20100706 Late CorrespondenceI.4►IJ RICHARDS I WATSON I GERSHON
V411 ATTORNEYS AT LAW -A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
355 South Grand Avenue, 40th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071-3101
Telephone 213.626.8484 Facsimile 213.626.0078
MEMORANDUM
to: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
from: Carol W. Lynch, City Attorney
Shiri Klima, Assistant City Attorney
date: July 6, 2010
subject: City Council Questions Raised at Public Meeting on June 29, 2010 regarding
Becoming a Charter City, and Responsive Answers Thereto
On June 29, 2010, we presented to the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City")
on the issue of becoming a charter city. We also submitted an extensive staff report on this topic.
At the meeting, the Council asked three questions to which we did not have immediate responses
and which we have subsequently researched. Below in bold are the Council's questions and our
researched responses.
I. Do the elements of the City's general plan need to be revised as frequently in a
charter city as they do in a general law city?
In a general law city, the housing element of a general plan must be revised "as frequently as
appropriate," but in any case at least once every five years. Gov't Code § 65588(a), (b),
(e)(3)(B). The other general plan elements must be reviewed only periodically and updated as
warranted by changing circumstances. Gov't Code § 65103(a); see also Curtin's California Land
Use and Planning Law, 2009 edition, chapter 2, pages 15-16.
Regarding charter cities, Government Code Section 65700(a) states:
"The provisions of [Chapter 3 regarding Local Planning, Government Code section
65100 et seq.] shall not apply to a charter city, except to the extent that the same may be
adopted by charter or ordinance of the city; except that charter cities shall adopt general
plans in any case, and such plans shall be adopted by resolution of the legislative body of
the city, or the planning commission if the charter so provides, and such plans shall
contain the mandatory elements required by Article 5 (commencing with Section 65300)
of Chapter 3 of this title."
Thus, so long as a charter city adopts a general plan by resolution that contains the mandatory
elements, the revision requirement does not apply unless the city's charter or ordinances adopt
R6876-0001 \1240890v2.doc 11
RICHARDS I WATSON ( GERSHON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW -A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
MEMORANDUM
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
July 6, 2010
Page 2
such a requirement. A charter city may not have to revise its general plan at all, and in any case,
need not revise its general plan as frequently as a general law city.
II. Have any charter cities reverted to being general law cities?
We have not found any examples of such a reversion. We searched the League of California
Cities (the "League") website but have not found such an example. We spoke with Kourtney
Burdick at the League, and she has not heard of any such cities. We also sent out an email to the
Public Law attorneys at Richards, Watson & Gershon asking if anyone knew of such an instance,
but have not received any replies. Thus, we do not know of any such cities.
III. Have charter cities weathered the recent economy better than general law cities?
We spoke with Timothy Schaefer, and he reiterated that he does not work with all of the cities in
the State and has not surveyed all cities to make a finite determination. However, he opines that
most if not all of the recent state budget cuts and the Legislature's reclamation of local funds
have affected charter cities just the same as they have affected general law cities. The benefit to
charter cities in this and any economy is that they have greater control over their expenditures, so
Mr. Schaefer opined that it is possible that charter cities weathered the recent economy better
than general law cities because of their heightened ability to cut their own expenditures in a time
when revenue decreased. However, he does not have statistics on point.
Ms. Burdick at the League said she does not know of any trends, and that the League has not
collected any such data.
R6876-0001\1240890v2.doc ( 2—
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY CLERK
DATE: JULY 6, 2010
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO
AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
for tonight's meeting:
Item No. Description of Material
3 Answers to questions posed by Mayor Wolowicz
5 Answers to questions posed by Mayor Wolowicz
6 Correction to page 6-2 of Staff Report —paragraph 2
10 Correction to pages 10-20 through 10-31 of Staff Report
12 Answers to questions posed by Mayor Wolowicz
Respectfully submitted,
Carla Morreale
W:WGENDA\2010 Additions Revisions to agendas\20100706 additions revisions to agenda.doc
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Carolynn Petru and Sara Singer
FROM:
Steve Wolowicz
CC:
Carolyn Lehr
DATE:
July 6, 2010
SUBJECT:
CC meeting 7/6/10 — item #3 Five -Year CIP
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
Carolynn and Sara,
Several meetings ago Staff recommended to Council that the funds relating to
undergrounding of utilities be returned to the General Fund. Cannot those funds
be applied to the CIP Unfunded Projects relating to Utility Undergrounding
projects described on pages 3-73, 74, and 75?
Thanks,
Steve
Hi Steve,
I checked with Finance regarding your question about the Utility Undergrounding
funds, and after adoption of the FY10-11 budget, only about $190,000 remains in
this fund. The fund originated from a desire to complete residential
undergrounding projects, and is supposed to be used as seed money to
complete engineering studies for residential neighborhoods that are interested in
undergrounding utilities through the creation of a special assessment districts.
The minimum estimate for an undergrounding project on the unfunded list is
$150,000; however, Public Works would be required to complete additional
research to determine a more refined estimate before we could include one of
these projects in the 5 -Year schedule. It is unknown at this time whether this
fund balance could bear the cost of an arterial utility undergrounding project and
retain enough of a fund balance to provide for a residential engineering study
should a neighborhood request one.
Page 1 of 1
C:\Documents and Settings\cadam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK451\RESPONSES to Wolowicz - cc meeting 2010 07-06 #3 CIP.doc 07/06/10 3:2C
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Dennis McLean
FROM:
Steve Wolowica
CC:
Carolyn Lehr
DATE:
July 6, 2010
CC meeting
7/6/10
SUBJECT:
item #5 Services agreement - Quinn
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
Dennis,
A few questions on this issue:
1. This is not directly related to the FEMA audit issue on the Western Avenue
sinkhole?
McLean reply:
Mr. Jerry Quinn has continued to provide services to the City related to the FEMA
claims resulting from the winter storms in 2005-05, including the Western Avenue
sinkhole.
2. What other items from the 2005 storm is possible for coverage, and does
this included the damage to residences?
McLean
McLean reply:
Based upon discussions with other members of Staff, the City filed claims for all
any and all storm damage it incurred resulting from the winter 2004-05 storms.
The City cannot file FEMA claims on behalf of property owners, or as a result of
such claims.
Page 1 of 1
ZAFEMAt20100706 CC SR Quinn PSA—Sig Authority\20100706 cc meeting 2010 07-06 #5 FEMA ser ices_McLean draft n:ply.doc 07/06/10 4:40 PM
CIVIC CENTER FACILITY ASSESSMENT
July 6, 2010
Page 2
BACKGROUND
The City Council has directed staff to complete a baseline study for Upper Point Vicente
Park as part of the Civic Center Master Plan. An assessment of the existing City Hall
facilities (Administration Building, Community Development Building and the Cable
TV/Communications Center) is an important part of the baseline study. Considering the
era of construction and the elapsed time since their construction, the buildings are
experiencing increasing maintenance needs which are likely to continue. To maximize
their potential for adequate use for future generations, the buildings will at some point,
require renovations to meet acceptable accessibility requirements, and safety and utility
standards.
The City Hall buildings are used primarily as administration offices, but they also house
communication equipment and computer network equipment that is used by all City
departments for the provision of all City services. Because the City contracts for public
safety services, we do not have essential public safety facilities such as the Sheriffs
Station or Fire Department Headquarters located within the City limits. Therefore, the City
Hall facilities play a critical role in emergency response as a central communications center
to communicate with the public safety first responders, residents, and the media. Public
Works and Community Development are very important during emergencies because they
are the key responding departments at City Hall. Public Works and Community
Development staff is expected to respond to immediate community needs such as street
repairs, hillside stabilization, broken storm drain pipes, and inspection services. Further,
individual Council members have expressed concerns that the existing City Hall facilities
may be inadequate to allow for the continuation and continuity of local government services
during and following a disaster, such as a major earthquake. Given these considerations,
the City's performance objective is for City Hall facilities to be at the "immediate
occupancy" level, which is defined in the ASCE/SEI 41/06 & FE 6 356 as:
Buildings meeting this performance level are expected to sustain minimal or no
damage to their structural elements and only minor damage to their nonstructural
components. While it would be safe to reoccupy a building meeting this
performance level immediately following a major earthquake, nonstructural systems
may not function due to either a lack of electrical power or internal damage to
equipment. Therefore, although immediate re -occupancy of the building is possible,
it may be necessary to perform some cleanup and repair, and await restoration of
utility service, before the building could function in a normal mode. The risk to life
safety at this performance level is very low.
This assessment will help to determine and quantify any deficiencies which exist based on
this performance objective.
SCOPE OF WORK
The goal of this RFP is to understand costs related to correcting any deficiencies
associated with the structures and systems of the physical plant of the City's administrative
I oc- 6-2 W
From: Dennis McLean [dennism@rpv.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 1:57 PM
To: cc@rpv.com
Cc: carlam@rpv.com; 'Teri Takaoka'
Subject: Late Correspondence - Replacement - 2010 Annual Report of the Oversight Committee
Importance: High
Attachments: 20100625—Exhibit B—OC—Annual Report.pdf
Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Council
I've attached the independent 2010 Annual Report of the Oversight Committee of the Water Quality & Flood Protection (storm
drain) program. While working in the capacity of the liaison for the Committee, I inadvertently included a working draft of the
Committee's Report with the agenda packet for tonight's Council meeting. I would encourage you to replace pages 10-20
through 10-31 with the attached final Report. A hard copy will be distributed as Late Correspondence. The only noteworthy
change from the early version issue follows:
"Total fiscal year expenditures are estimated to be about $1,120K User Fee collections this year amounted to
$1,239K. "
The early version seems to indicate that expenditures are expected to exceed fee revenue during FY09-10. They did not.
I've copied the Members of the Oversight Committee as well.
Thanks,
Dennis McLean
Director of Finance and Information Technology
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Finance and Information Technology
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
wwW:palosverdes. com/r/rpv_
dennism@rpvcom - (310) 544-5212 p — (310) 544-5291 f
Do you really need to print this e-mail?
This e-mail message contains information belonging to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, which may be privileged, confidential and/or protected from disclosure. The
information is intended only for use of the individual or entity named. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this
email in error, or are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.
7/6/2010
t
"Revised" Exhibit B
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: WQFP Program Oversight Committee
DATE: June 25, 2010
SUBJECT: 2010 Annual Report
The Oversight Committee has reviewed RPV Water Quality and Flood
Protection (WQFP) Program activities and expenditures in FY 2009-10, and
plans for FY 2010-11 in accordance with RPV Municipal Code Section
3.44.080. This review was based on information provided by Staff.
Our Annual Report is attached.
�� 4.en,
Frank Lyon
Chairman
WQFP Program Oversight Committee
Cc.-
Carla
c,Carla Morreale
Dennis McLean
Ron Dragoo
Committee Members
Z �� 13 10-20
"Revised" Exhibit B
2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE WQFP PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
An Oversight Committee was established by the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council in 2007 to
annually review project expenditures and plans for the Water Quality and Flood Protection (WQFP)
Program and to recommend a User Fee Rate for the next fiscal year. The Committee consists of the
following members:
Frank Lyon (Chairman)
John Constantino
John Curtis
Henry Ott
Lowell Wedemeyer
The Committee met with the City's Finance and Public Works staffs three times over the past six
weeks to review WQFP Program activities and expenditures in FY 2009-10 and planned projects and
budgeted expenditures in FY 2010-11. Staff also provided the Committee with their proposed Storm
Drain Plan through FY 2014-15, excerpts from the City's 2010 draft Five -Year Financial Model and
the 2010 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and their recommendation for the FY 2010-11 User Fee
Rate.
This report conveys the Committee's conclusions and recommendations in accordance with their
responsibilities designated by the City Council on May 5, 2009 and documented in RPV Municipal
Code Section 3.44.080.
FY 2009-10 EXPENDITURES
The approved WQFP Program expenditure plan (i.e. budget) for FY 2009-10 totaled $2,926K. As of
May 27, $466K had been spent and an additional $655K had been committed. Total fiscal year
expenditures are estimated to be about $1,120K. User Fee collections this year amounted to $1,239K.
Major projects are described in the staff report dated May 10, 2010 (Attachment A), and fiscal year
expenditures are summarized in Attachment (B), which were prepared by Staff.
Staff has advised the Committee that the variance between the $2,926K budget and the estimated
expenditures of $1,120K is largely due to the necessity to investigate design alternatives prior to
beginning the design and environmental phases that were anticipated while developing the FY 09-10
budget estimate for the San Ramon Stabilization project, the deferred Storm Drain Lining project
(expected to begin in early FY 10-11) and rescheduling the Drainage Master Plan Program.
The uncommitted remaining fund balance in the City's WQFP Program Fund as of June 30, 2010 is
estimated to be about $422K.
The Committee believes that all WQFP Program costs to date, including User Fee revenues, have been
properly spent to discover and mitigate storm drain problems in the City.
10-21
3 � t3
"Revised" Exhibit B
PLANS FOR FY 2010-11
Staff has presented the Committee with a draft FY 2010-11 WQFP Program expenditure plan (see
Attachment B) of $1,585K, not including previously authorized but unspent funds. With the expected
$1,806K to be carried forward from FY 2009-10, total WQFP Program expenditures in FY 2010-11
are expected to be about $3.3 million.
Major planned projects in FY 2010-11 are described in Attachment (A), Attachment (C) and
Attachment (D), all prepared by Staff.
All planned projects appear necessary and are being funded appropriately under the present
circumstances.
USER FEE RATE FOR FY 2010-11
The Committee continues to believe that considerably more revenue from a Storm Drain User Fee
could objectively be justified, and recommends increasing the User Fee rate up to the maximum
allowed by law.
OTHER COMMENTS
1. The Committee continues to believe that currently planned resources are inadequate to address
known storm drain repair needs in the City, and experience has shown that additional unknown needs
will probably arise that may require immediate attention. The San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project
alone is roughly estimated to cost around $20 million and definite sources for these costs are currently
unknown. Including these costs, the current Five Year Plan reveals a WQFP Program funding deficit
of about $30 million at the end of FY 2014-15 to address storm drain repair needs that are known at
this time.
2. It would be unrealistic and unfair to fund the City's share of the San Ramon Stabilization Project
entirely with money from the Storm Drain User Fee.
3. The Committee recommends that TOT revenue from Terranea be set aside in a reserve fund and
allocated first to high priority CTP infrastructure repairs, including storm drain projects.
4. The Committee recommends that a provision for funding long-term maintenance of the City's storm
drain system beyond 2016 when the Storm Drain Fee sunsets should be included in future Five -Year
Financial Models.
5. The Committee supports Staff s recommendation to accelerate the Drainage Master Plan Program.
Attachment (A): Staff Report "WQPF Program: FY 09-10 Update" dated May 10, 2010 (w/o attach.)
Attachment (B): Storm Drain Plan through FY 14-15
Attachment (C): Excerpt from Staff report "Water Quality And Flood Protection Program — Public
Hearing For Annual User Fee Rate — FY10-11" dated May 26, 2010
Attachment (D): Excerpt From FY 10-11 DRAFT CIP — Hawthorne Blvd. Project.
10-22
�{ 0� t3
"Revised" Exhibit B
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
Attachment A
PALOS VERDES
TO: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE FOR THE WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD
PROTECTION PROGRAM
FROM: DENNIS McLEAN, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
DATE: MAY 10, 2010
SUBJECT: WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM —
FY09.10 UPDATE
Project Managers: Andy Winje, PE Associate Engineer
Ron Dragoo, PE, Senior Engineer
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
This report includes a brief update regarding the major projects Included in the Water
Quality and Flood Protection program in addition to highlights from the FY09-10 program.
PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project
The City allocated $1.2 million for the completion of the Project Study Report (PSR) for the
San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project (a/k/a as the Palos Verdes Drive East
(PVDE)/Palos Verdes Drive South (PVDS) Roadway Stabilization Project). The PSR will
provide a minimum of three preliminary alternative designs and environmental requirements
for each design alternative. This phase of the project should be complete within 12
months. This contract was awarded to Harris and Associates on March 16, 2010.
The project is estimated to cost $19.5 million, and has been included in the City's Capital
Improvement Plan on the Unfunded Projects List. The City has taken a collaborative
approach with the City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles County to request federal funds for
the San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project. All three government agencies signed a
letter of cooperation pledging their collective commitment to work together to insure that
these vital transportation routes remain safe and viable. The letter was signed by RPV
.5. 13 10-23
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment A
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM — FY09-10 UPDATE
May 10, 2010
Page 2 of 5
Mayor Steve Wolowicz,. L.A. Councilwoman Janice Hahn and L.A. County Supervisor Don
Knabe and submitted to Congressman Dana Rohrabacher in December 2009.
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher visited the project site in August 2009, and immediately
recognized the threat, and therefore, has included the project in his High Priority Project
portfolio for the reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU (a federal transportation bill in which
projects are authorized and funded) this year. The City has received statewide and
regional support for the project Including letters from Tony Strickland, CA State Senate,
Roderick D. Wright, CA State Senate, Alan Lowenthal, CA State Senate, Bonnie
Lowenthal, CA State Assembly, Ted Lieu, CA State Assembly, Don Knabe, Los Angeles
County Supervisor, and Janice Hahn, Los Angeles City Councilwoman. Please see the
attached fact sheet for additional information about the project.
McCarrreli Canyon
The Notice of Completion for the McCarrell Canyon project was presented to the City
Council on November 17, 2009. The project reached substantial completion in April, just 24
months after its commencement. The $7.4 million project was designed to convey water
from a 100 -year storm from both the McCarrell Canyon and Barkentine Canyon to the
beach with the expectation of providing full protection to the neighborhoods. Upon
completion of this project, miscellaneous tasks have been identified to clean up the
surrounding project site. The amount of $167,000 was carried over to FY09-10 to complete
incidental site clean-up work, including undergrounding the utilities. The City was granted
the APWA achievement award for the project.
PROJECT UPDATES
Pro ect Name: San Ramon Canyon Stabilization Project
Pro ect Area: P.ro ect Area 3
Bud eted Cost: $1,162,000
Contract Award: $506,300
Total/Estimated Costs: TBD
Percentage Completion: 0%
Pro ect Description:
A Request For Proposals was issued and qualified firms Interviewed in November 2009 for the
completion of a Project Study Report (PSR). A Professional Services Contract was awarded to Harris
and Associates on March 16, 2010 for the preparation of the Project Study Report. The PSR will
Identify at least three preliminary design options and provide environmental requirements for each
design alternative. This phase of the project should be complete within 12 months. City Staff and
Elected Officials are actively pursuing Federal funding opportunities. A fact sheet about the project
has been developed and Is available to all interested parties see attached).
to of 13 10-24
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment A
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM — FY09-10 UPDATE
May 10, 2010
Page 3 of 5
Pro ect Name: Catch Basin Filtration Devices
Project Area: Pro ect Area 12
Budgeted Cost: $205,000
Contract Award: TBD
Final/Estimated Costs: TBD
Percentage Completion: 0%
Project Description:
Staff has deferred advertising the catch basin filtration project in the north east portion of the city.
This area of the City was identified to address the trash problems at Lake Machado in Los Angeles.
Due to problems with performing work on catch basins that are maintained by Los Angeles County,
work on this project had to be delayed to the 2009-2010 Fiscal Year. Procedures for the installation
of best management practice devices for storm drain structures within Los Angeles County Flood
Control District Facilities have recently been published. The Project Plans and Specifications are
being revised to include these new requirements. The Project will be advertised in May and a
contract is expected to be awarded in June 2010. The estimated cost of this project is $200,000.
Project Name: Los Verdes Golf Course
pro ect Area: Pro ect Area 10
Budgeted Cost: $95,000
Contract Award: TBD
Final/Estimated Costs: TBD
Percentage Completion: 0%
Pro ect Description:
This is a Los Angeles County project. The originally proposed share of project cost was 22% by the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Storm drain Improvements behind homes on Calle De Suenos were
Installed by the County of Los Angeles during this past year. Albeit only half of the system originally
proposed by Los Angeles County was installed, the Improvements should Improve how runoff from
their facility is managed. The remaining half of the improvements were not installed by the County
due to the lack of adequate right of way to install a standard county storm drain through private
property. To date, Los Angeles County has not Invoiced the City requesting reimbursement for the
City's share of cost for the construction that has been completed. Therefore, staff believes that it is
prudent to carry forward the $95,000 included in the FY07-08 budget as the City's share of
construction costs for this project.
--I OF 13 10-25
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment A
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM — FY09-10 UPDATE
May 10, 2010
Page 4 of 5
Project Name: PVDE Drainage Inlets
Pro Oct Area: Pro ect Area 6
Budgeted Cost: $60,000
Contract Award: TBD
Total/Estimated Costs: TBD
Percentage Completion: 0%
Pro ect Description:
This project was presented as the first phase of a five year project to address roadway drainage
Issues along Palos Verdes Drive East. Subsequent to establishing this project, Public Works
recommended and the City Council approved a study of the Palos Verdes Drive East to evaluate the
adequacy of the roadway to accommodate Its many varied uses (i.e. vehicle traffic, equestrian and
cycling) and provide recommendations to increase safety. If curb improvements were installed atthis
time, it is likely that the improvements would not accommodate future safety recommendations. No
action has been taken and this project is being included with improvements that are anticipated on
Palos Verdes Drive East to better facilitate surface drainage while accommodating the multiple uses
of this particular roadway. Staff recommends that the budgeted funds identified for curb
Improvements be carried forward to next year's budget when the larger roadway project will likely be
conducted. A roadway project which helps address drainage issues along PVDE is currently being
designed. Improvements are anticipated to be Included In the project that will better channel water
away from private property. Construction is tentatively anticipated during the summer of 2010.
Project Name: Miscellaneous Repairs & Storm Drain Filtration Maintenance
Project Area: Project Area 12
Budgeted Cost: $326,495
Contract Award: $152,400
TotallEstimated Costs: $326,000
Percentage Completion: 10%
Project Description:
As a result of this program and the following maintenance activities, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
has not received a single "after—hours" callout to address a rain related emergency during the past
three years.
All of the filters in the 111 catch basins with filtration and trash screens Installed in the City
are scheduled to be replaced;
All Catch Basins in the City have been cleaned;
Large Diameter Storm Drain Maintenance projects have been identified on PVDE,
Hawthorne Blvd., and Indian Peak Rd. and will be repaired through the lining project this year
D 44 storm drain outlets are identified and scheduled to be cleaned and repaired throughout
the City this year
Cleaned and video inspected 26 sections of CMP.
Other miscellaneous repairs have also been including repairs at Seacove and Packet Road and an
18 Inch drain on Palos Verdes Drive South.
$ 13 10-26
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment A
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM — FY09-10 UPDATE
May 10, 2010
Page 5 of 5
Project Name: Via Colinita Vickery Canyon
Project Area: pro ect Area 7
Budgeted Cost: $251,600
Contract Award: $85,475
Total/Estimated Costs: $251,600
Percentage Completion: 25%
Pro ect Description:
One of the pipelines draining into the Vickery Canyon basin runs along Palos Verdes Drive East. A
project has been completed connecting additional catch basins to this pipeline. Construction on this
project began in January and was completed In March. The Project cost was $85,475.
Additional pipelines in the Vickery Canyon basin will be rehabilitated this year and are In various
stages of design. Although cost estimates are not fully developed, construction on this project is
expected to begin this year;
Project Name: Storm Drain Linin
Pro ect Area: Project Area 12
Budgeted Cost: $624,822
Contract Award: TBD
Total/Estimated Costs: TBD
Percentage Completion: f 0%
Pro ect Description:
As a result of the inspections performed on the large diameter storm drain pipes, seven storm drain
lines were determined to need some form of work. One of the seven (the one -hundred twenty inch
diameter pipe running under PVDS that was repaired last year) pipes identified became an
emergency repair when holes in the pipe were discovered during a follow up inspection. Three large
diameter storm drains are scheduled to be repaired through this year's lining program, and the
remaining three large diameter pipes needing repairs will be Inspected again next year and possibly
scheduled for repairs.
Following this year's rains, additional work is required on many pipe inverts and this work is currently
underway. Plans and specifications for the FY09-10 lining project are in process. Twenty-six lines
have been identified for lining this year. Three large diameter lines are included, and the remaining
twenty-three are thirty Inches and smaller. Advertising for this year's project has been delayed to
May to accommodate repair work. A Project award is likely to be recommended at the June 22, 2010
City Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes Storm Drain Costs (FY09-10 through FY14-15)
q of 13 10-27
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment C
WATER QUAL ND FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM— ANNUAL
USER FEE RATE — 0-11
May 28, 2010
Page 9 of 13
The ct has been divided into three p s and will likely take a number of years to
complete. Y09-10 and FY10-11, the City cil allocated approximately $1.5 million
(including ca ver money from FY08-09) to coNate
Study Report which will
serve as the pr initiation document that is sund Federal Agencies for
project funding. T ontract that is expected to lcept alternatives for the
project was awarded orris and Associates att0 City Council meeting.
This study is expected eke 6 to 8 months to I and Phase III have
been included on the unfu d list of the CIP at this time. Attached is report is a copy
of the Palos Verdes Drive Ea Palos Verdes Drive South Roadway S ' ization Project
Fact Sheet.
Drain User Fee and FYI 0-11
The Star in User Fee, which generates nue totaling about $1.2 million annually,
will expire in This revenue is deposited the Water Quality Flood Protection
(WQFP) fund for provement and maintenanc he City's storm drain facilities.
The draft 5 -Year Storm Plan that was presented to th mmittee on May 10th was
nearly Identical to the pian p nted a year ago. During Its ting on May 10th, the
Committee suggested that to valuate the Inclusion of sev of the "original 38
projects" in FY13-14 and FY15 o Plan. Accordingly, Staff ha onsidered and
luded certain projects in FY12-13, -14 and FY14-15. A desc n of those
p cts are presented below. Staff has ais -considered the timing and oach for
dev Ing a complete master plan of drainag described below. Once th an is
comple the priority of all projects included in the or Storm Drain Plan may ch e.
Additional a funding needs of the top priority San mon Stabilization Project m
affect this Pla .
Drainage Master Plan Program
The Drainage Master Plan Program seeks to do two things. First, a planning document
would be prepared during FYI 0-11 to guide staff in developing project programming. Staff
has re -programmed the Los Verdes project allocation and other projects savings to fund
the preparation of the planning document. Second, a data collection and retention system
would be implemented that would allow for efficient and systematic management of the
stormwater system Into the future that would be integrated into the City's existing
Geographic Information System ("GIS') as its data backbone. $40,000 is already included
in the FY09-10 budget of the General Fund that will be used to facilitate integration of the
new data Into the GIS system.
The current planning document for the City's storm drain system is the Update to the
Master Pian of Drainage, prepared in 2004 by a consultant. It was an update to a previous
plan, prepared by the same consultant in 1998. The update In 2004 added to the storm
11 of 13 10-29
"Revised" Exhibit B
WATER QUALITY AND FLOOD PROTECTION
USER FEE RATE— FYI 0-11
May 26, 2010
Page 10 of 13
Attachment C
PROGRAM- ANNUAL
drain Inventory to reflect projects that had been recently completed. It also Included a
revised hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for the pipes to determine where hydraulic
deficiencies in the system occur. However, no assessment of the condition of the pipes
was made at that time. All the pipes In the Inventory (atlas) were assumed to be fully
operable and In an adequate state of repair. Based on this analysis, the consultant
developed a list of hydraulically deficient drains, a prioritization scheme based on that and
estimated costs. This list became the basis for the projects identified at the implementation
of the WQFP Program.
The basic inadequacy of the 2004 master plan update was that it did not address the
physical condition of the pipes but merely addressed the hydraulic issues. Since 2004, a
number of deficiencies in the physical condition of the pipes and channels have been
Identified and many of them addressed through new construction and lining projects.
However, at this time, many deficiencies remain. Some are known and some unknown,
due to both hydraulics and serviceability. In addition, as a given storm drain is modified, It
may affect the characteristics of runoff on downstream systems. In order to capture these
system changes and incorporate conditional deficiencies In the planning process, staff
believes it Is important to systematically document the existing conditions, update the
analyses of the system, develop costs of correction and levels of risk associated with
deficiencies, and use that data to develop project priorities and work plans. This would be
accomplished by development of a Drainage Master Plan Program.
in order for the master plan to be comprehensive, it should include verified inventory data,
data on the condition of pipes, revised hydrologic and hydraulic calculations and models as
required, estimates of costs of both corrective measures and risks of waiting, and a
scheme by which projects can be prioritized,
Further, to make the master plan useful In the future, It should be able to be updated to
reflect work of new drainage and development projects, and discovery of new pipe
conditions. Again, the backbone of the master plan would be the City's GIS system, which
would store atlas information, archived records of construction and maintenance, and
updated inspection footage. The GIS platform Is already being used by the City, including
some atlas Information of the storm drains. The new master plan information would be
added to this, along with future data obtained from new projects, routine field inspections
and reported problems. An effort would be made annually to update the GIS system with
data created and collected throughout the year.
ects added to 5 Year Storm Dra Ian
Based comments o d by the Comm members du he Oversight
Committee ing conducted ay 10t", Sfiaff has re the 5 -Year Sto ain Plan,
including the fo ng storm drain ts:
�2 °F 13 10-30
"Revised" Exhibit B
Attachment D
Excerpt from City of Rancho Palos Verdes FY10-11 DRAFT Capital Improvement
Plan
PROJECT: HAWTHORNE BLVD.
TYPE: Storm Drain System
LOCATION: Project Area 10
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
This project will improve drainage across Hawthorne Boulevard by
replacing two existing 18" pipes with one 24" and one 30" RCP
DESCRIPTION: pipes. There will be two separate lines crossing Hawthorne
Boulevard from north to south. Phase 1 of the project is planned for
FY 10-11 and Phase II will be completed in FY 11-12.
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES IF KNOWN
CATEGORY YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 6
ACQUISITION
LEGAL
TOTAL 1 $370,000 1 $200,000
IMPACT ON OPERATING BUDGET
N/A
JUSTIFICATION FOR INCLUSION ON S YEAR CIP
SAFETY X ECONOMY AND EFFICIENCY
SUPPORTS ESSENTIAL CITY SERVICES OUTSIDE FUNDING COMMITTED/ELIGIBLE
SUPPORTS TACTICAL PLAN GOALS X COMMUNITY QUALITY/SUSTAINABILITY X
OTHER PROJECT INFORMATION:
Hawthorne SWC1
Page 34 of 87
13 J- 15
10-31
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Ray Holland and Nicole Jules
Carolynn Petru and Sara Singer
FROM:
Steve Wolowicz
CC:
Carolyn Lehr
DATE:
July 6, 2010
SUBJECT:
CC meeting 7-6-10 item #12 PVDE Improvements
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
Ray, Nicole — and Carolynn and Sara,
Please help us understand the relationship between the CIP improvements in
topic #3 and those in topic #12 for PVDE.
1. Understanding that the projects listed on page 12-2 are for FYE 11-12 it is
difficult to tie these to the five-year CIP schedule on page 3-14. Can you
help explain the relationship?
2. There is a very wide range on Project Budget from $85,000 to $1,575,000.
(A) Are those amounts on page 3-14?
(B) Why is there such a wide range ($85,000 to $1.5 million) for item #3 on
page 12-2?
Page 1 of 2 12-
CADocuments and Settings\cadam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet F1les\0LK451\cc meeting 2010 07-06 #12 PVDE_nicoles response.doc 07/06/10 4:37
3. Aren't the "Priority Projects to be included in the 5 -year CIP - Unfunded
projects list" (items 6 to 9 for a total of $2,850,000 to $4,550,000) already
on the master schedule of unfunded projects on page 12-2?
Priority
Page 2 of 2
C:\Documents and Settings\carlam\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK451\cc meeting 2010 07-06 #12 PVDE_nicoles response.doc 07/06/10 4:37