440 is $2,260,000,as approved in the 2007 budget process.The actual costs paid on this project as of June 13, 2006,are $380,402.Total expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date,including this contract,are approximately 2 $1,409,697.Based on the cost analysis performed,staff-does not anticipate that .a budget increase is necessary.Attachment B l.s a table of listing commitments,expenditures,and projected final cost for the project. Finance has determined that 100%of the funding for this project is currently be available from the Replacement Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This project supports the District's Mission statement,"To provide the best quality of water and wastewater services to the customers of Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,efficient,and sensitive manner ...If This project fulfills the District's Strategic Goals No.1 -Community and Governance,and No.5 -Potable Water,by maintaining proactive and productive relationships with the project stakeholders and by guaranteeing that the District will provide for current and future water needs LEGAL IMPACT: Legal counsel reviewed this Utility Agreement for consistency and content. HJ/RR/MA.vm Attachments P,\WORKING\CIP W440-P2440\Staff Reports\BD 07-05-06 I-90S Utility Agreement 31755.doc 3 ATTACHMENT A r··~mB:iECTjpR"ojECT:r"Ap·p·~~:;;e····Utiii t Y·Ag~e·eme";;t··N~·~·3"·i·755··"·;i"th"·c~j t·~a;;s for SR i 905 Utility Relocations !i COMMITTEE ACTION: On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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. ..........j 1 SUBJECT/PROJECT: Otay Water District ATTACHMENT B Approve Utility Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for SR 905 Utility Relocations Date Updated:June 13,2006 P2440 -SR 905 Utility Relocations Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal VendorI Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $2,260,000.00 I Planning Studies $- Labor $56,251.66 $56,251.66 $56,251.66 Environmental $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Land Acquisition $15,000.00 $12,000.00 $3,000.00 $15,000.00 Bowen &Associates Land Acquisition $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Easement Purchases Preliminary Design $- Temp Labor $111.65 $111.65 $111.65 Sedona Staffing $$ _.- Legal 35.00 35.00 Burke,Williams,Sorensen LP Total Planning $71,363.31 $68,398.31 $35,000.00 I$103,398.31 Design Consultant $226,900.00 $192,095.11 $34,804.89 $226,900.00 HDR Inc Consultant $67,315.00 $61,838.25 $5,476.75 $67,315.00 Hirsch &Company $$$$..-In House/Labor 97,439.30 97,439.30 20,000.00 117,439.30 Advertise &Award $2,429.00 $1,730.19 $698.81 $2,429.00 OCB Reprographics -- Advertise &Award $69.60 $69.60 $.$69.60 San Diego Daily Transcript Advertise &Award $328.00 $328.00 Union Tribune -- Advertise &Award $3,173.40 $3,173.40 Reimbursement $(55,279.38)$(55,279.38)$-$(55,279.38)CalTrans La Media Rd Consultant Reimbursement $(69,200.00)$(69,200.00)Utility Agreement #31755 Consultant Reimbursement $(60,700.00)$(60,700.00)Utility Agreement #31756 Consultant Reimbursement $(27,440.00)$(27,440.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Consultant Reimbursement $(27,441.00)$(27,441.00)Utility Agreement #31758 G;'nSiJila;;t rfeimburs-;;ment $(10,354.00)$(10,354.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Labor Reimbursement $(25,200.00)$(25,200.00)Utility Agreement #31755 Labor Reimbursement $(16,800.00)$(16,800.00)Utility Agreement #31756 Labor Reimbursement $(15,120.00)$(15,120.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Labor Reimbursement $(8,400.00)$(8,400.00)Utilit0greement_#317~__ Labor Reimbursement $(5,040.00)$(5,040.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Total Design $338,873.52 $297,893.07 $(201,213.15)$96,679.92 Construction In House/Labor $13,151.83 $13,151.83 $-$13,151.83 Construction Contracts $711,316.00 $-$711,316.00 $711,316.00 Zondiros Corporation Construction Manager $170,000.00 $170,000.00 ~--~AccpUciose-out $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Materials $46.47 $46.47 $..$46.47 CW.Mcgrath Materials $155.16 $155.16 $.$155.16 HSS Rentx Inc ----Materials $258.00 $258.00 $.$258.00 Penhall Co Professional Legal Fees $500.00 $500.00 $..$500.00 First American Tille Labor Reimbursement $17,850.00 $(17,850.00)$(17,850.00)Utility Agreement #31755 labor Reimbursement $(11,900.00)$(11,900.00)Utility Agreement #31756 LaborReimbursement $11,000.00 $(11,000.00)$(11,000.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Labor Reimbursement $11,000.00 $(11,000.00)$(11,000.00)Utility Agreement #31758 Labor Reimbursement $5,902.00 $(5,902.00)$(5,902.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Construction Cost --$97,500.00 $97,500.00 $97,500.00 Utility Agreement #31755 Construction Cost $809,820,00 $809,820.00 Utility Agreement #3175~.__-Construction Reimbursement $(125,865.00)$(125,865.00)Utility Agreement #31757 __ Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $2,260,000.00 I Construction Reimbursement $(!74,320.00)$(174,320.00)UtilityAgreement#31758 Construction Reimbursement'$(18,400.00)$(18,400.00)Utility Agreement #31759 CM Reimbursement $12,831.00 $(12,831.00)$(12,831.00)Utility Agreement #31755 CM Reimbursement $(10,956.00)$(10,956.00)Utility Agreement #31756 CM Reimbursement $7,978.00 $(7,978.00)$(7,978.00)Utility Agreement #31757 CM Reimbursement $7,978.00 $(7,978.00)$(7,978.00)Utility Agreement #31758 CM Reimbursement $4,421.00 $(4,421.00)$(4,421.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Depreciation $89,778.38 $89,778.38 $89,778.38 Utility Agreement #31755 Depreciation $7,652.92 $7,652.92 Utility Agreement #31756 Depreciation $2,167.41 $2,167.41 $2,167.41 Utility Agreement #31757 Depreciation $3,465.00 $3,465.00 $3,465.00 Utility Agreement #31758 Depreciation $2,161.61 $2,161.61 $2,161.61 Utility Agreement #31759 Total Construction $999,459.86 $14,111.46 $1,493,460.32 $1,507,571.78 Grand Total $1,409,696.69 $380,402.84 $1,327,247.17 $1,707.650.01 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••H••••H•••W ,•••••,_ ___••••••••••••••___••••••••••! EXHIBIT A r·su·BJE-cTipI~6JEcT:······_··I····App-~~;e···_··U"t-"i-i·it·Y:-···Ag~·e-ement--··No···~-·"'··3-i7··5 5········;"i·ti;:-··ca·i·t...~an·s·········:E""o~·SR I ;I I 905 Utility Relocations I ; i..__w••,.w,_••••"••_._~.,,_•••__.•••_••••n'~~._l ~__~__ _. 5 ................; BROWNFIELD SR-905 UTILITY RELOCATIONS \~.\\',- \CD PACIFIC RIM CT (APPROVED)\ UTILITYAGREEMENT NO.31758 --@ CACTUS RD (APPROVED) UTILITYAGREEMENTNO.31759 BRITANNIA BLVD UTILITYAGREEMENTNO.31756 GAlLES BLVDIDUBLIN DR (APPROVED) UTILITY AGREEMENTNO.31757 I AIRWAY RDIHARVEST RD l J,UTILITYAGREEMENTNO.31755 I OTA Y WATER DISTRICT y-OCEAN VIEWHILLSPKWY ,\OTAYMESA RD~OSEDSR-905 PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP ...,... ~! ~ a~~ ~ N.C~, "~~~!~L ...JC:I~j..J~t:ti::I:J:~~~_J..J.ll__.1JJ.U..!J.u.J.~.liiii=::=::::::J ~~~~:> "-u/~;:j !'l:>i£'-......... EXHIBIT A ,EXHIBIT B ......'j", r"....SU'BJE·C'TiPROJECi':i Approve Utility Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for SR !905 Utility Relocations l.......................__.......................................1........................__...............1 6 STATE OFCALIFORNIA BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSINGAGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION District 11 P.O.BOX 85406 MS-S-54 SAN DIEGO,CA 92186-5406 (619)688-6682 FAX (619)688-2570 February 2,2006 Otay Water District Ron Ripperger 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley,CA 91978-2096 Dear Mr.Ripperger: ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER.Governor -Flex your power! Be energy efficient! 11-SD-905 KP R9.3/R18.62 E.A.:091821 Utility No.31755 Enclosed are four originals and one photocopy of the Utility Agreement No.31755 covering the relocation ofwater facilities to accommodate the STATE'S construction on Route 905,E.A.091821. If you find the Agreement satisfactory,please execute and return all original copies,and keep the "Owner File Copy".Please return the originals to this office for further processing.The Owner File copy is for your files until we can return a fully executed original document to you. Ifyou have any questions,please contact me at (619)688-6682. ~ Debbie Rodriguez Utility Coordinator Right ofWay Division Enclosure "Caltrans improves mobility across California" STATE OF CALIFORNIA.DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UTILITY AGREEMENT RW 13-5 (Rev.10/95) Page 1 of4 Dist Co Rte KP (P.M.)EA 11 SD 905 R9.3/R18.62 091821 (R5.8/Rll.6) Federal Aid No.:A905 (015) Owners File;CU12242 FEDERAL PARTICIPATION:On the Project X Yes gNo On the Utilities (gI Yes o No UTILITY AGREEMENT NO.__---..;31;;;.;.7~55~_DATE _ The State ofCalifornia acting by and through the Department ofTransportation,hereinafter called "STATE"proposes to construct a new freeway (phase 1)in San Diego County inSan Diego from 1.1 Ian east ofthe Route 905/805 separation to 0.6lan west ofthe Mexico Border and OTAY WATER DISTRICT,hereinafter called "OWNER",owns and maintains water facilities.within the limits ofSTATE's project Itis hereby mutually agreed that: I.WORK TO BE DONE In accordance with Notice to Owner 31755 dated 1112/06,STATE shall relocate OWNER's water faciliiies as shown on OWNER's Plan Nos.CU12242 dated 11/16/05 and 12/16/05,which plans are included in STATE's Contract Plans for the improvement ofState Route 905,E.A.091824 which,by this reference,are made a part hereof.Deviations from the OWNER's plan described above initiated by either the STATE or the OWNER.shall be agreed upon by both parties hereto under a Revised Notice to Owner.Such Revised Notices to Owner,approved by the STATE and agreed to/acknowledged by the OWNER,will constitute an approved revision ofthe OWNER's plans described above and are hereby made a part hereof.No work under said deviation shall commence prior to written execution by the OWNER. ofthe Revised Notice to Owner.Changes in the scope ofthe work will require an amendment to this Agreement in addition to the revised Notice to Owner.OWNER shall have the right to inspect the worle by STArn's contractor during construction.Upon completion ofthe work by STATE,OWNER agrees to accept ownership and maintenance ofthe constructed facilities and relinquishes to STATE ownership ofthe replaced facilities. n.LIABILITY FOR WORK: The existing facilities are lawfully maintained in their present location and qualifY for relocation at STATE expense under the provisions ofSection 703 ofthe Streets and Highways Code. III.PERFORMANCE OF WORK: Owner shall have access to all phases ofthe relocation work to be performed bySTATE,as described in Section I above,for the puxpolle ofinspection to ensure that the work is inaccordance with the specifications contained in the Highway Construction Contract;however,all questions regarding the work being perfonned will be directed to STATE's Resident Engineer for their evaluation and final disposition. " UTILITY AGREEMENT (Cont.) RW 13·5 (Rev.10/95) IV.PAYMENT FOR WORK: Page,20f4. I UTILITY AGREEMENT NO.31755 The STATE shall pay its share ofthe actual and necessary cost ofthe herein-described work within90 days after receipt oftive (5)copies ofOWNER's itemized bill in quintuplicate,signed by a responsible official ofOWNER's organization and prepared on OWNER's letterhead;compih:d on the basis ofthe actual and necessary cost and expense.The OWNER shall maintain records ofthe actual costs incUITed and charged or allocated to the project in accordance with recognized accounting principles.The OWNER's billing cost to STATE is $35,303.00. The STATE shall perform the work under Section I above at no expense to OWNER except as hereinafter provided. It is understood that the relocation as herein contemplated includes betterment to OWNER's facilities by reason of increased capacity in the estimated amount of$97,500.00,said amount to be deposited upon demand in the San Diego Office ofthe Department ofTransportation,prior to the time that the subject freeway contract bid is opened by the STATE.The final betterment payment shan be calculated based upon the actual quantities installed as determined bytbe STATE's engineer,and the current cost data as determined from the records ofthe OWNER.In addition,the OWNER shall credit the STATE at the time ofthe fmal billing for all the accrued depreciatin and the salvage value of any material or parts salvaged and retained by OWNER. Not more frequently than once amonth,but at least quarterly,OWNER will prepare and submit progress bills for costs incw-red not to exceed OWNER's recorded costs as ofthe billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work.Payment ofprogress bills not to exceed the amount ofthis Agreement may be made under the terms ofthis Agreement.Payment ofprogress bills Which exceed the amount ofthis Agreement may be made after receipt and approval by STATE ofdocumentation supporting the cost increase and after an Amendment to this Agreement has been executed by the parties to this Agreement. The OWNER shall submit afinal bill to the STATE within 360 days after the completion ofthe work described in Section I.above.Ifthe STATE has not received a final bill within 360 days after notifiction ofcompletion of OWNER's work described in Section I.oftbis Agreement,and STATE has delivered to OWNER fully executed Director's Deeds,Consents to Common Use or Joint Use Agreements as required for OWNER's facilities,STAm· will provide written notification to OWNER ofits intent to close its file within 30 days and OWNER hereby aclmowledges,to the extent allowed by law,that all remaining costs will be deemed to have been abandoned.Ifthe STATE processed a final bill for payment more than 360 days after notification ofcompletion ofOWNER's work, payment ofthe late bill may be subject to allocation and/or approval bythe California Transportation Commission. The final billing shall be in the form ofanitemized statement ofthe total costs charged to the project,less the credits provided for in this Agreement,and less any amounts coveredby progress billings.However,the STATE shall not pay fInal bills which exceed the estimated cost ofthis Agreement without documentation ofthe reason for the increase ofsaid cost from the OWNER and approval ofdocumentation by STATE.Except,ifthe ·final bill exceeds the OWNER's estimated costs solely as the result ofa revised Notice to Owner as provided for in Section I,a copy ofsaid revised Notice to Owner shall suffice as documentation.In either case,payment ofthe amount over the estimated cost ofthis Agreement may be subject to allocation and/or approval by the California Transportation Commission. In any event ifthe final bill exceeds 125%ofthe'estimated cost ofthis agreement,an Amended Agreement shall be executed by the parties to this Agreement prior to the payment ofthe OWNER's final bill.Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result ofdeviations from the work described in Section I ofthis Agreement shall have the prior concurrence ofSTATE. Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by the OWNER for a period ofthree years from the date ofthe f'mal payment and will be available for audit by State and/or Federal auditors.Owner agrees to comply with Contract Cost Principles and Procedures as set forth in48 CFR,Chapter 1,Part 31,et seq.,23 CPR, Chapter I,Part 645 and/or 18 CFR,Chapter 1,Parts 101,201,et a1.Ifsubsequent State and/or Federal audit detennines payments to be unallowable,OWNER agrees to reimburse STATE upon receipt ofSTATE billing. -'1 r UTILITY AGREEMENT (Cant!) '~W 13-5 (Rev.10/95) V.GENERAL CONDITIONS: Page 30f4 .I UTILITYAGREEM:gNT NO.31755 ·f . All c~sts accrued by OWNER as a result ofSTATE's request ofJ1.Ule 15,2004 to review,studyandlorpreplll:e relocation plans and estimates for the project associated with this Agreementmay be billed pursuant to the terms and conditions ofthis Agreement. If STATE's project which precipitated this Agreement is canceled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by OWNER,STATE will notify OWNER in writing and STATB reserves the right to temrinate tIlls Agreement byAmendment.The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement All obligations ofSTATE under the tenns ofthis Agteement are subject to the passage ofthe annual Budget Act by the State Legislature and the allocation ofthose funds by the California Transportation Commission. OWNER shall submit a Notice ofCompletion to the STATE within 30 days ofthe completion ofthe work described herein. It is understood that said highway is a Federal aid highway and accordingly,23 CFR,Chapter 1,Part645 is hereby incorporated into this Agreement **"'* UTILITY AGREEMENT (Cant.) "RW 13-5 (Rev.10/95) Page 4 of 4 IUTILITY AGREEMENT NO.31755 THE ESTIMATED COST TO STATE FOR ITS SHARE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED WORK IS $2=.,9=-64"'-'-',6=5=0.=00"----,-_ CERTIFICATION OF FUNDS I hereby certify upon myown personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for theperiod and purpose ofthe expenditure shown here. ~/t1t?/r30·;;«XJ£ I /HQ Accountin~Officer Date ,/ITEM CHAP STAT FY AMOUNT "J(,.60-30I~dlJ;;A,Sf diJtJ!>".~,~.s:.fOJ.00()o<./()-iii.0 FUND TYPE EA AMOUNT Design Funds $ Construction Funds 091824 $2,964,650.00 RWFunds 091829 $35,303.00 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the above parties have executed this Agreement the day and year above written. OWNER:OTAYWATERDISTRICT ........,.,, .~. """...".'.".• .0-·'••••••,."0'•••••••~~.:-:.::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.-.......'.Ob Date Date ~~By bieRodrlgUeZ Utility Coordinator By _ Name/Title STATE: DO NOT WRITE BELOW -FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY EA FUNDING VERIFIED: R1W Planning and Management Date Debbie Rodriguez Utilit Coordinator Date Distribution:3 originals to R/W Program Accounting &Analysis 3 originals returned to R/W Planning &Management STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER,Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT-11 p,0,BOX 85406 MS-54 iAN DIEGO,CA 92186-5406 )HONE (619)688-6682 FAX (619)688-2570 January 23,2006 @..~"..., !lit : • I ..\~ Flex yourpower! Beenergy efficient! Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley,CA 91977-7299 Attention:Ron Ripperger 11-SD-905 KP:R5.8-R11.6 EA:091821 UTIL NO:31755 Enclosed is Notice to Owner No.31755 covering the relocation of water facilities on Airway Road and Harvest Road. Ifyou have any questions,please call me at (619)688-6682. o~ DEBBIE RODRIGUEZ Utility Coordinator Right ofWay Division Enclosures "Caltrans improves mobility across California" SDSTATE OF CALIFORNIA.DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE TO OWNER RW 13-4 (Rev.9/96) PAGE 1 OF 1 NOTICE TO OWNER ..; Number 31755 Dis!.County Route KP(PM)-E.A. 11 SO 905 (R5.8-R11.6)091821 Federal Aid No.:A905 (015) Owners FiI~: Date:1-12-06 I Freeway:[X I Yes [I No To:OtayWater District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley,CA 91977-7299 Because of the State Highway construction project:In San Diego County in sari Diego from 1.1 KM east of the Route 905/805 separation to 0.6 KM west ofthe Mexico border. Which affects your facilities:Water facilities (12-inch and I8-inch potable water pipelines)on Airway Road . and Harvest Road. You are hereby ordered to:Relocate water facilities as shown on Caltrans Utility Sheets U-601 to U-607. Your work schedule shall be as follows:The relocation work is to be completed by State's Contractor as·· listed in the Special Provisions in accordance with the Construction Contract 091824. Notify Luis Jerez,at telephone number (619)688-6473,48 hours prior to initial start ofwork,and 24 hours prior to subsequent restart when your work schedule is interrupted. Liability for the cost ofthe work is:100%STATE 0%OWNER.Liability is based on Section 703 ofthe . Streets and Highway Code. PEDRO ORSO-DELGADO DISTRICT DIRECTOR cc:Resident Engineer Pennlts . RIW Byi·~~.L!!::.:::+~~47a.~~~~ DAYID W.JOHN DISTRICT UTIL THIS NOTICE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PERMIT.OBTAIN AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT BEFORE STARTING WORK. TOTALSHEETS KILOMETER POSTTOTALPROJECT PLANS APPROVAL DATE REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER HDR ENGINEERING,INC.8690 BALBOA AVENUESUITE200SANDIEGO,CA 92123-1300 11 TI'4 Strrt.of Colifemio or its offioors or ogent.sholl not bt1 r.sponsibl.for fhs OCCITocy orcarpl.tens..of .'sctronic cr>pl..of thispia!sheot. Collrons iIfJIf ms aweb slle!To gel10 1m web slle,go 16:tttp://wwwtJat.ca1}W 1'1';0 U-607 PHASE -1 PLAN /,.;;>'--\----t->~~\a0?'U-606 co??'EXIST FIRE HYDRANT TO REMAIN ..I IEXIST450-mm-~--"--------------------E-X-I S-T-4-5-0-m-m-+t-e"J~-;;-::---- ACP WATER ACP WATER ABANDON PIPELINE ABANDON PIPELINE EXIST 600 mm ~ ACP WATER "L2!9-~(D , ...1 0w>-VlCD>0 wW0:.Vl W>I-W «0:0 WI-«0 SCALE:1:4060 o ~ I lDoI "',.1111 00WW>->->->-00........lLlL ~~-<-0>- <Doo'":::, -<'"..,'",.. "'<D UTILITY PLAN WATER RELOCATION SCALE AS SHOWN U-6 01 AR'~I!=PROJECT 80&04020o SCALE:1:4000 PHASE - 3 PLAN SCALE:1:4000 PHASE -2 PLAN EXIST 450 mm 4-&lli-ACP WATER - ABANDON PIPELINE STEEL WATER EXIST 300 mm ~ACP WATERABANDONPIPEL!NE ~qR.~EDUCED PLANS ORIGINAL U-602 U-603 150 mm ..(..9.!!-t-FIREHYDRANTASSEMBLY 150 mm ~FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY 150 mm ~.F IREHYDRANTASSEMBLY NEW 300 ITVTl £..lZ.!+ CML &C WELDEDSTEELWATER ED- ,.._- Z22S ED - ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN EXIST 250 1TVTl. ~ACP WATERABANDONPIPELINE 1.LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES TO BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR IN FIELD. 2.SEE STAGE CONSTRUCTION AND TRAFFIC HANDLING PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. 3.THIS PLAN ACCURATE FOR WATERLINE RELOCATION WORK ONLY. 4.FINAL LOCATION OF AIR RELEASE VALVES,BLOW-OFFS AND CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATIONS SHALL BE PER PLAN AND WATER AGENCY STANDARDS. 5.MINIMUM COVER OVER PIPELINES SHALL BE 1070 mm ~UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6.EXISTING WATERLINE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE.CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE EXISTING WATERLINE ONLY·AS REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF .WORK. 7.CONTRACTOR'TO TEST CATHOO'IC PROTECTION SYSTEM AND PROVIDE REPORT TO OTAY WATERDISTRICT. S.(j)=TRACER WIRE. NOTES: l-XCI x----Ui II:W>o zCI-IIIWQ '->->-t;l CD CD 1-0«w 0-lZ W::>c.:>><::u-U-lVl W«w :x:uo u x ~i=•I-15 x a...I/)~. ~::s I-:z~a::•a..LLlQ •Z~ i...J•U )(~ ..I=!~~"I/) h -,.e~ii.... 3+80.543 2 ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERSUNLESSOTHERWISESHOWN PLANS APPROVAL DATE HDR ENGINEERING,INC. 8690 BALBOA AVENUESUITE200SANDIEGO,CA 92123-1300 REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER DTAY WATER DISTRICT2554SWEETWATERSPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY,CA ~1~78-2096 UTILITY PLAN WA TER RELOCATION SCALE AS SHOWN U -6 02 Co/Irons IlON !'tJs a web slle!Ta gello Ire web slle,go 10:1ttp:IIWWWlial.caijfN ",.Sfrtt.of Colifornlo or its officers or agents shalf not 1>0 ,"_ibl.for tho oca.I'"Q;y or CCIfJ,.tene..of .Iectronic rx:p/es of this p/~shoot. I'!"c EXIST TELEPHONE WATERLINE DATA [8]6 OR BEARING RADIUS LENGTH LENGTH(M)(FT) CD .S 88°45'33"E N/A .. ..2.00 ~ 11}S 46°14'27"E N/A .4.08 ~rn S 88°45'01"E N/A·433.36 1421.79 1 STA 2+63.000 ACP WATERABANDONPIPELINE 2 STA 2+67.840 EXIST 450 mm· +10:::Ow01-.« ""3:: EXIST GAS STA 1+10.000 5 EASEME R/W ____J'--_ INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATION PER DETAILS.150 mm ~FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY.CONNECT TO THE NEW450mmrt~WATER MAIN.MAINTAIN IN SERVICEDURINGCONSTRUCTION.CONNECT TO EXISTING.SEE DETAILS FOR AIRWAY ROAD CONNECTION. CONNECT 50 mm ~.WATER METER (IRRIGATION)TO NEW 450 mm ~WATER MAIN..r NSTALL 150 .mm (-&!!-t BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY PER DET AILS.INSTALL 100 mm ~COMBINATION AIR RELEASE AND VACUUM VALVE PER DETAILS.INSTALL 450 mm t-t-tr-l x 300 mm ~TEE.NEW 450 mm tt-B-"t CML &CWELDED STEEL ·WATER. INSTALLATION NOTES: 161 162 ffi ~ Cl ~W Vl W>I- W « 0:::Cl WI-« Cl :z:0i=-cl- x ~:z:-ce::I- ~ I-:z:~l-e::-c~.....Q l-ICl x---:n tl:w>o zCl-IIIWC x _ <Doo'"IZ...",..,0I··N ....--i·~--..1·tN._-_., !r·--·-·· TOTALSHEETS UTILITY PLAN WATER RELOCATION U-603SCALEASSHOWN PLANS APPROVAL DATE ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERSUNLESSOTHERWISESHOWN HDR ENGINEERING,INC. 8690 BALBOA AVENUE SUITE 200SANDIEGO,CA 92123-1300 OTAY WATER DISTRIC7 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARDSPRINGVALLEY.CA 91978-2096 . ......!......_.H~•......_.•._._... ____._..__~..__Jjj;)lJ~:~~~;j~~~:~~J~~~l~~mn~:~l~l::::::=::E::~~E\~~iT~i(~~H~... \.._.".__. 7htt St(Jfr,ofCalifornia or its officers cr agents shall not be nJsponsib/~for thtJ aca.rocy or ~/~tene$$of electronic caples of this plan s~t. Cal/rans 00/{ms aweb sile!To gelto 1m web site,go 10:filp:l/wwwdolixujw I!rlC STA 5+53.900=110+20 CALTRANS.INSTALL TWO 450 mm U-a-'I 45°BENDSAND450mm~~BUTTERFLY VALVE,CLASS 250SEEDETAILS EXIST TELEPHONE 75 mm CP1 GAS END CONSTRUCTION WATERLINE DATA []6-OR BEARING RADIUS LENGTH LENGTH(M)(FT) '.m S 88°45'01"E N/A 433.36 ~ El N 43°50'26"E..N/A 2.48 ~ [II S 88°50'26"-E N/A 11.97 ~ STA 5+34.000 .COMBINATiON AIR RELEASEANDVACUUMVALVE PLAN SCALE:1:500 ....__.:..:.....E.ASEMfi;NT S 4+24.360 BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY 5 STA 4+08.900 4 COMBINATION AIR RELEASEANDVACUUMVALVE STA 4+16.310 AIRWAY ROAD 6 STA 20+000 UTILITY CORRIDOR .INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATION PER DETAILS. 150 mm ..(..G--!J-)FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY.CONNECT TO THENEW450mm.tJ--a-'I WATER MAIN.MAINTAIN IN SERVICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.CONNECT TO EXISTING 300mm L~ACP WATER MAIN. SEE DETAILS FOR AIRWAY ROAD CONNECTION.. . INSTALL 100 lnm (A-!'1 COMBINATION AIR RELEASE AND VACUUM VALVE. INSTALL 150 mm (...&!'1 BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY. INSTALL .450 mm l.J...&"1 x 510 mm l2-e-'J x 450 mm (.j..8-'J TEE WITH 1 -'510 mm 12~BF'V,2 -450 inm LJ.-a-!-'1 BFV . INSTALLAT10NNOTES: ffi CJ ~Z SiC I--wi~ l5z ~w ~w~o~->I£C <w~en ~I S',;;"i;;':'.._-_..-----t .-f.....---.86"--.4~0'O .+20 +40 ....j ,--_•.-..-__....- -..-..__-__-_'-'" U;.mJ!~::! x ~ I.IJ-I--!li<;:1-- -Vl ::~~ x '->->-oenw en 1-0 0«w...JZ w ::J<.:l :.:u-u ...JtIl w«w ::cUOu N I-W :r £CCl x----WIII..,a:w>0 z « Cl-III enwa-~.... x x Q) ~a >-wtil ..en >a ww0::til W>I- W « 0:::a wI-«0 o IDo IN ';" '"ooNIZ"''''...,0,.. N~,.,,., 'III 00WW>->->->-00...J...JlLlL ~~."'-0>- TOTALSHEETS ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERSUNLESSOTHERWISESHOWN UTILITY PLAN W AT·ER RELO.CA TION· SCALE AS SHOWN U-6 04 Co/trans fIOH OOS a web site!To gfillo IhJ web site,go to:hltp://www.dol.cal)CN WATERLINE DATA 0 6 OR BEARING RADIUS LENGTH LENGTH(M)(FT) ~1 N 0°.25'13"E N/A 2.00.~ m N 44°34'47"W N/A 2.37 J-ri<r [II N 0°25'13"E N/A 173.42 ~ pjrle NEW 450 mmCML&C WELDED.STEEL WATERSEESHEETU-602 +60+40 eo60 +20 4020 11 +00+80+60 F:'2R.I'lEI?UCED PLANS OR [G[NAL 0 +40+2010+00 INSTALLATION NOTES: INSTALL CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATION PER DETAILS. CONNECT TO EXISTING 250mm .~ACPWATER MAIN. SEE DETAILS FOR HARVEST ROAD CONNECTION. INSTALL 50 mm ~2"'1 COMBINATION AIR RELEASE AND VACUUM VALVE. INSTALL.l00 mm (AY')BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY PER DETAILS. INSTALL 450 mm (.1-8"')x450 mm (.-1-8"')x300mm (J.-l")TEE2 -450 mm (.J-&""')BUTTERFLY VALVES,CLASS 250 . 1 -300mm CJ.-2-"')GATE VALVE .®INSTALL 300mm(~LGATEVALVE. PVC SEWEREXIST400 mm .'~)~~CD '.'-==--- BEGIN CONSTRUCTIONA0+00 =STA 16+30 CALTRANS)INSTALL 300 mm ~GATE VALVEANDTWO300mm~45°BENDSSEECONNECTIONDETAILS '->-oeo >-w ro.1--04:W 0....JZ W::::>t:>><:u-u....J(/)W 4:W ::r:uo u 0 >-w (/)eo .->0 wW0::(/) W>.1-- W 4: 0::0 W I--4: 0 I-:zLJ.JW~O -<-fu>Q ~I W ~CJ) :za::0.....-i-.J-<(..) x ~.~!!I-<;::1-•Vl "",dP N W I-~:x:WC) x-...;--.., III .. D:lIJ>0 <C zC)CJ) III -lIJ :::»a ... x I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIEA091821 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARDSPRINGVALLEY,CA 91978-2096' Calf/ons IXJII IrJs aweb sIte!To gel 10 fhJ.web slle,go 10:(1://wwwJiot£O!](J{ JCU 11224 "'"Sh1fIi ofCQIIfDi7JIQ or its D,flC#n or agents 8II01I1l<tt 1M respalSiblo for "."..-'r...-----t-the_oca.rac_...;y_or_',.."""",,-IO_fOflO_S8_Q'_O_lectroo__"_"...;COf1:..,i...;.e'_Q;..';...fh;..."s.;.PI;...'If/;..'_hee_f.;..'I ...........:""~.._~-" I!rlC ACP WAT{R HOR ENGINEERING,INC. .~..........•..~~i~/~~~OA AVENUESANDIEGO,CA 92123-1300 UTILITY PLAN W ATERRELOCATION S'CALEAS SHOWN U-6 05 6·~":·:·:;"·:·"~:··.::=.~.:~.~:.::::::.::"~~¥:iQ:9.:::::::..:::::::.:::::::£?~p.:::::::::'::::::::::::'±4::Q:::::=::::::=::==±~.Q""~. EX I ST TELEPHONE /( INSTALLATION NOTES: §INS.TAL.L .·CATHOD.IC PROTECTION TEST S.T.ATI.ON PERDETAI LS.2 INSTALL 150 mm Wl BLOW'-OFF ASSEMBLY PER DETAILS. 3 CONNECT 50mm (7)WATER METER (LRRIGATION) TO NEW 510mm(~l·WATER MAIN..ill INSTALL100mm (AJ")COMBINATION RELEASE AND VACUUM VALVE~ UTILi TYCORR IDOR OF CAL TRANS UTILITY CORRIDOR ALIGNMENT EXIST FENCE LENGTH(FT)LENGTH(M) WATERLINE DATA BEARING RADIUS x " 0w>-l/)ro >a ww0::l/) W>I-W <>:cr:0 WI-«a ,>-omw1-0 0«w...Jz w ::;)0 ::.::u-u...JV!w«w ::I:uo u N W 20+06.096 UTILITY CORRIDORI-a:J:4+16.310 AIRWAY ROADClWx----l/l .~IXlJJ>0 <CzCl...(J)VIUI -Q ;:).... CJ ~z-i=a:-<t-W~WxV)Z:z-<-e:CJ \:Is z t-W:z~LLI9i0a--wCI >a:w-<U>-"·t,~-I....J-<U u-n o <DoIN '"g NIZ...",-,0 I"N'"--AA1111 00....w1-1-1-1-00....1....1...... .,~~ ...-01- TOTALSHEETS ENGINEER HDR ENGINEERING,INC. B690BALBOA AVENUESUITE200. SAN DIEGO,CA 92123-1300 OTAY WATER DISTRICT 2554.SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARDSPRINGVALLEY,CA 9197B-2096 Tho Stat.of Californlo ar Its offlcm-s ar agents sholl not,,"rOsfJOMlbl.far tho ocarocy ar eatrJ/.tenoss of .Iectronic copi..of this pial shMt. Caltrans n<M OOS aweb site!To gelto tiIJ web site.go to:tttp://wwwilotlXll}CN AO604020o ;f'--'-'iM...R •• PHASE 1 UTILITY PLAN }-.-- PROFILE 'WATER'RELOCATION ..~ H •U-606 \ EXIST TELEPHONE FOR REDUCED PLANS'ORIGINAL ·CALTRANS INSTALLATION NOTES: CD,'I,NST,ALL CAT,HODICPROTECTION TE,ST STATION PER DETAILS.GD'INSTALL 150 mm~}BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY PER DETAILS. \\.e-----,-e~·~_e ~""""""...:=:::::t~::::.::t:._._::::l::::::: ·~i.~:~~r::=::~::±"$:~::::::::=:::':::::::r._~9::~~::::::~:::?4:£Q:Q::::::::::~::::±Q _±', m3 iE:;;bj ~:I:Cl x--"--Ul.11: ILl>0 zCl-Ul ILl U)C -~ .J ~CJ i=Z <-I-~13 wa..x V')W:z<ze:.- l:5 CJ I-Z:z W~I-0::W<a..0LaJQ-> <~-W:z U)13....::i i<u x ~ LaJ-I-~~-..., ~=lit~~~i.- WATERLINE DATA 6.OR BEARING RADIUS .LE(NMG)TH LENGTH(FT) x N 9°26'44"W N/A 248.93 ~ 6°44'36"LEFT 154.57 18.19 ~ N 16°11'20"W N/A 21.59 ~ 16°54'33"RIGHT 145.43 42.92 ·1-4G-;-B7 .N 0'!43'13"E N/A 30f.69 ~ o :go':'z~:: I"~~ ~A 1111 00ww............gg lLlL ~~-t-o ... TOTALSHEETS UTILITY PLAN .WATER RELOCATION U-607SCALEASSHOWN HDR ENGINEERING,INC. 8690 BALBOA AVENUE· SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO,CA 92123-1300 Tho StoltJ of Colifornlo or its officers or agents shll/flOI ~responslbl.for ~ocanx:y orCO/IPI.teness of ./octr«Iic copl••of this plm sheot.. Coltrons fI(NI ros 0 web site!To getto tm web site.go to:1ttp:/I'MWILio!l:o.(jw <Do IN ...................."-~"_,"••"_••••••••••••M •..·~.··.·7 ~riC 600 mm STA 14+66.230 (CALTRANS OTAY MESA ROAD) 5TA 28+31.000 4 STA 28+32.000 STA 28+35.220 .. +40+2028+00 .GAS· +80+60 INSTALLATION NOTES: <D INS.TALL CATHODIC PROTECTION TEST STATION PER DETAILS. @ CONNECT EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT. CONNECT TO THE NEW 510 mm (2.e'1 WATER MAIN. MAINTAIN IN SERVICE DURING CONSTRUCTION. @ INSTALL 100 mm .u")COMBINATION AIR RELEASE AND VACUUM VALVE. @ INSTALL 150 mm l8"'l BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY PER DETAILS. IN SERVICE UNTIL NEW LINE IS ACTIVATED EXIST 250 mm' EXIST WATER TO REMAIN -'-------SCALE:Horiz 1:500 .....~"_,_,•.~.:0;;.::.:.:::.t::.:::::j,:::::,:L..,."__.".Y.~.r~!..".L:".~.2 "_J..:.,,::,r:.::.::;:",,;'::,:.:..1.:::.t·:.::.I :.1."_(":·.:.L,'::.:::'."1.'.,,":I:·;:·:'i::..~::t ,::·::I::::::~J.~::.:~:~j.:::::;jj}~:::f 1:::':.':.,."""".".."""",."".""""."""".""".."""""""."""""_.1.._"1 +40 EX I ST 900 mm U&"1 GAS OIH ELECTRIC ___[__=_-----J....-- I-WW~FH~~~~~~t~~..~~-~~~~~~~::=vc~~4 wwr7+~'o~o;--:=JI--~~~~:::::::+=~~;:;;~;::;;;;±~:=~~;';;;:~~~t1~o . o \rtF=-=4=~=.i;:::M;t-\ N WATERLINE DATA 0 6 OR BEARING RADIUS LENGTH LENGTH~(M)(FT) IT2J N 0043'13"E NIA 301.69 ~8'l 5]N 45°47'06"E NIA 10.57 ~ ~N 0°47'06"E NIA 3.00 ~ EXIST 450 mm STEEL WATER REMOVE WATERLINE INSTALL NEW 510 mm ~ CML &C WELDED STEEL WATER ~~::::::::I::::.~:~::~::~::::::~:::::::::::i::::::::·.~.._M+.•_~_'St-;;tl~~'r'-"'-"""'''-'-'''''''''~'''''''''''''''',--~-,, _.."_.,-.~_._.-_,_-, . ..·..•..·,··..·1'·· •.._·_..·,···•·",..·_""··..,,..-_."___-_-___-"-" " ".•_-"_" "-", " "-"..-".""".""""",, J f~~~)+80 27+00 "+20mi8i>b!" (;) W>-IIIen>(;)Wwa::III .W>I- W <{a::(;) wI-<{ (;) 8 ~<~130-X VI:z<c::~ ::s ~:z~c::W<0-0LLIC-> <a: :z W 13 en L&..-j...J<(..,) x·.~ LLI-~~~-I!?.dI~i ....N -l :r W ::cCla:xc __-U VI W l-n:'<l:w ..,~>0 Z c:tCl-VIw en0-::;).... x AGENDA ITEM 4 July 5,2006 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board ~ SUBMITTED BY:Ron Ripperger,Engineering Design Manager ~art~Riend~au,~ss~~tJnt Civil Engineer APPROVED BY:Mehdl Arbablan /jUflH (Chief)Chief,Engineefi~g and Planning MEETING DATE: C.I.P.I G.F.NO: P2440, P2454 DIV. NO. 2 APPROVED BY: (Asst.GM): SUBJECT: Manny Magana Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations Award of a Construction Contract for the SR 905 Utility Relocations,Alta Road Vaults and Meter Bypass Project (P2440, P2454) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board award a construction contract to Zondiros Corporation in the amount of $930,316 for the construction of the SR 905 Utility Relocations,Alta Road Vaults and Meter Bypass Project (See Exhibit A-1 and A-2 for the project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization to award a construction contract to Zondiros Corporation for the construction of the SR 905 Utility Relocations,Alta Road Vaults and Meter Bypass Project. ANALYSIS: This construction project consists of three (3)main items of work within two (2)CIP projects.The first project (CIP P2440)is part of Caltrans'ongoing efforts to relocate utilities where conflicts exist within their SR 905 right-of-way in Otay Mesa Caltrans is currently in the process of completing the land acquisition and design for SR 905.The District's exis~ing pipelines within public streets or easements will need to be relocated to accommodate the new freeway.The second project (CIP 2454)consists of replacing the covers on two (2)existing seismic vaults in Alta Road in Otay Mesa along with installation of a recycled water master meter bypass and vault in the District's Use Area. The SR 905 scope of work includes installation of a 12-inch CML&C welded pipe,re~oval and disposal of an existing asbestos ceme~t pipe along with installation of miscellaneous appurtenances.The work will take place in Pacific Rim Court,Gailes Boulevard,Dublin Drive, and Cactus Road. The vault covers in Alta Road are deteriorated to a point where District staff receives phone calls on a regular basis from the County of San Diego regarding the condition of the covers and that they now pose a hazard.The Meter Bypass project is required because the system has only been operated in one direction,from the Chapman Facility to the Central Area System.Presently,the District can not pump recycled water from the 944-1 Pump Station into Pond 1 and 4. Installing the meter bypass will allow the District to move South-Bay Water Reclamation Facility water into our system.This is anticipated to begin in Spring 2007.Staff included this work in the SR 905 project design and bid to help expedite the work. Hirsch &Company,the District's consultant,designed the pipeline and developed the bid documents.In-house staff designed the vault lid replacement and meter bypass work.The project was advertised for bid on May 19,2006;subsequently one addendum was sent out to all bidders and plan houses to address contractors'questions during the bidding period.Bids were publicly opened on Tuesday,June 13, 2006,with the following results: ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE CONTRACTOR 1.Zondiros Corporation,San Marcos 2.Ortiz Corporation,Chula Vista 3.BRH -Garver West,San Diego $744,537 TOTAL BID AMOUNT $930,316 $964,433 $1,089,735 The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for conformance to the contract documents.The lowest bidder,Zondiros Corporation,submitted a responsible bid and holds Class A,B &C-27 Contractor's Licenses as required by the contract documents. The District has no past experience with Zondiros Corporation. References were checked and Zondiros Corporation was found to be a highly rated company.Staff also verified that it can comply with the bonding requirements for this project.Per the public competitive bidding process,staff is recommending the award of a construction contract to Zondiros Corporation in the amount of $930,316. 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The total budget for CIP P2440 is $2,260,000,as approved in the 2007 budget process.The actual costs paid on this project as of June 13, 2006,are $380,402.Total expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date,including this contract,are approximately $1,707,650.Based on the cost analysis performed,staff does not anticipate that a budget increase is necessary.Attachment B-1 is a table listing commitments,expenditures,and projected final cost. The total budget for CIP P2454 is $465,000,as approved in the 2007 budget process.No actual costs have yet been paid on this project. Total expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date, including this contract,are approximately $330,000.Based on the cost analysis performed,staff does not anticipate that a budget increase is necessary.Attachment B-2 is a table listing commitments,expenditures,and projected final cost Finance has determined that 100%of the funding for this project is currently available from the Replacement Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This project supports the District's Mission statement,"To provide the best quality of water and wastewater services to the customers of Otay Water District,in a professional,effective,efficient,and sensitive manner ...".This project fulfills the District's Strategic Goals No.1 -Community and Governance,and No 5 -Potable Water,by maintaining proactive and productive relationships with the project stakeholders and by guaranteeing that the District will provide for current and future water needs. LEGAL IMPACT: None /tJg)JJC- GEfneral Manager HJ/RR/MA:vm Attachments P,\WORKING\CIP W440-P2440\Staff Reports\BD 07-05-06,I-905 Bid Award.doc 3 .l ATTACHMENT A [5UBJE'cTipRoJE'CT:"T"A~'a'r'd""oi'''a''c''o~'s'tr;:i~t'Ion"'Eon't'r'~'~t''''f;;r''the''SR'-''9'65'Ut'i1 i t Y ;I Relocations,Alta Road Vaults and Meter Bypass ProjectI1(P2440,P2454) L 1.. COMMITTEE ACTION: On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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. """""""1 ! SUBJECT/PROJECT: Otay Water District ATTACHMENT B-1 Approve Utility Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for SR 905 Utility Relocations Date Updated:June 13,2006 P2440 -SR 905 Utility Relocations Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $"'~i~q;Ql>,Q;Qq •...j;ij~Rijirls·· Studies $- Labor $56,251.66 $56,251.66 $56,251.66 Environmental $2,000.00 $2,000.00 Land Acquisition $15,000.00 $12,000.00 $3,000.00 $15,000.00 Bowen &Associates Land Acquisition $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Easement Purchases Preliminary Design $- Temp Labor $111.65 $111.65 $111.65 Sedona Staffing Legal $35.00 $35.00 Burke,Williams,Sorensen LP Total Planning $71,363.31 $68,398.31 $35,000.00 $103,398.31 Design Consultant $226,900.00 $192,095.11 $34,804.89 $226,900.00 HDR Inc Consultant $67,315.00 $61,838.25 $5,476.75 $67,315.00 Hirsch &Company In House/Labor $97,439.30 $97,439.30 $20,000.00 $117,439.30 Advertise &Award $2,429.00 $1,730.19 $698.81 $2,429.00 OCB Reprographics Advertise &Award $69.60 $69.60 $-$69.60 San Diego Daily Transcript Advertise &Award $328.00 $328.00 Union Tribune Advertise &Award $3,173.40 $3,173.40 Reimbursement $(55,279.38)$(55,279.38)$-$(55,279.38)CalTrans La Media Rd Consultant Reimbursement $(69,200.00)$(69,200.00)Utility Agreement #31755 Consultant Reimbursement $(60,700.00)$(60,700.00)Utility Agreement #31756 Consultant Reimbursement $(27,440.00)$(27,440.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Consultant Reimbursement $(27,441.00)$(27,441.00)Utility Agreement #31758 Consultant Reimbursement $(10,354.00)$(10,354.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Labor Reimbursement $(25,200.00)$(25,200.00)Utility Agreement #31755 Labor Reimbursement $(16,800.00)$(16,800.00)Utility Agreement #31756 Labor Reimbursement $(15,120.00)$(15,120.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Labor Reimbursement $(8,400.00)$(8,400.00)Utility Agreement #31758 Labor Reimbursement $(5,040.00)$(5,040.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Total Design $338,873.52 $297,893.07 $(201,213.15)$96,679.92 Construction In House/Labor $13,151.83 $13,151.83 $-$13,151.83 Construction Conttacts $711,316.00 $-$711,316.00 $711,316.00 Zondiros Corporation Construction Manager $170,000.00 $170,000.00 Accptlclose-out $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Materials $46.47 $46.47 $-$46.47 C.w:Mcgrath Materials $155.16 $155.16 $-$155.16 HSS Rentx Inc Materials $258.00 $258.00 $-$258.00 Penhall Co Professional Legal Fees $500.00 $500.00 $-$500.00 First American Title Labor Reimbursement $17,850.00 $(17,850.00)$(17,850.00)Utility Agreement #31755 Labor Reimbursement $(11,900.00)$(11,900.00)Utility Agreement #31756 LaborReimbursement $11,000.00 $(11,000.00)$(11,000.00)Utility Agreement #31757 LaborReimbursement $11,000.00 $(11,000.00)$(11,000.00)Utility Agreement #31758 Labor Reimbursement $5,902.00 $(5,902.00)$(5,902.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Construction Cost $97,500.00 $97,500.00 $97,500.00 Utility Agreement #31755 Construction Cost $809,820.00 $809,820.00 Utility Agreement #31756 Construction Reimbursement $(125,865.00)$(125,865.00)Utility Agreement #31757 Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $2,260,000.00 - Construction Reimbursement $(174,320.00)$(174,320.00)UtilityAgreement #31758 Construction Reimbursemenf $(18,400.00)$(18,400.00)Utility Agreement #'31759 CM Reimbursement $12,831.00 $(12,831.00)$(12,831.00)Utility Agreement #31755 CM Reimbursement $(10,956.00)$(10,956.00)Utility Agreement #31756 CM Reimbursement $7,978.00 $(7,978.00)$(7,978.00)Utility Agreement #31757 CM Reimbursement $7,978.00 $(7,978.00)$(7,978.00)Utility Agreement #31758 CM Reimbursement $4,421.00 $(4,421.00)$(4,421.00)Utility Agreement #31759 Depreciation $89,778.38 $89,778.38 $89,778.38 Utility Agreement #31755 Depreciation $7,652.92 $7,652.92 Utility Agreement #31756 Depreciation $2,167.41 $2,167.41 $2,167.41 Utility Agreement #31757 Depreciation $3,465.00 $3,465.00 $3,465.00 UtilityAgreement #31758 Depreciation $2,161.61 $2,161.61 $2,161.61 UtilityAgreement #31759 Total Construction $999,459.86 $14,111.46 $1,493,460.32 $1,507,571.78 Grand Total $1,409,696.69 $380,402.84 $1,327,247.17 $1,707,650.01 -- ATTACHMENT B-2 SUBJECTIPROJECT:Approve Utility Agreement No.31755 with Caltrans for SR 905 Utility Relocations Otay Water District Date Updated:June 13,2006 P2454 -Alta Road Vaults and Meter Bypass Expenditures Outstanding Projected Final Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $465,000.00 Planning Studies $-$--_.__._---- Labor $-$- -~~~-~~ Environmental $-$--_._---_.......__....--_.. Land Acquisition $-$- -~-~--.._~-------- Preliminary Design $-$- Total Planning $-$-$-1$- Design Consultant $-$----_....__...__..._- In House/Labor $36,000.00 $36,000.00 ---_._------------ Advertise &Award $25,000.00 $25,000.00 Total Design $-$-$61,000.00 $61,000.00 I Construction In House/Labor $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Construction Contracts $219,000.00 $-$219,000.00 $219,000.00 Zondiros Corporation Construction Manager $-$- .--.....------_.----...., Accptlclose-out $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Total Construction $219,000.00 $-$269,000.00 $269,000.00 Grand Total $219,000.00 $-$330,000.00 $330,000.00 6 RDEIK P2440 P2454 cg ",- ~OWD BOUNDARY PACIFIC RIM CT. GAlLES BLVDIDUBLIN DR. CACTUS RD. SEISMIC VALVE VAUL T. METER VAULTI CHECK VALVE VAULT.SEE EXHIBITA-2. CD ® o o ® SR 905 UTILITY RELOCATIONS ALTA ROAD VAULTS AND METER BYPASS BROWNFIELD Tijuana Estuary VICINITY MAP ..,... PROJECT SITE ,« OTAYMESARD..r======,~~~~;~~~.~:~~ ~-~~ :;; i~~r....-_II.-......w...I..............---..........O...TA-Y WA TER 0 IS TR leT :; ~u~;;i'l~.---_...&_-----------------------------'"'-EXHIBIT A-1 'll :0- C">......, .... C"> Mission Bay '"C"> t'] :0- :<: IMPERIAL BEACH VICINITY MAP RECYCLED WATER POND #1 BORROWPIT -,--_-1 POND #2 5 METER VAULT/ CHECKVALVE VAULT AULD GOLFCOURSE P2440 P2454 SR 905 UTILITY RELOCATIONS ALTA ROAD VAULTS AND METER BYPASS ".t£ ~~ot; ~ ~'i N,"~:li i r-----~!1-__~_~~~~~i1.W;~~~[---_-:":::"~_--1~t j OTA Y WATER DISTRICT~:; Q.~~~._--_.._--------------------_.....<i EXHIBIT A-2 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5 .-.----- TYPE MEETING:Regular Board MEETING DATE:July 5,2006 1,2,4SUBMITTEDBY: APPROVED BY: (Chief) APPROVED BY: (Ass!.GM): SUBJECT: Robert Scholl ~.~PROJECT:P1253-007000 DIV.NO. Associate Civil Engineer Rod posada~~~ Chief,Development Services Manny Magana Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations Award of a Professional Engineering Services Contract for the Revision of the Waste Discharge Permit for the Otay Water District Recycled Water Distribution System GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorize the award of a professional engineering services contract in the amount of $119,580.00 to PBS&J for the revision of the Waste Discharge Permit for the Otay Water District Recycled Water Distribution System. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for award of a professional engineering services contract in the amount of $119,580.00 to PBS&J for the revision of the Waste Discharge Permit for the Otay Water District Recycled Water Distribution System. ANALYSIS: On June 29,1992,the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)adopted Order No.92-25,"Waste Discharge Requirements for Otay Water District,Jamacha Basin Facility, San Diego County".This is the most recent revision to the District's waste discharge permit that conditions the operation of the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility and the District's recycled water distribution system.The permit covers discharge specifications,reclaimed water use provisions, monitoring provisions,and reporting requirements. The RWQCB has stated that it prefers to update waste discharge permits for recyled water systems about every 10 years to reflect Title 22 changes in the California Code of Regulations that should be included in the permits.However,the primary purpose for updating our waste discharge permit is to include the use of recycled water from the City of San Diego's South Bay Water Reclamation Plant in the District's recycled water distribution system. The District is requesting professional consulting services for the preparation of an engineering report that will provide detailed information regarding the production of recycled water at the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility and the transmition and distribution of this and the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant's recycled water through the District's recyled water distribution area.This consultant shall also assist the District in negotiating the conditions of the revised waste discharge permit with the RWQBC and the State of California Department of Health Services. The District advertised for these services on March 23,2006 (see Attachment B).A total of eight engineering firms responded by submitting letters of interest and current copies of their companies'Statement of Qualifications.Requests for Proposals (RFP)were submitted to these firms on April 11,2006. On May 5,2005,three proposals were received from the following firms: •Carollo Engineers (Carollo) •Miller Brooks Environmental (Miller) •PBS&J Five firms (PB Water;Camp,Dresser,McKee;Lee &ROi Brown and Caldwelli Simon Wong Engineering)chose not to propose. The consultants'proposed costs for providing the engineering services as requested in the RFP are given below.Staff's cost estimate for this contract,as provided in the recycled operating budget,was $120,000. •Carollo: •Miller: •PBS&J: $122,843.20 $141,080.00 $119,580.00 In accordance with the District's Policy 21,five staff members from Engineering,Development Services,and Operations evaluated 2 and scored all written proposals,with the consultants'proposed costs comprising 20%of their total scores.A summary of the complete consultant evaluation is shown in Attachment C.PBS&J received the highest total score and thus has been selected by the review panel as the most-qualified consultant. Staff checked PBS&J's references and was given positive feedback on their past performances on similar work.A preliminary schedule for the work is given in Attachment D.Staff recommends the award of a professional services contract to PBS&J for a not-to-exceed amount of $119,580.00. FISCAL IMPACT: The committed funds for be expended in FY 2007. engineering services in STRATEGIC GOAL: this contract totaling $119,580.00 will $120,000 was included for professional the FY 2007 recycled operating budget. This project supports the District's strategic goal of creating a comprehensive environmental program that is proactive in response to environmental compliance. LEGAL IMPACT: None. !JM«JArL-General Manager Attachments RS/RP:vm P,\WORKING\CIP W253 NPDES\WO 30101\Staff Reports\BD 07-05-06,Waste Discharge Permit Revision.doc 3 ATTACHMENT A rstiBjECTipR6jECi:TA~a'~d'C;f--~""P'~;f es s i or:;:'~i"-E'~gir:;:~e~i~g'-'s-e-~~'i"~e s"CC;;;t~'ac-t-'-'fo~---' i I the Revision of the Waste Discharge Permit for the Otay iWater District Recycled Water Distribution System _..1 'n•••u .,•••••••••••••••••••_•••••••_••••••••••••_,•••••_••••••_,••••••_•••••••_••w",."•••••.H••••••_••,••••••••_••••••••••H••••••w••••••••_••••_._•••••••••••••••_n '••HW•••••••_••••,_••••••••••••••~,.,•••,••••••••_••••_•••,••••••H__•••••_.~.,'"_••,._•••••••••••••"•••••••••••1 COMMITTEE ACTION: On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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-1 ADVERTISEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SERVICES Otay Water District (OWD)will require the services ofa professional engineering finn (Consultant)to provide professional services for its Ralph W.Chapman Wastewater Recycling Facility (RWCWRF)Waste Discharge Permit revision (CIP PI253-007000).The RWCWRF's existing Waste Discharge Pennit was last revised on July 2,1992.The State ofCalifornia Regional Water Quality Control Board has stated that it prefers to update Waste Discharge Permits every 10 years.The major reasons for updating the RWCWRF Waste Discharge Permit are to: 1.Reflect Title 22 changes in the California Code ofRegulations that should be included in the Waste Discharge Permit,and 2.Include the use ofrecycled water from the South Bay Water Reclamation Plant when OWD begins taking water from the South Bay Plant in January 2007. Interested candidates are required to send a Letter ofInterest and maintain a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ)current within the calendar year to Veronica Munoz,Otay Water District,2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard,Spring Valley,California 91978-2096.Ifa firm has submitted a SOQ to the District within the calendar year and the qualifications remain current and accurate,then only a Letter ofInterest is required. Deadline to submit Letter ofInterest and SOQ will be at 4:00 p.m.on April 5,2006.A Pre- Proposal Meeting will be held at OWD on April 20,2006. Technical questions regarding the Professional Consultant Services should be referred to the Otay Water District Project Manager Robert Scholl at (619)670-2219. Dated this 23rd day ofMarch. Rod Posada,P.E. ChiefofDevelopment Services OTAY WATER DISTRICT ,,' ",ATTACHMENT B-2 Veronica Munoz Otay Water District/Engineering &Develop 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley CA 91978-2096 IN THE MATTER OF Professional Consultant Serv ..~.;'.. ....r :;'; ';,;,'. CASE NO. I,Eboni N.Hines,am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen years,and not party to or interested in the above entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of the San Diego Transcript,a newspaper of general circulation,printed and published daily,except on Saturdays and Sundays,in the City of San Diego,County of San Diego and which newspaper has been adjUdged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego,State of California,under the date of January 23, 1909,Decree No.14894;and the Statement of Qualifications is a true and correct copy of which the annexed is a printed copy and was published in said newspaper on the following date(s),to wit: March 27 I certify under penalty of perjury that the forgoing is true"and correct. ATTACHMENT C SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS BY PANEL MEMBERS Waste Discharge Permit Revision for the Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility Project No.P1253·007000 -<WRITTEN )J ORAL*)..... Knowledge of TOTAL AVERAGE Qualifications and Consultant's jurisdictional Completeness in Proposed schedule References experience Proposed agencies,local area addressing forthe work and Consultant's Additional creativity,Understanding of SCORE SCOREexperienceofProposalCostStrengthofprojectPresentation,Qualityof response Consultant's relevant to method to environmental Estimate requested demonstrated ability commitment insightto scope,schedule,communicationskills to questionstypeofprojectaccompiishworkconcerns,and information in ItemV to complete projects to EBE and SBE issues manager assigned personnel resources beingconsidered regulatory ofthe RFP within budget requirements SCORE 15 10 15 10 20 15 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 100 **v" Robert Scholl 13 8 15 10 19 11 9 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 90 Rod Posada 13 8 13 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 87Carollo 87.2MartaRiendeau129128N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 85Engineers Gary Stalker 12 9 13 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 87 Dale Kreinbring 14 7 14 8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 87 Robert Scholl 11 6 12 2 16 10 5 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 67 Rod Posada 10 5 11 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 65MillerBrooks 64.4MartaRiendeau10555N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 61Environmental Gary Stalker 10 5 10 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 67 Dale Kreinbring 8 5 8 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 62 Robert Scholl 12 8 14 8 20 13 8 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 88 Rod Posada 13 9 14 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 91 PBS&J Marta Riendeau 8 7 10 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 80 88.0 v" Gary Stalker 12 8 11 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 86 Dale Kreinbring 15 9 15 10 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 95 --- *Oral Interviews are for projects with fees over $200,000. **If fees are less than $200,000,then total score is 100 points. P:\WORKING\CIP W253 NPDES\WO 30101\RFP Rating Form Project Schedule Otay Water District Waste Discharge Permit Revision Ralph W.Chapman Water Recycling Facility ATTACHMENT D 6 Final Engineering Report and permit application packet 10 days 8 .Reg Bd Review 90 days I +ExternalTasks ~External Milestone +Summary Milestone Split Task Task Name Kick off Meeting with QWDlData gathering1Ii3100 7 Permit WDR permit application/Eng report submittal to Regional 5 days Board byOWD 9 !i3 .Permit adoption atBoard Hearing -Mid March 2007 (meetings 0 days are held on the second Wed of the month). 10!i3 Permit Public hearing -February 2007 (may be concurrent with 0 days Adoption hearing on March 2007 or a month earlier-worst case here) 99·1077.04 Progress ProjectSummary ..-'''''Deadline Page 1 ATTACHMENT E AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BETWEEN OTAY WATER DISTRICT AND PBS&J FORTHE RALPH W.CHAPMAN WATER RECYCLING FACILITY WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT REVISION (CIP P1253-007000) This Agreement (Agreement)is made and entered into this day ofJuly,2006 by and between the OTAY WATER DISTRICT,a municipal water district,formed and existing pursuant to California Municipal Water District Act of 1911,as amended,hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT,"and PBS&J,hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." WITNESSETH WHEREAS,the DISTRICT requires the services ofan engineering consultant to render certain technical and professional services described below;and WHEREAS,the CONSULTANT has available,and offers to provide,personnel and facilities necessary to accomplish the work within the required time. NOW,THEREFORE,DISTRICT AND CONSULTANT agree as follows: I.Scope ofEngineering Services The CONSULTANT agrees to perform those services described in the scope ofwork set forth in Exhibit 'A'attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.The scope of consulting services shall include meetings with District staff,review ofprevious technical documentation,preparation of an Engineering Report,and assistance with negotiations with regulatory agencies. II.Authorization Specific authorization to proceed with the work described in Exhibit 'A'is hereby granted upon full execution ofthe Agreement.The CONSULTANT shall proceed with the work described in Exhibit'A'immediately upon receipt of a fully executed copy ofthis Agreement. /II.Compensation In return for providing the services described in Exhibit'A',which are to be performed by the CONSULTANT,the DISTRICT agrees to pay,and the CONSULTANT agrees to accept, compensation as set forth in Exhibit 'A',in the not-to-exceed aggregate amount ofONE HUNDRED NINETEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS ($119,580.00), payable in proportion to the work completed.The total estimated fee reflects the budget breakdown - 1 - per task included in Exhibit 'B'.Total compensation for all Professional Services provided under this agreement shall notexceed ONE HUNDRED NINETEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS DOLLARS ($119,580.00)during the term ofthis agreement without prior written authorization from the DISTRICT. The CONSULTANT shall invoice the DISTRICT on a monthly schedule in the format shown in Exhibits 'C'and 'D'.The CONSULTANT shall not invoice the DISTRICT for work that has not been completed at the time the invoice is prepared.The DISTRICT shall have forty-five (45) days from the date ofreceipt oferror-free invoices prepared in accordance with Exhibits 'C'and 'D' to make payment without incurring interest and/or penalty charges. IV.Standard of Care The CONSULTANT is employed to render engineering consultant services only,and any payment made to the CONSULTANT is compensation solely for such services as the CONSULTANT may render and recommendations the CONSULTANT may make.The CONSULTANT'S services shall be furnished in accordance with generally accepted engineering consultant principles and practices. V.Documents All original drawings,spreadsheets and documents,including digital photographs and files developed for the project,shall,upon payment in full for the services described in this Agreement, be furnished to and become the property ofthe DISTRICT,except as otherwise provided in Section VIII:Termination or Abandonment. The CONSULTANT shall provide final documents on high-density media such as ZIP® disk 1001250 MB or compact disk (CD).Final drawings and details shall be in AutoCAD®2000 format.Final Contract Specifications,reports,and spreadsheets shall be in Microsoft®Office 2000 format.Any other electronic format documents provided to the DISTRICT must be formatted to the same software version or release as that ofthe DISTRICT. VI.Performance and Schedule The CONSULTANT agrees to coordinate project work to ensure its timely completion and shall promptly notify the DISTRICT ofany anticipated delays,which may affect the work schedule. The CONSULTANT agrees to complete the work in accordance with the activity schedule set forth in Exhibit 'A'.In the event the time for completing the scope ofwork is exceeded due to circumstances beyond the control ofthe CONSULTANT,the CONSULTANT shall have an additional amount oftime to be agreed upon in writing between the parties in which to complete the work.The scheduled time ofcompletion is 10 months from the Notice to Proceed for this project. VII.Change in Scope of Work Any additional costs (changes,extras,modifications,etc.)arising out ofrevisions by the DISTRICT or changes in regulations after execution ofthis Agreement in the work not covered within the Scope ofWork shall be brought to the attention ofthe DISTRICT immediately,and no such work shall be done prior to obtaining written approval from the DISTRICT. - 2 - Ifthe DISTRICT changes the Scope ofWork,or ifchanges in regulations after execution of this Agreement necessitate changes in the Scope ofWork,or ifthe CONSULTANT is requested to perform services not detailed in the Scope ofWork,the CONSULTANT shall provide a cost estimate and written description ofthe additional work required to perform such services and to complete the work.Compensation for such services and time ofcompletion shall be negotiated by the parties hereto in advance ofrendering such additional work,or the DISTRICT will not be required to pay for such additional work.All work performed without proper authorization shall be considered part ofthis Agreement for no additional compensation. VIII.Termination or Abandonment Ten (10)calendar days from the date ofa written notice to terminate or abandon all or any portion ofthe work,the DISTRICT has the right to terminate or abandon all or any portion ofthe work.In such event,the DISTRICT will have the right to take possession and shall own immediately all original specifications,drawings,and other documents developed for that portion of the work completed and/or being abandoned.The DISTRICT will pay the CONSULTANT for services for any portion ofthe work being terminated which were rendered prior to termination.If said termination occurs prior to completion ofany task ofthe project for which a payment request has not been received,the fee for service performed during such task shall be based on an amount mutually agreed to by the DISTRICT and the CONSULTANT for the portion ofsuch task completed but not paid prior to said termination.The DISTRICT will not be liable for any costs other than the fees or portions thereof,which are specified herein.Ifall work is abandoned as herein provided,this Agreement shall automatically terminate on the 10th day from the date of notice. IX.Indemnification A.CONSULTANT agrees to the following: 1.Indemnification for Professional Services.CONSULTANT will save harmless and indemnify and,at DISTRICT's request,defend the DISTRICT,its board of directors,officers,attorneys,agents,volunteers,employees,and representatives (collectively,the "Indemnified Persons")from and against suits,actions,or claims brought for,or on account of,injuries or damages sustained by any person or property directly resulting from a negligent or wrongful act,error or o,mission by CONSULTANT or any ofCONSULTANT's officers,agents,employees,or representatives,in the performance ofthis Agreement. 2.Indemnificationfor other Damages.CONSULTANT indemnifies and holds the Indemnified Persons harmless from and against a claim,action,damages,costs (including reasonable attorney's fees),injuries,or liability,directlyresulting from this Agreement,for its negligent performance.Should any Indemnified Person DISTRICT be named in a suit,or should a claim be brought against it by suit or otherwise,directly resulting out ofthis Agreement,for the CONSULTANT's negligent performance,CONSULTANT will defend said Indemnified Persons (at DISTRICT's request and with counsel satisfactory to DISTRICT)and will indemnify said Indemnified Person for any judgment rendered against it or any sums paid out in settlement or otherwise. - 3 - B.It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions will survive termination ofthis Agreement. C.The requirements as to the types and limits ofinsurance coverage to be maintained by CONSULTANT as required by this Agreement and any approval ofsaid insurance by DISTRICT, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement,including,without limitation,to the provisions concerning indemnification. X.Insurance Requirements A.Before commencing performance under this Agreement,and at all other times this Agreement is effective,CONSULTANT will procure and maintain the following types ofinsurance with coverage limits complying,at a minimum,with the limits set forth below: Type of Insurance Limits (combined single) Commercial general liability Professional liability Business automobile liability Workers compensation $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Statutory requirement B.Commercial general liability insurance will meet or exceed the requirements ofISO- CGL Form No.CG 12 10 11 97.The amount ofinsurance set forth above will be a combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury,personal injury,and property damage for the policy coverage. Liability policies will be endorsed to name DISTRICT,its officials,and employees as "additional insureds"under said insurance coverage and to state that such insurance will be deemed "primary" such that any other insurance that may be carried by DISTRICT will be excess thereto.Such insurance will be on an "occurrence"basis,except professional liability shall be on a "claims made"basis,and will not be cancelable or subject to reduction except upon a thirty-(30)day prior written notice to DISTRICT. C.Automobile coverage will be written on ISO Business Auto Coverage Form CA 00 01 1001,including symbol 1 (Any Auto). D.CONSULTANT will furnish to DISTRICT duly authenticated Certificates ofInsurance and Endorsements evidencing maintenance ofthe insurance required under this Agreement and such other evidence ofinsurance as may be reasonably required by DISTRICT from time to time. Insurance must be placed with insurers with a current A.M.Best Company Rating equivalent to at least a Rating of "A:VII."Originals ofthe duly authenticated Certificates ofInsurance and Endorsements shall be included with this Agreement as Exhibit E. E.Should CONSULTANT,for any reasons,fail to obtain and maintain the insurance required by this Agreement,DISTRICT may obtain such coverage at CONSULTANT's expense and deduct the cost of such insurance from payments due to CONSULTANT under this Agreement or terminate pursuant to Section 15. -4- XI.Successors and Assigns;Notice This Agreementand all ofthe terms,conditions,and provisions hereofshall inure to~the benefit ofand be binding upon the parties hereto,and their respective successors and assigns; provided,however,thatno assignment ofthis Agreement shall be made without written consent of the parties to this Agreement.Any attempt by the CONSULTANT to assign or otherwise transfer any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent ofthe DISTRICT shall be void. Since the primary consideration ofthe DISTRICT in entering this agreement is the qualifications of the CONSULTANT,as opposed to a low bid,the DISTRICT will refuse to consent to assignments ifit considers the assignee to have lesser qualifications. Except as otherwise provided by law,any demand upon or notice required or permitted to be given by one party to the other under this Agreement shall be effective (i)on a personal delivery,(ii) on the day it is delivered via facsimile,provided that notice so given shall also be mailed via U.S. Mail and further provided that the party giving facsimile notification must retain evidence of successful transmittal ofthe notice,(iii)on the second business day after mailing by certified or registered United States mail,return receipt requested,or (iv)on the succeeding business day after mailing byExpress Mail or after deposit with a private delivery service ofgeneral use (e.g.,Federal Express)postage or fee prepaid as appropriate,addressed to the party at the address shown below: DISTRICT: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley,California 91978-2004 Attention:Mark Watton CONSULTANT: PBS&J 9275 Sky Park Court,Suite 200 San Diego,CA 92123-4386 Attention:James J.Strayer XII.Project Organization The CONSULTANT proposes to assign Jennifer Duffy as the Project Manager.The Project Manager shall not be removed from the project or reassigned without prior approval ofthe DISTRICT,which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.No subcontracting ofsignificant portions ofthe contracted environmental services shall be made without prior approval ofthe DISTRICT. XlIl M~cellaneous A.Covenant Against Discrimination.Consultant covenants that,by and for itself,its heirs, executors,assigns and all persons claiming under or through them,that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of,any person or group ofpersons on account ofrace,color, creed,religion,sex,marital status,national origin,or ancestry in the performance ofthis Agreement. Consultant shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race,color,creed,religion,sex,marital status, national origin or ancestry. B.Non-liability ofDistrict Officers and Employees.No officer or employee ofDISTRICT shall be personally liable to the Consultant,or any successor in interest,in the event ofany default or breach by DISTRICT or for any amount which may become due to the Consultant or to its successor,or for breach ofany obligation ofthe terms ofthis Agreement. - 5 - ~ C.Conflict ofInterest.No officer or employee ofDISTRICT shall have any financial interest,direct or indirect,in this Agreement nor shall any such officer or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his financial interest or the financial interest of any corporation,partnership or association in which he is,directly or indirectly,interested,in violation ofany State statute or regulation.The Consultant warrants that it has not paid or given and will not payor give any third party any money or other consideration for obtaining this Agreement. D.Interpretation.The terms ofthis Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning ofthe language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason ofthe authorship ofthis Agreement or any other rule ofconstruction which might otherwise apply. E.Compliance with Laws.Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal,state and local laws,regulations,statutes and ordinances (collectively,the "Laws")in connection with this Agreement and the performance ofthe work.Consultant shall indemnify and defend the Indemnified Persons from and against any liability incurred due to any failure on the part of CONSULTANT to comply with any applicable Laws. XIV.Integration;Amendment This Agreement and the attached Exhibits represent the entire understanding by and between the DISTRICT and the CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein.No prior oral or written understanding shall be ofany force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder.This Agreement may be amended at any time by the mutual consent ofthe parties by an instrument in writing. xv.Execution PBS&J James J.Strayer,Associate Vice President Otay Water District Mark Watton,General Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM Yuri Calderon,General Counsel COPIES:0 FILE (Ong.),0 CONSULTANT,0 PROJECTMANAGER.,0 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE P:\Working\CIP W253 NPDES\WO 30101\Engineering Services AgreemenLdoc - 6 - AGENDA ITEM 6 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING:Regular Board SUBMITIED BY:David Charles, Public Services Manager MEETING DATE: W.O.lG.F.NO: July 5,2006 DIV.NO.All APPROVED BY: (Chief) APPROVED BY: (Asst.GM): SUBJECT: Rod Posada,~~~ Chief,Development Services Manny Magana Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations Adopt Resolution No.4082 Amending Policy 26 -District Administration of Reimbursement Agreements GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt Resolution No.4082 amending Policy 26 - District Administration of Reimbursement Agreements.The proposed revisions are intended to set a time limit for when reimbursement requests must be received by the District and to add the requirement that reimbursement requests must also be brought to the Board for consideration. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: Amendment of Policy 26 -District Administration of Reimbursement Agreements. ANALYSIS: During a recent meeting,Board members asked staff to revise Policy 26 concerning the establishment of a sunset time for reimbursement requests and to clarify that all reimbursement requests will be presented to the Board for consideration. Accordingly,staff with the assistance of legal counsel have revised and added to the language of Policy 26,to provide a five (5)year expiration of the reimbursement agreements after the original Board approval.Also,staff added language to provide for reimbursement requests to be presented to the Board prior to final reimbursement to developers. FISCAL IMPACT: None. STRATEGIC GOAL: District's Strategy 2.2.2.1 Evaluate Key Business Processes to Ensure Adequate Financial Controls LEGAL IMPACT: None. G~ DC/RP:acc Exhibits P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\BD 07-05-061 Amendment to Policy 26 (DC).doc 2 ......1 ATTACHMENT A r···susJecfip·RoJ"e·cf·:········l·····Ad;;··p·t·······R·e··s·~·i~·t··i·;·~······"N ;;····:···········4···0··8·2·········~~·~·dI~g········t·;·······p·;·i·i··~·y········2··6········=·····D·i·s··t"~Ict I Administration of Reimbursement Agreements ........1., , " " " ". COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering and Operations Committee met on June 23,2006 and supported staff's recommendation. NOTE: The "Committee Action"is written in anticipation of the Committee(s)moving the item forward for Board approval.This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee(s)approved item,or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee(s)prior to presentation to the full Board. 3 ~,OTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/7/05 AGREEMENTS 2L~06 PURPOSE This policy establishes guidelines for how the District will administer reimbursement agreements for facilities,both Master Plan and Non-Master Plan.It also describes when and how the District will participate in the cost of such facilities. BACKGROUND Policy 25 requires that development which creates the need for new facilities must bear all costs to construct and finance the on-site, in-tract and off-site water,wastewater,and recycled water systems. ~On-site"facilities are defined as those pipelines,pump stations and reservoirs required within a developer's project boundaries."Off- site"facilities are those facilities located outside a project's boundary that are required to serve the project.~In-tract" facilities are defined as those non-regional facilities that serve only the project being constructed.These facilities are typically 6 inch through 12 inch pipelines.In-tract facilities are the sole responsibility of the developer/property owner until the facilities and all required property easements are dedicated to,and accepted by, the District pursuant to authority granted by the Board to the General Manager. The District's Master Plan includes all regional on-site and off-site facilities anticipated to be necessary to provide service throughout the District.The District's capacity fees have been calculated to pay for the cost of all the regional facilities identified in the Master Plan including the developer/property owner portion of such facilities.The District does not subsidize development but it does undertake responsibility to insure that those regional facilities necessary to serve a particular development are constructed and that the costs associated with the construction of said facilities is fairly distributed among all users. POLICY A.Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement by the District:For facilities identified in the Master Plan,both on-site and off-site, the District may reimburse the developer for construction and design costs if the project meets the following guidelines: DTAY WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject "Policy Date Date Number Adooted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/07/05 AGREEMENTS 7/05/0~ 1.The project must be in the District's approved five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)at the time of the request,and shall not exceed the CIP budget amount without prior Board approval. 2.The District has approved a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP)and any required maps,upon which the facilities are clearly described. 3.The developer makes an irrevocable offer to dedicate the facilities and any easements required for the operation and maintenance of the facilities to the District,which offer is accepted by the General Manager and all applicable language and documentation of the dedication(s)is prepared and recorded,all in the manner authorized by the Board. 4.The developer enters into an Agreement for Construction of a Water System with the District. 5.The developer/property owner obtains bids from qualified contractors and provides copies of the bids to the District.The developer/property owner is responsible for selecting the lowest responsive responsible bidder.The developer/property owner will be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project based on the unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive responsible bid. 6.The cost of addressing environmental issues,such as burying a reservoir,shall not be reimbursable unless they are currently addressed in the District's Master Environmental Impact Report and CIP. 7.All soft costs,such as engineering,inspection,bonds,etc., will be included in the reimbursement cost at five percent of the construction costs. 8.Except as provided below,the District will pay 100 percent of the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the project. 9.The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing if, after analysis by the Finance Department,it is determined that the borrowing fits into the District's financial plan as outlined in Policy 25. 10.If for any reason reimbursement funds are not vailable at the time the project is operationally complete,the District may elect to defer or a portion of the reimbursement the District determines is due the developer until the General Manager accepts Page 2 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject ,--Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/07/05 AGREEMENTS 7/05/06 the dedication of the project and until all liens,claims and/or bonds,as applicable,have been released in the manner provided under the Agreement for Construction of a Water System. 11.Funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a CIP until the reimbursement is made. 12.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board.A Staff Report will be prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. 13.This type of reimbursement agreement eontains no end date for collection from the District of the approved reimburscmcnt,ends five (5)years after Board's original approval.~The reimbursement agreement may be terminated prior to said five (5) year term by the General Manager upon a determination that the developer has failed to comply with its obligations under the Reimbursement Agreement or the Agreement for Construction of a Water System. 14.Inf the ease of reimbursement agreement expiresation,prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement,the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.~The Developer shallmay submit new documentation and re~est that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request. 15.All reimbursement requests shall be approved bysubmitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval B.Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by Future Users:Occasionally,a developer/property owner requests the District to administer a reimbursement agreement to collect money from future customers who connect to the facility built by the developer/property owner.If the District agrees,the District collects the reimbursement amount from each customer connecting to the facility, together with any other District connection fees.The reimbursement portion of the customer's payment is forwarded by the District to the developer/property owner as reimbursement. Page 3 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject --Policy Date Date Number Adooted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 ti/07jOS AGREEMENTS 7/05/06 The District may administer this type of reimbursement agreement if the developer/property owner's project meets the following criteria and guidelines: 1.The developer/property owner demonstrates the facilities to be constructed have adequate capacity to serve future customers. 2 The developer/property owner requests and executes a reimbursement agreement,which is presented to the Board for approval in conjunction with the presentation of an agreement to construct. 3.The property owner deposits with the District the estimated cost for District staff to prepare a nexus study and obtain Board approval for the reimbursement agreement.District staff will provide a written estimate of the required deposit to the property owner within 15 days of the property owner's request. 4.The property owner provides three (3)bids from qualified contractors for the purpose of establishing the cost of the facilities and the portion of the reimbursement amount which is to be allocated to future connections. 5.A nexus study shall be performed by District staff to identify those who may benefit from the construction of the proposed facility and the amount they shall reimburse the developer/property owner who constructed the facility. 6.Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners affected by the reimbursement agreement,an informational staff report will be presented to the Board. 7.The District shall notice all those property owners that will be subject to the reimbursement charge.These property owners will then be responsible to pay their fair share of the cost of the facilities at such time as they connect to the system.The fair share will be based on their Assigned Service Unit/Equivalent Dwelling Unit (ASU/EDU)contribution to the total projected ASU/EDU to use the system.The reimbursement charge will be in addition to any other fees a property owner would pay to the District to obtain service. 8.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board Prior to presenting a reimbursement agreement to the Board,staff must obtain two originals signed by an authorized representative of the developer/property owner.A Staff Report must then be Page 4 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT -- BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject ..Policy Date Date Number Adooted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/07/G-5 AGREEMENTS _7/05/06 prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. 9.This type of reimbursement agreement shall be valid for 10 years from the date of Board approval.After the 10 year period has lapsed the collection of the reimbursement amount by the District shall cease. 10.Concurrently with submission of a signed reimbursement agreement, the developer/property owner must pay an administrative fee to the District to defray costs related to the review of the request and the negotiation and execution of the reimbursement agreement The amount of the administrative fee will be calculated at the staff rate existing at the time of said submission 11.In addition,concurrently with payment of the fee described above,developer must pay a fee to defray costs estimated to be incurred per each connection to be established during the term of the reimbursement agreement.The amount of this fee will be calculated based on an estimated 6 man hours per connection.The staff rate in existence at the time the reimbursement agreement is executed will be used as a base and it will be projected to change each year to account for changes in the COLA,as determined by the District's finance department. 12.The District will not distribute any reimbursement funds to the developer/property owner until the project has been accepted by the Board.The distribution of reimbursement funds will occur as the District collects the funds from new customers who connect to the facility,but not more frequently than once per year. 13.District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at,the same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service are collected. 14.If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.The Developer may submit new documentation and request that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request Page 5 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject "Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/07/05 AGREEMENTS 7/05/06 15.All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval. C.Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by the District:Normally the District would not participate in the cost of facilities which are not identified in the Master Plan.These facilities are of benefit only to the adjoining property and should ordinarily be financed solely by the developer/property owner proposing the new facility.Nonetheless,there may be circumstances where the General Manager determines that it is appropriate for the District to participate in the cost of a non-Master Plan facility. Typical reasons would be in order to accommodate future growth or betterment of the system.In these instances,the District may establish special fees to recover the reimbursement costs from benefiting property owners as they connect to the system. The District may reimburse the developer/property owner for construction costs if the project meets the following criteria and guidelines: 1.The General Manager has determined that it is appropriate for the District's customers to participate in the construction of the project. 2.The developer/property owner shall obtain three (3)bids from qualified contractors and provide copies of the initial bids to the District.The developer/property owner is responsible for selecting the lowest responsive bidder.The developer/property owner will be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project based on the unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive bid 3 A nexus study will be performed by the District to identify those property owners who may benefit from the construction of the proposed facility. 4.Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners affected by the reimbursement agreement,an informational Staff Report shall be presented to the Board. 5.The District shall notice all those property owners which will be subject to the reimbursement charge.These properties will then be responsible to pay their fair share of the cost of the facilities,plus interest,at such time as they connect to the system. Page 6 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised I DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 12/07/&5- AGREEMENTS 7/0,?J06 6.The developer/property owner shall request and execute the reimbursement agreement with the District prior to awarding any contracts for construction. 7.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board.A Staff Report shall be prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. 8.Except as provided below,the District will pay 100 percent of the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the project. 9.The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing,if it is determined that borrowing is in the best interest of the District's customers. 10.If for any reason reimbursement funds are not available at the time the project is operationally complete,the District may elect to defer the reimbursement until the General Manager determines that it is appropriate to make payments. 11.Funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a CIP until the reimbursement has been made 12.This type of reimbursement agreement contains no end date for the collection by the District of its contributed share of the cost, and shall be the responsibility of all current and subsequent property owners. 13 District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at the same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service are collected. 14.If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.The Developer may submit new documentation and request that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request. 15.All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval. Page 7 of 7 ,-'OTAYWATER DISTRICT ," BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject Policy Date Date Number Adooted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS PURPOSE This policy establishes guidelines for how the District will administer reimbursement agreements for facilities,both Master Plan and Non-Master Plan.It also describes when and how the District will participate in the cost of such facilities. BACKGROUND Policy 25 requires that development which creates the need for new facilities must bear all costs to construct and finance the on-site, in-tract and off-site water,wastewater,and recycled water systems. "On-site"facilities are defined as those pipelines,pump stations and reservoirs required within a developer's project boundaries."Off- site"facilities are those facilities located outside a project's boundary that are required to serve the project."In-tract" facilities are defined as those non-regional facilities that serve only the project being constructed.These facilities are typically 6 inch through 12 inch pipelines.In-tract facilities are the sole responsibility of the developer/property owner until the facilities and all required property easements are dedicated to,and accepted by, the District pursuant to authority granted by the Board to the General Manager. The District's Master Plan includes all regional on-site and off-site facilities anticipated to be necessary to provide service throughout the District.The District's capacity fees have been calculated to pay for the cost of all the regional facilities identified in the, Master Plan including the developer/property owner portion of such facilities~The District does not subsidize development but it does undertake responsibility to insure that those regional facilities necessary to serve a particular development are constructed and that the costs associated with the construction of said facilities is fairly distributed among all users. POLICY A.Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement by the District:For facilities identified in the Master Plan,both on-site and off-site, the District may reimburse the developer for construction and design costs if the project meets the following guidelines: OTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY ., Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS 1.The project must be in the District's approved five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)at the time of the request,and shall not exceed the CIP budget amount without prior Board approval. 2.The District has approved a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP)and any required maps,upon which the facilities ,are clearly described. 3.The developer makes an irrevocable offer to dedicate the facilities and any easements required for the operation and maintenance of the facilities to the District,which offer is accepted by the General Manager and all applicable language and documentation of the dedication(s)is prepared and recorded,all in the manner authorized by the Board. 4.The developer enters into an Agreement for Construction of a Water System with the District. 5.The developer/property owner obtains bids from qualified contractors and provides copies of the bids to the District.The developer/property owner is responsible for selecting the lowest responsive responsible bidder.The developer/property owner will be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project based on the unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive responsible bid. 6.The cost of addressing environmental issues,such as burying a reservoir,shall not be reimbursable unless they are currently addressed in the District's Master Environmental Impact Report and CIP. 7.All soft costs,such as engineering,inspection,bonds,etc., will be included in the reimbursement cost at five percent of the construction costs. 8.Except as provided below,the District will pay 100 percent of the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the project. 9.The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing if, after analysis by the Finance Department,it is determined that the borrowing fits into the District's financial plan as outlined in Policy 25. 10.If for any reason reimbursement funds are not vailable at the time the project is operationally complete,the District may elect to defer or a portion of the reimbursement the District determines is due the developer until the General Manager accepts Page 2 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT ~~ BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY «<,. Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS the dedication of the project and until all liens,claims and/or bonds,as applicable,have been released in the manner provided under the Agreement for Construction of a Water System. 11.Funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a CIP until the reimbursement is made. 12.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board.A Staff Report will be prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. 13.This type of reimbursement agreement ends five (5)years after Board's original approval.The reimbursement agreement may be terminated prior to said five (5)year term by the General Manager upon a determination that the developer has failed to comply with its obligations under the Reimbursement Agreement or the Agreement for Construction of a Water System. 14.If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.The Developer may submit new documentation and request that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request. 15.All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval. B.Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by Future Users:Occasionally,a developer/property owner requests the District to administer a reimbursement agreement to collect money from future customers who connect to the facility built by the developer/property owner.If the District agrees,the District collects the reimbursement amount from each customer connecting to the facility, together with any other District connection fees.The reimbursement portion of the customer's payment is forwarded by the District to the developer/property owner as reimbursement. The District may administer this type of reimbursement agreement if the developer/property owner's project meets the following criteria and guidelines: Page 3 of 7 OTAYWATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY ,--~-, Subject Policy Date Date Number Adooted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS 1.The developer/property owner demonstrates the facilities to be constructed have adequate capacity to serve future customers. 2.The developer/property owner requests and executes a reimbursement agreement,which is presented to the Board for approval in conjunction with the presentation of an agreement to construct. 3.The property owner deposits with the District the estimated cost for District staff to prepare a nexus study and obtain Board approval for the reimbursement agreement.District staff will provide a written estimate of the required deposit to the property owner within 15 days of the property owner's request. 4.The property owner provides three (3)bids from qualified contractors for the purpose of establishing the cost of the facilities and the portion of the reimbursement amount which is to be allocated to future connections. 5.A nexus study shall be performed by District staff to identify those who may benefit from the construction of the proposed facility and the amount they shall reimburse the developer/property owner who constructed the facility. 6.Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners affected by the reimbursement agreement,an informational staff report will be presented to the Board. 7.The District shall notice all those property owners that will be subject to the reimbursement charge.These property owners will then be respons~ble to pay their fair share of the cost of the facilities at such time as they connect to the system.The ..fair share will be based on their Assigned Service Unit/Equivalent Dwelling Unit (ASU/EDU)contribution to the total projected ASU/EDU to use the system.The reimbursement charge will be in addition to any other fees a property owner would pay to the District to obtain service. 8.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board. Prior to presenting a reimbursement agreement to the Board,staff must obtain two originals signed by an authorized representative of the developer/property owner.A Staff Report must then be prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. Page 4 of 7 OTAYWATER DISTRICT -~ BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY _r__~... Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS 9.This type of reimbursement agreement shall be valid for 10 years from the date of Board approval.After the 10 year period has lapsed the collection of the reimbursement amount by the District shall cease. 10.Concurrently with submission of a signed reimbursement agreement, the developer/property owner must pay an administrative fee to the District to defray costs related to the review of the request and the negotiation and execution of the reimbursement agreement. The amount of the administrative fee will be calculated at the staff rate existing at the time of said submission. 11.In addition,concurrently with payment of the fee described above,developer must pay a fee to defray costs estimated to be incurred per each connection to be established during the term of the reimbursement agreement.The amount of this fee will be calculated based on an estimated 6 man hours per connection.The staff rate in existence at the time the reimbursement agreement is executed will be used as a base and it will be projected to change each year to account for changes in the COLA,as determined by the District's finance department. 12.The District will not distribute any reimbursement funds to the developer/property owner until the project has been accepted by the Board.The distribution of reimbursement funds will occur as the District collects the funds from new customers who connect to the facility,but not more frequently than once per year. 13.District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at the same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service are collected. 14.If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.The Developer may submit new documentation and request that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request. 15.All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval. Page 5 of 7 OTAY WATER DISTRICT -- BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY -- Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS C.Non-Master Plan Facilities-Reimbursement to Developer by the District:Normally the District would not participate in the cost of facilities which are not identified in the Master Plan.These facilities are of benefit only to the adjoining property and should ordinarily be financed solely by the developer/property owner proposing the new facility.Nonetheless,there may be circumstances where the General Manager determines that it is appropriate for the District to participate in the cost of a non-Master Plan facility. Typical reasons would be in order to accommodate future growth or betterment of the system.In these instances,the District may establish special fees to recover the reimbursement costs from benefiting property owners as they connect to the system. The District may reimburse the developer/property owner for construction costs if the project meets the following criteria and guidelines: 1.The General Manager has determined that it is appropriate for the District's customers to participate in the construction of the project. 2.The developer/property owner shall obtain three (3)bids from qualified contractors and provide copies of the initial bids to the District.The developer/property owner is responsible for selecting the lowest responsive bidder.The developer/property owner will be reimbursed for the CIP portions of the project based on the unit prices submitted with the lowest responsive bid. 3.A nexus study will be performed by the District to identify those property owners who may benefit from the construction of the proposed facility. 4.Prior to the public notice being sent to those property owners affected by the reimbursement agreement,an informational Staff Report shall be presented to the Board. 5.The District shall notice all those property owners which will be subject to the reimbursement charge.These properties will then be responsible to pay their fair share of the cost of the facilities,plus interest,at such time as they connect to the system. 6.The developer/property owner shall request and execute the reimbursement agreement with the District prior to awarding any contracts for construction. Page 6 of 7 GTAY WATER DISTRICT - BOARD OF DIRECTORS POLICY Subject Policy Date Date Number Adopted Revised DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT 26 2/10/93 7/05/06 AGREEMENTS 7.Each reimbursement agreement requires approval by the Board.A Staff Report shall be prepared and reviewed with the Finance Department prior to presentation to the Board for approval. 8.Except as provided below,the District will pay 100 percent of the reimbursement cost after the General Manager accepts the project. 9.The District may elect to finance the facilities by borrowing,if it is determined that borrowing is in the best interest of the District's customers. 10.If for any reason reimbursement funds are not available at the time the project is operationally complete,the District may elect to defer the reimbursement until the General Manager determines that it is appropriate to make payments. 11.Funds for reimbursement shall be carried as a crp until the reimbursement has been made. 12.This type of reimbursement agreement contains no end date for the collection by the District of its contributed share of the cost, and shall be the responsibility of all current and subsequent property owners. 13.District staff shall collect the reimbursement amount due at the same time the standard District capacity fees for the new service are collected. 14.If the reimbursement agreement expires prior to acceptance of the facilities by the District or prior to payment of reimbursement, the Developer shall no longer be entitled to reimbursement.,The Developer may submit new documentation and request that the District enter into a new reimbursement agreement.If the District agrees to enter into a new reimbursement agreement for the facilities,however,the District may revise the terms and amounts of reimbursement at its discretion based on information available at the time of the request. 15.All reimbursement requests shall be submitted to the Board for consideration and shall not be processed without prior Board approval. Page 7 of 7 RESOLUTION NO.4082 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT AMENDING POLICY NO.26 DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS WHEREAS,the Development Services staff routinely evaluates and makes recommendations to update,revise and replace Board policies,in order to ensure that the policies are maintained to promote best management practices,and WHEREAS,the Engineering and Operations Committee and the Development Services staff have determined that there is a need to amend Policy No.26 -District Administration of Reimbursement Agreements,in order to clarify the District's procedure for entering into and managing reimbursement agreements and include changes with respect to setting a time limit when reimbursement requests must be received by the District and to add the requirement that reimbursement requests must be presented to the Board for consideration,and WHEREAS,the Board wishes that the policy be amended as per the attached copy. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District as follows: Amend Policy No.26 -District Administration of Reimbursement Agreements,in order to clarify the District's procedure for entering into and managing reimbursement agreements and include changes with respect to setting a time limit when reimbursement requests must be received by the District and to add the requirement that reimbursement requests must be presented to the Board for consideration. PASSED,APRROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 5th day of July, 2006,by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: President ATTEST: Secretary· P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\BD 07-05-06,Amendment to Policy 26 (DC)Res 4082 (draft 06-07-06).doc 2 AGENDA ITEM 7 STAFF REPORT July 5,2006 4DIV. NO. P2359 WO 30002 MEETING DATE: C.I.P.I G.F.NO: Regular Board '7<!0HosseinJuybari,Senior Civil Engineer Ron Ripperger,Engineering Design Manager Mehdi Arbabian dttU/' Chief,Engineefi~g and Planning Manny Magana Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations APPROVED BY: (Asst.GM): APPROVED BY: (Chief) TYPE MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: SUBJECT:Award of a Construction Contract for the Meter Shop Remodel (P2359) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board award a construction contract to Blair Rasmussen Construction in the amount of $60,747 for the Meter Shop Remodel (see Exhibit A for the project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization to award a construction contract to Blair Rasmussen Construction for the Meter Shop Remodel. ANALYSIS: Currently,the Meter Maintenance Cross Connection Staff is housed in the District's Operations Warehouse where they are working in modular workstations that do not provide the ideal working environment.This modular-style office has 5 workstations,is relatively small,and does not provide any privacy In addition,the workstations are exposed to excessive noise,dust,and extreme temperature variations during the summer and winter seasons.In order for staff to have a better working environment,a new 24 feet by 12 feet office room will be provided The new office will be divided into individual cubicles and will be located next to the existing Meter Shop office which is closer to the Meter Maintenance Cross Connection Staff Supervisor,thus making interaction more efficient. In order to maximize space,the roof/deck of the new off~ce room will be constructed for lightweight storage.This project also includes relocating the existing heater to an existing column located at the southeast corner of the Meter Shop.It is estimated that the construction will be completed within 90 days after the Notice to Proceed date. In-house staff designed the Meter Shop Remodel and developed the bid documents.The project was advertised for bid on May 22,2006. Subsequently,two Addendums were sent out to all bidders and plan houses to address contractor questions during the bidding period. Bids were publicly opened on Tuesday,June 13,2006 with the following results: ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE CONTRACTOR 1.Blair Rasmussen Construction,San Diego 2.RSM2 Contractors,Inc.,La Mesa 3.Healey Construction,National City 4.C.D.M.Construction,Inc.,El Cajon $76,713 TOTAL BID AMOUNT $60,747 $67,380 $88,500 $89,802 The evaluation process included reviewing all bids submitted for conformance to the contract documents plus a detailed review of each contractor's bid proposal.The lowest bidder,Blair Rasmussen Construction,submitted a responsive bid and holds a valid Class B Contractor's License as required by the contract documents. The District has positive past experiences with Blair Rasmussen Construction.The contractor previously completed office additions to the Administrative and Engineering areas without any problems.Staff also verified with Blair Rasmussen Construction that the company can comply with the bonding requirements for this project.Per the public competitive bidding process,staff is recommending the award of a construction contract to Blair Rasmussen Construction in the amount of $60,747.~.... FISCAL IMPACT:?Z- The total budget for the Meter Shop Remodel (P2359)is $190,000,as approved in the 2007 budget process.The actual costs paid on this project as of June 13,2006,are $89,547.Total expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date,including this contract, are approximately $186,794.Based on the cost analysis performed, staff does not anticipate that a budget increase is necessary. Attachment B is a table of commitments,expenditures,and projected final cost for the project. Finance has determined that 100%of the funding is currently available from the Replacement Fund. 2 STRATEGIC GOAL: This project supports the Strategic Goal to maintain a safe and productive work environment. LEGAL IMPACT: None HJ/RR/JV/VM Attachments P,\WORKING\CIP P2359\WO 300xx\Staff Reports\BD 07-05-06,Meter Shop remodel Bid Award.doc 3 IMPERIAL BEACH EVATORROAD OTA Y WATER DISTRICT METER SHOP REMODEL EXHIBIT A P2359 ATTACHMENT A COMMITTEE ACTION: On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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 Otay Water District Date Updated:June 13,2006 P2359 Operations EOC and Meter Shop Remodels and EOC Maps- Outstanding Projected Finat VendorlBudgetCommiffedExpendituresCommitment&Cost Comments$190,000 Forecast Planning Studies $- Labor $4,179.64 $4,179.64 Temp Labor $- Postage $17.04 $17.04 Fed Ex Materials $- Land Acquisition $- Pre-design $ Total Planning $-$4,196.68 $-$4,196.68 Design Consultant $- $- Materials $458.61 $458.61 TigerReprographics In House/Labor $51,432.20 $51,432.20 In House/Labor (future)$10,000.00 $10,000.00 OfficeSupplies $124.17 $$124.17 Office Depot Outside Services cream Reprographics,LLC)$222.49 $-$222.49 Team Reprographics,LLC Service Contracts Awbrey Cook McGill Architects)$5,118.13 $4,129.43 $988.70 $5,118.13 OCB Reprographics $748.55 $636.54 $112.01 $748.55 OCB Reprographics -Future $400.00 $400.00 San Diego Daily Transcript $63.80 $63.80 Reimbursement of Expenses $- TotalDesign $5,866.68 $57,067.24 $11,500.71 $68,567.95 Construction In House/Labor $2,086.56 $5,000.00 $7,086.56 Construction Contracts GAAllen&Co.$10,000.00 $-$10,000.00 BlairRasmussen Construction $60,747.00 $60,747.00 Future Remodeling Projects (TBD)$20,000.00 $20,000.00 $82.00 $82.00 Petty cash reimbursement Computer Hardware $15,523.58 $15,523.58 Dell Computer Software Technology IntegrationGroup $105.60 $105.60 Hewlett Packard $484.87 $484.87 Professional Legal Fees I $- AccpVclose·out $- Total Construction $-$28,282.61 $85,747.00 $114,029.61 Grand Total $5,866.68 $89,546.53 $97,247.71 $186,794.24 5 AGENDA ITEM 8 STAFF REPORT wR2090DIV.NO. July 5,2006BOARDMEETING DATE: W.O.lG.F.NO: Rj~t~r~ Randy Klaahsen Mehdi Arbabian,~~~7~;' Chief,Engineet1~~and Planning Manny Magana, Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations APPROVED BY: (Asst.GM): SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: (Chief) TYPE MEETING: SUBJECT:Water Recycling Facility Feasibility Study (R2090) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve staff's recommendation to participate in a joint water recycling facility feasibility study (District's share of study not to exceed $80,000).The study would be completed in conjunction with the City of Chula Vista and the Sweetwater Authority.All parties would share the costs equally.The facility would either be located near the Otay River or Sweetwater River (please see Exhibit A for potential project location). That the Board of Directors approve staff to create a new Capital Improvement Project R2090 in the amount of $110,000 to cover the cost associated with the Water Recycling Facility Feasibility Study.In the event this project is not feasible,that the Board of Directors approve both the expenses related to the project and the funding from expansion to be approved as adjustments to the operating budget, having a net zero impact on the operating budget. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To complete a joint water recycling facility feasibility study for future recycled water supply needs. ANALYSIS: With the unprecedented growth and future densification occurring in Chula Vista,the City has begun to look at their future sewer capacity needs and figure they will need about 5 million gallons of extra capacity ultimately.This need could be met in a number of ways. Currently,their service is provided by the City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department and the needed capacity could be acquired from the City of San Diego at a significant cost.Another option for Chula Vista would be to build a new water recycling facility and create a future recycled water supply for themselves or a partner.The economics for a new water recycling facility may be viable and it is the City's desire to participate in the feasibility study as a one-third cost sharing partner.They have given Sweetwater Authority a letter of commitment. In May,the Sweetwater Authority formally requested our General Manager's commitment to move forward with a feasibility study.The Sweetwater Authority has the desire to market recycled water in their service area and most recently completed a Recycled Water Resources Master Plan.It appears at this time however,that one of their potential major recycled demand users,LS Power (formerly Duke Energy),has changed their cooling strategy for the future power producing plant from wet cooled with recycled water to air cooled. But it is still Sweetwater's desire to move forward with this feasibility study.This is in part because they have received a $25,000 grant from the San Diego County Water Authority to do the study. Otay's interest in the feasibility study would be to benefit from another recycled water supply source.Ultimately,the District's average day demands will be 8.2 million gallons per day and presently we have a supply of 7.1 million gallons per day (1.1 from Ralph Chapman Water Reclamation Plant and 6 million gallons per day from the City of San Diego's South Bay Water Reclamation Plant).It is ~the District's goal to ultimately meet 100%of recycled water demand with 100%recycled water supply and potentially expand the use of recycled water to the North District and other areas.Expanding recycled water use would cause the supply and demand gap to increase by as much as 1 to 2 million gallons per day. Staff believes that this project has very good potential to create a new recycled water supply and recommends that we participate as a one- third partner in the study. 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The Total If approved,the total budget for eIP R2090 will be $110,-000 actual costs paid on this project as of June 15,2006,is $0. expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date, including this contract,are approximately $110,000.Based on the cost analysis performed,staff does not anticipate that a budget increase is necessary.Attachment B is a table of commitments, expenditures,and projected final cost for the project. Finance has determined that 100%of the funding is currently available from the Expansion Fund. STRATEGIC GOAL: This project supports the following strategic goal: construct new infrastructure -satisfy current and for Potable,Recycled and Wastewater Services." LEGAL IMPACT: None. MA/RK/MF vm Attachments "Design and future water needs P:\WORKING\CIP W341\WO 30024\Plannlng\Water Recycling Facility On SVOS\CMTE,6-23-06 Staff Report New Water Recycling Facility.doc 3 USE I AREA "Io.."_1"-..,J--"f---__ I I I,!i.LJ.L...i I I OTAY WATER DISTRICT NEW WATER RECYCLING FACILITY IMPERIAL BEACH '".. <>....., 1"=4000' li.~~IaI'"....,.-_..._....._........__...ilWilIi ~.I····~........-.ii!L!!i0~C~A~TI!!O~N~M~A-P----------- EXHIBIT A 4 ~...".." " COMMITTEE ACTION: ATTACHMENT A ·········"·····1 ........................................"' On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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:..··,..............·····························1; i..,..............L.~~t ~E !3~c:::..yc:::.~~!!.9..~~.c:::~~.~.!..y.~.~~?~b iIit y.~!1!~y(!3?q..~q).................................., Otay Water District R2090 -Sweetwater River Water Recycling Facility Date Updated:June 15,2006 Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $110,000.00 Planning Studies $-$80,000.00 $80,000.00 Labor $-$30,000.00 $30,000.00 Environmental $- Land Acquisition $- Preliminary Design $- Total Planning $110,000.00 Design Consultant $- In House/Labor $- Advertise &Award $- Total Design $- Construction In House/Labor $- Construction Contracts $- Construction Manager $- .Accpt/c1ose-out $- Total Construction $-$-$-$- Grand Total $-$-$-$110,000.00 AGENDA ITEM 9 STAFF REPORT 2R2087DIV.NO. July 5,2006BOARDMEETING DATE~ W.O.lG.F.NO: R~r BOar.d .J!&....L-/ Randy'Klaahsen/Rod Posada Mehdi Arbabian,~/)vJ1f Chief,Enginee"tri~'~~d Planning Manny Magana, Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Operations APPROVED BY: (Ass!.GM): SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: (Chief) TYPE MEETING: SUBJECT:Otay Mesa Value Engineering Study (R2087) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve staff's recommendation to adopt the Otay Mesa Value Engineering Study (please see Exhibit A for project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To adopt the Otay Mesa Value Engineering Study. ANALYSIS: In April 2004,the District hired Harris and Associates to perform a value engineering study for the Otay Mesa recycled water system. A group of industry specialists were invited to brainstorming meetings that led to different ideas being explored for cost savings. There were participants from the private,as well as,public sectors including the City of San Diego and Padre Dam Municipal Water District. One of the concepts that materialized from the meetings was to put a pipeline from the District's Central Area System to the Otay Mesa System in the alignment of Wueste Road and eliminate the "A50-2 Recycled Water Reservoir,the 860-1 Recycled Water Pump Station and other related Capital Improvement Program (CIP)projects:-This" concept was pursued and found to be viable.The Wueste Road pipeline project will save the District over $6 million dollars in capital improvements.The CIP revisions are shown on Exhibit B and have been reflected in the FY07 CIP. In addition to the capital savings,it has been calculated that our annual operation and maintainance costs will decrease by $400,000 per year because we will not have to maintain the two facilities being eliminated. The basis of the Water Resources Master Plan has always been to meet 100%of our recycled water demand with 100%recycled water supply. Although the 680-1 and 944-1 Recycled Water Pump Stations would have to be modified in the future if the additional supply were to come from the City of San Diego South Bay Water Reclamation Facility,all recycled water supply options remain open and viable.This was a fundamental principal that the District wanted to maintain with the Wueste Road pipeline option. Based on the Wueste Road pipeline concept,an analysis was performed to determine the cost of recycled water on Otay Mesa on a cost per acre foot basis.It was found that the cost per acre foot will range from $663 to $673 per acre foot.The first number assumes an interest rate of 5.5%and the second 8.0%.That cost per acre foot does not include the Metropolitan Water District and San Diego County Water Authority incentives of $185 per acre foot and $147 per acre foot respectively. Another idea was to eliminate retrofitting existing customers on Otay Mesa and significantly downsize the distribution system.This would create less of an economic burden on developers.The total number of exaction projects decreased and the distribution network decreased in length from 240,000 feet to 150,000 feet.The estimated saving~for those pipelines is $8.8 million dollars. A third concept was pursued to lessen the burden on developers.This concept was to eliminate recycled water on projects that had less than 10,000 square feet of irrigated area on a parcel.The equivalent usage was 1 acre foot of recycled water per year.This concept would have created pipeline segment gaps in the distribution network.To fill the gaps,a fee to the developer per foot was being proposed to fund the missing distribution pipelines in the future. However,the District's attorney reviewed this concept and found that it would create a sense of unfairness and that it would require a nexus study and report in accordance with California Government Code section 66000.The attorney recommends to remain with the existing 2 policy of requiring all developable parcels to install the required distribution system for the use of recycled water FISCAL IMPACT:~ ....."....~' The total budget fbr CIP R2087 is $3,598,000 as approved in the 2007 budget process.The actual costs paid on this project as of June 15,2006,are $73,047.Total expenditures plus outstanding commitment and forecast to date,including this contract,are approximately $84,147.Based on the cost analysis performed,staff does not anticipate that a budget increase is necessary.Attachment B is a table of commitments,expenditures,and projected final cost for the project. Finance has determined that 100%of the funding is currently available from the Expansion Fund. This project has decreased the overall FY07 CIP by more than $6 million dollars. STRATEGIC GOAL: This project supports the following strategic goal:"Design and construct new infrastructure -satisfy current and future water needs for Potable,Recycled and Wastewater Services." LEGAL IMPACT: MA/RK vm Attachments P,\WORKING\CIP W34l\WO 30024\Planning\Otay Mesa Value Engineering Study 2006\CMTE,6-23-06 Staff Report Otay Mesa VE.doc 3 NTS OTAY WATER DISTRICT OTAY WATER DISTRICT OlAY MESA VALUE ENGINEERING STUDY .&"c~ii'':;- lUMr----,-------------------I ~ISH;.i ~!~7~...._=~~~----~J~U:N:;.E';2~OO:6~· EXHIBIT A 4 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/P·ROJECT:·r···.m.........................................····mm . !Otay Mesa Value Engineering Study(R2087) l..............................1 COMMITTEE ACTION: On June 23,2006,the Engineering and Operations Committee met and 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. .1 ATTACHMENT B SUBJEel/PROJECT:mr···························m.m··.····....m..................·......m.....··m m m.......................................jIOtayMesaValueEngineeringStudy(R2087), L.,m m ·..··.····..·m···.·····..·.·J Otay Water District R2087-0tay Mesa Value Engineering Study Date Updated:June 15,2006 Expenditures Outstanding ProjectedFinal Vendor/ Budget Committed to Date &Forecast Cost Comments $3,598,000.00 Planning Studies-Change Order #3 $-$73,047.00 $11,100.00 $84,147.00 Harris Labor $- Environmental $- Land Acquisition $- Preliminary Design $- Total Planning $84,147.00 Design Consultant $- In House/Labor $- Advertise &Award $- Total Design $- Construction In House/Labor $- Construction Contracts $- Construction Manager $- AccpUclose-out $- Total Construction $-$-$-$- Grand Total $-$-$-$84,147.00 AGENDA ITEM 10 TYPE MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: (Chief) STAFF REPORT Regular Board Meeting BOARD MEETING DATE:July 5,2006 Gary Stalker,,@ W.O.lG.F.NO:DIV.NO.5 System Operations Manager Ii/ Pedro Porras,Chief of Water Operation U!- APPROVED BY:Manny Magana,Assistant General Manager,Engineering and Water Operations (Asst.GM): SUBJECT:Acceptance of Mr.Jose Rodriguez's Request for a Waiver of Fees STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To accept Mr.Jose Rodriguez's request for waiving the District's fee in the amount of $4,617.00 for an unauthorized sewer connection. PURPOSE: To accept Mr.Jose Rodriguez's request for a waiver of the District's fee in the amount of $4,617.00 for an unauthorized sewer connection pursuant to Section 10 of the District's Code of Ordinance. ANALYSIS: Mr.Rodriguez resides at 4816 Redondo Drive in La Mesa.He immediately removed the unauthorized connection,at his expense,when notified of it.There was no damage done to the sewer system.A chronological series of the events related to this action are as follows: 1.On May 4,2004 Mr.Rodriguez purchased this property and has submitted a copy of the Grant Deed (Attachment B)for the property as verification of the date of purchase.Mr.Rodriguez claims that he did not make the illegal sewer connection but rather it already existed on his property when he purchased the property and was unaware of it.He also claims that the real estate agent who sold him his property was not aware of the illegal connection. 2.On June 9,2004 the District's collection system maintenance staff discovered the illegal connection,a PVC pipe inserted through the concrete collar just below the lid.A trench line was still visible to the corner of the house,near a pool;however,it was obvious to staff that the trench was several months old. 3.The collection system maintenance staff stated that they reported the connection to Doug Clarke,the previous Water Reclamation Manager.No documentation of any follow-up action taken at the time could be located.Doug Clarke retired from the District in late 2004. 4.On September 1,2005,collections staff were cleaning and inspecting the same system again and discovered the illegal connection was still there.They notified Dale Kreinbring, Reclamation Plant Supervisor,who asked management for direction on what needed to be done.Gary Stalker,System Operations Manager,consulted with the District's legal counsel. Legal counsel determined that the homeowner should be fined $4,617.00 for the illegal connection per Section 51.04 of the Code of Ordinances entitled "Unauthorized Connection to District Sewer System." 5.The District mailedMr.Rodriguez a "Notice of Fine"for the unauthorized sewer connection, dated November 22,2005.Mr.Rodriguez spoke with two District staff members and at which time he was instructed to disconnect the illegal connection and redirect the sewer pipe to his existing sewer main.Mr.Rodriguez states that as soon as he was instructed to disconnect the illegal connection he worked diligently to rectify this and did so within a few days.District staff verified that Mr.Rodriguez disconnected the connection and stated that Mr.Rodriguez was always congenial to staff and not confrontational. 6.Mr.Rodriguez sent a letter to the District (Attachment C)dated December 19,2005 requesting a waiver of the fine based on not being the owner when the connection was made and on his prompt actions to remove the connection. 7.The District sent Mr.Rodriguez a letter dated February 15,2006 stating that per Section 10.01 of the Code of Ordinance he would need to apply for a waiver and submit a fee of $50.00. 8.Mr.Rodriguez submitted an "Application for Waiver or Modification of Ordinance Requirements"form and $50.00 fee to the District on March 13,2006 (Attachment C). Staff is recommending that this waiver of the fine be approved because Mr.Rodriguez was not the owner when the unauthorized connection was made,he immediately removed the connection when notified him of it,and there was no damage done to the sewer collection system.In addition,the District's staff failed to follow-up when the unauthorized connection was initially discovered in June, 2004. The District could try to collect a fine from the previous owner,who lives at 4222 Avocado Blvd.in La Mesa,CA.This address is in the District's sewer service area and Helix Water District's water service area.However,if they refused to pay,it would cost the District in excess of the fine amount of $4,617.00 to collect it. FISCAL IMPACT: None STRATEGIC GOAL: Stewards of Public Infrastructure LEGAL IMPACT: General Manager NOm Attachment A:Committee Action Form Attachment B:Copy of Mr.Rodriquez's Grant Deed Attachment C:Mr.Rodriguez's request for waiver of penalty fee ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT:Acceptance of Mr.Jose Rodriguez's Request for a Waiver of Fees COMMITTEE ACTION: This item will be presented to the Engineering/Operations Committee on June 23,2006. 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. I Attachment B I Attachment C I Attachment c 1