HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Agenda Packet 051308CITY OF ATASCADERO
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION: 6:00 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, California
CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 P.M.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT — CLOSED SESSION
2. CALL TO ORDER
a. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Govt. Code Sec. 54956.8)
Property: 6905 EI Camino Real
Agency Negotiator: Wade McKinney, Executive Director
Negotiating Parties: James Harrison
Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiator will concern price and terms
of payment.
b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Govt. Code Sec. 54956.8)
Property: 3855, 3865, 3895 and 3905 EI Camino Real
Agency Negotiator: Wade McKinney, Executive Director
Negotiating Parties: Alan Yarborough
Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiator will concern price and terms
of payment.
3. ADJOURN
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
on
REGULAR SESSION: 6:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL: Chairperson Beraud
Vice Chairperson Luna
Board Member Brennler
Board Member Clay
Board Member O'Malley
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to
address the Board on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Board has
jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state your name and
address for the record before making your presentation. The Board may take action to
direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. A maximum of 30
minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless changed by the Board.)
A. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Mid -Year and Mid -Cycle Budget Revisions
■ Fiscal Impact: $273,810 decrease in Redevelopment Agency reserves
for fiscal year 2007-2008
$612,540 decrease in Redevelopment Agency reserves for fiscal year
2008-2009
■ Recommendation: Board adopt the attached Draft Resolution
amending the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 budgets. [Executive Director]
2. Appropriation of Funds for Restoration of Historic City Hall
■ Fiscal Impact: $6,527,700.
■ Recommendation: Agency Board appropriate $6,527,700 to cover the
current funding shortfall for restoration of the historic City Hall and to
assure the California Cultural and Historical Endowment that the City
intends to move forward with the project. [Administrative Services]
3. Atascadero Creek Bank Restoration Project — City Bid No. 2006-011
■ Fiscal Impact: None.
■ Recommendations: Board:
1. Accept Arthurs Contracting, Inc.'s work as complete.
2. Authorize the Public Works Director to sign and file the Notice of
Completion. [Public Works]
2
BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, the Board
Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities.
Board Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take
action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Board may take
I%W action on items listed on the Agenda.)
C. ADJOURNMENT:
M
3
ITEM NUMBER: RA A-1
DATE: 5/13/08
Community Redevelopment Agency of
Atascadero
Staff Report — Executive Director
Mid -Year and Mid -Cycle Budget Revisions
RECOMMENDATION:
Board adopt the attached Draft Resolution amending the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009
budgets.
REPORT -IN -BRIEF:
Like most public agencies in the State of California, the Redevelopment Agency is in a
period of economic downturn. Property taxes are coming in lower than expected and
operating expenses are coming in slightly higher than expected. The Agency has
adopted an aggressive capital improvement program for the current budget cycle.
Taken together with the reduced revenues and increased expenses, this program will
leave the Agency with a negative uncommitted reserve fund balance as of June 30,
2009. However, many of the capital projects have not yet been started and the full
financial effect of these capital projects may not impact the current budget cycle.
Therefore, it is anticipated that for the Agency will remain in the black through June 30,
2009.
DISCUSSION:
Revenue and Expense Projections
Property tax current increment for fiscal year 2007-2008 is coming in a healthy 18%
above the prior year; however it is still falling just short of current year budget
projections. Current increment is expected to come in at a total of $2,227,630 with
$1,653,590 being deposited into the Agency General Fund and $574,040 being
deposited in to the Agency Debt Service Fund in accordance with bond covenants. For
2008-2009, staff believes that due to the stagnant real estate and development market,
that the Agency will not see nearly the growth in current increment that it has seen in
5
the past. This means a projected shortfall of $340,000 for Current Increment Revenues
in 2008-2009.
Supplemental Tax Increment revenues are directly related to property sales within the
Redevelopment Agency. As the number of properties selling drops, so does the
amount that the Agency receives from these supplemental tax billings. In 2006-2007,
the Agency received $284,400 in Supplemental Tax Increment. This revenue is
expected to fall to $135,000 in the current fiscal year and to remain at that level in fiscal
year 2008-2009. This will cause a budgeted shortfall in Supplemental Tax Increment of
$134,000 in 2007-2008 and $175,000 in 2008-2009.
Rent income and interest income are expected to come as budgeted for both fiscal
years; however an expected contribution of $70,000 from the Colony Square Project for
the pedestrian bridge may not come in as expected.
Most operating expenses are coming in as expected, however some budget
adjustments are being proposed for items such as a small proposed increase to salaries
and benefits due to changes to the labor contracts and a $20,000 annual increase in
contract costs to account for the increased need for legal advice as the Agency
becomes more active. A $4,230 change is also proposed in 2008-2009 for increased
liability insurance costs. The Agency is a member of CJPIA which is a cost sharing pool
and must share in the cost of several large settlements that have been incurred by other
members of the pool.
There are also a number of special projects that have been undertaken or are proposed
to be undertaken by the Agency that require additional funding:
Historic Printery Consultant
$40,000 for fiscal year 2007-2008
At the February 27, 2007 meeting, the City Council agreed to a process for the
Printery whereby the Redevelopment Agency would hire an independent
historical consultant to prepare the historic analysis for the Printery CEQA
document. At that time, it was intended to bring the $40,000 appropriation before
the Redevelopment Agency Board for consideration, whether as part of the
regular budget cycle or as a separate item. This budget appropriation was never
formally brought before the Agency's Board. Therefore, staff recommends this
amount be included in the mid -year adjustments.
• Holiday Lights
$9,970 for fiscal year 2007-2008
The Sunken Gardens Holiday Enhancement Project had an adopted budget of
$20,000 for festive holiday decorations in Sunken Gardens. Originally, these
new decorations were intended as a replacement for the tree lights which were
removed as part of the safety tree trimming project. After the lights were
removed, the community indicated a preference for the tree lights rather than any
other decoration. The tree lights had been an important part of the community's
holiday tradition for a long time. The cost to put the old lights back up was
0
Im
equivalent to having new, more efficient lights installed. The $9,970 budget
adjustment represents the additional cost of the tree lights over the alternate
decorations that were originally planned.
City Hal! Landscaping
$19,610 for fiscal year 2007-2008
The proximity of City Hall to the new Colony Square project required that some
renovations occur in front of City Hall. The Colony Square project performed a
significant amount of improvements in the parking lot area, including a change in
all of the elevations for drainage, curbs, gutters, water lines, irrigation and
landscaping. The Agency is responsible to maintain the landscaping in front of
City Hail as part of the agreement with the City. Madrone Landscapes, Inc. was
hired to repair all of the irrigation and replace landscaping as a result of the
improvements done by Colony Square. The new elevations and landscaping are
consistent with the requirements for the upcoming construction of the pedestrian
bridge.
Fagade Improvement Program
No adjustment recommended.
Recently, the Board requested that staff research the Agency's capacity to renew
the Fagade Improvement Grant program. Staff recommends that Board should
not commit the Agency to any new or expanded programs until the economy
turns around and the Agency is in a better fiscal environment.
Main Street — The Agency Board expressed interest in increasing funding to
Main Street to enhance existing events and create new events. One alternative
discussed would provide up to $5,000 per event of matching funds to a maximum
of $25,000. Matching funds would be sponsorships or other new funds raised by
Main Street to support individual events. There was discussion regarding the
need to create a monitoring program to determine the success of this effort
including hotel room sales, number of businesses open, attendance, etc. The
events would not result in additional City cost. Main Street would be responsible
for coordination and administration of the events so there would not be an impact
to City services. There are other alternatives including a simple contract
increase. Anticipated costs of this expanded program are $25,000 to be included
in the 2008-09 operating budget.
The Redevelopment Agency budgeted for a very aggressive capital improvement
program as part of the 2007-2009 budget process. Eighteen projects totaling over
$11.6 million- were projected to be completed in the two year budget. While projects
such as the Lewis Avenue Bridge and the Colony Park Community Center have been
completed, there are a number of projects that are still in the design phase and
therefore will not be constructed until the spring or summer of 2009. This means that
costs to complete construction will be incurred in later years than originally proposed.
7
Available Fund Balance
Over the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 fiscal years, revenues are projected to come in
$767,400 short of projections, operating expenses are expected to come in $64,560
over projections and special projects are expected to come in $29,580 over projections.
Attachment B - Budget Projections for the Community Redevelopment Agency of
Atascadero shows detailed revenues and expense projections for the Agency General
Fund for each of the fiscal years. The worksheet was prepared assuming all capital
projects will be completed by June 30, 2009. While this assumption is probably not
realistic at this time, the worksheet does show how much of its available funds the
Agency has committed to budgeted projects. Currently, the Agency has committed
$102,000 more than it has available in the next two fiscal years.
This means that because of the economic downturn, the Agency has potentially
overextended itself. The expected delays in a number of projects (those projects that
have not been started are indicated by an "' on Attachment B), however, leads staff to
believe that the Agency is fine at this time. The Agency will not need to borrow
additional funds to meet its commitments, but instead can use 2009-2010 funds to
complete its capital program.
Potential Future Commitments
While this means that the Agency is able to meet its current commitments, there is
another possibly large financial commitment that has not been accounted for that the
Board must consider in any future funding decisions that it may make- the Restoration
of Historic City Hall. The exact cost to repair Historic City Hall is unknown at this time,
as is the amount that FEMA and OES will participate in the restoration; however it would
not be unlikely that the Redevelopment Agency would have to contribute more than the
$2 million already budgeted in order to complete this priority project. Funding from the
Redevelopment Agency will also be required to meet the cash flow needs of this very
large project. (OES and FEMA funding is on a reimbursement basis.) The
Redevelopment Agency does have the bonding capacity to both cover cash flow needs
and to contribute additional funds to the project, should it become necessary. Bonds,
however, come with required principal and interest payments that will require the
commitment of future increment.
Staff Recommendations
Some basic precautions should ensure that the Agency continues to be able to meet its
financial commitments both now and into the future. Staff recommends that the Board:
• Not approve any new appropriations without the elimination or reduction of a
currently budgeted project or program; and
• The Board continue to monitor the long-term financial outlook for the Agency in
order to ensure that the funds are available for the projects and programs that
are a priority of the Board and the Community.
M
cm
SUMMARY:
Overall, the Redevelopment Agency is in good financial shape, however, some
watchfulness is necessary as the Agency has committed all of its reserves to budgeted
projects and there is the potential that the Agency will have to issue bonds in the near
future in order to complete the Historic City Hall Restoration Project. The aggressive
capital improvement program adopted by the Agency as part of the 2007-2009 budget
has allowed the Agency to make the much needed investment in the community now
and the continued prudent stewardship of the Agency by its Board will ensure that the
future is secure as well.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$ 273,810 decrease in Redevelopment Agency reserves for fiscal year 2007-2008
$ 612,540 decrease in Redevelopment Agency reserves for fiscal year 2008-2009
ALTERNATIVES:
Board has the option to add or delete any budget item. This will decrease or increase
the remaining reserve balance at June 30, 2008 and June 30, 2009 by the amount
adjusted.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Draft Resolution Amending the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 Fiscal
Year Budgets
Attachment B Budget Projections for the Community Redevelopment Agency of
Atascadero.
9
2=9
Attachment A
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF ATASCADERO
AMENDING 2007-2008 AND 2008-2009 FISCAL YEAR BUDGETS
WHEREAS, the Community Redevelopment Agency of Atascadero Board adopted
Resolution RA2007-002 setting for the budget for fiscal years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Redevelopment Agency of Atascadero Board hereby
wishes to amend said budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Community Redevelopment
Agency of Atascadero Board
SECTION 1. The appropriation amounts are amended as follows:
Redevelopment Agency
General Fund
Low / Moderate Income
Housing Fund
2007-2008 2008-2009
Increase / (Decrease) Increase / (Decrease)
Revenue Expenditure Revenue Expenditure
Budget Budget Budget Budget
Adjustments Adjustments Adjustments Adjustments
$ (182,000) $ 91,810
160
$ (182,000) $ 91,970
$ (585,000) $ 27,540
230
$ (585,000) $ 27,770
11
Attachment A
Draft Resolution
Page Two
SECTION 2. These changes are effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution.
On motion by Board Member and seconded by Board Member
, the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED:
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF ATASCADERO
Chairperson Ellen Beraud
ATTEST:
Marcia McClure Torgerson, Board Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Brian Pierik, Board Counsel
12
m
T
O
E'% w'
t
V
tC
a
on
V
C
of N
FBI
CD
U
C
m
'C
m
i
00 ' 0 0
M
') coo o N
c
CT Lr
cL
am") r OO
000000
ami m °o)�cooc�oM
a•o M O ti � � �
O O c-MMN r
Q m C M
E9
0 C) '
0000
o
N Nt
C
0
co
(D
coo (OD_ c)
Lf)
U
� LO M t,
M
(D
0) mMLo
O
m .�
N
LO
�
r
N
NO
E9
N
000000
ami m °o)�cooc�oM
a•o M O ti � � �
O O c-MMN r
Q m C M
E9
0 C) '
0 0 0 0 '
o
N Nt
C
o oo
co
U 0 �
LOO o (OD CCD
M
C
rC)MN
N
C co
U (Mco NN
CD
m .�
O r M M
rt
Q.
r
(V
NO
E9
N
C
N
N U N
E _
`X E c
c � CD m
E a
m N U C w
E :C-
c *'
O m N
CL (D
ro w
� a C �
Ucn0� 90
000 "
0 0 0 0 '
O
N Nt
C
o oo
0)
N
LOO o (OD CCD
M
N
rC)MN
T
0) (D r Lr)
U (Mco NN
00
p
O r M M
rt
Q.
r
(V
NO
E9
N
C
N
N U N
E _
`X E c
c � CD m
E a
m N U C w
E :C-
c *'
O m N
CL (D
ro w
� a C �
Ucn0� 90
000 "
0 0 0 0 '
o
N Nt
C
o oo
0)
m m
M'Tcoom
00
aCb
rC)MN
T
0) (D r Lr)
N N M
a) N
C O
m
M
O
Q
•-
N
NO
E9
N
C
N
N U N
E _
`X E c
c � CD m
E a
m N U C w
E :C-
c *'
O m N
CL (D
ro w
� a C �
Ucn0� 90
000 "
000
" co
N Nt
C
o oo
000
L000
00
NOM
rOLO
CDM
0) (D r Lr)
N r
a) N
r
r .r..ri
CCj
0 0 0 0''
0-0-0-6 ,
0 0
00
o oo
000
OaCD_LLo
LLo000
00
r co m
r O LO In
M m
0) (D r Lr)
r N
r
r
r .r..ri
CCj
00(oo
00
o oo
000
Cl)M0r
O
00
O
LOGO
OOO
OD'tNLU)
CA
LOON
r
O
v
mwoot`000 0-00
M M N c moo 0 0 0 0 0
M LO r- m 0 m O O LA @ (V N
MNN.0N..rNM yr
s
0000000000' ..00
� 00(000000 0 00
t� 0U) 00Lo 000 00
d rNO00rOLO L() 6 L
M N 0 N.i v M 0 0 CN
U
U)
= O O
C
C
m�a amE
tq N O O
m O Q O N
ani �c0UJ
moo
c c mCDC��-n co
>, o � L c
° c
mow c cE m� m ou
p m w N a) N O N O=— p
CCop�@> 3g
E 8.— m 7 7 U 0 00
w0cnco wUaCD000
^
-00
co C)0
r-
000
CA
(DNM
O
LOGO
OOO
— "t *
CA
r (5 Ln
CD CD M
O
CT
N
r
v C) N
mwoot`000 0-00
M M N c moo 0 0 0 0 0
M LO r- m 0 m O O LA @ (V N
MNN.0N..rNM yr
s
0000000000' ..00
� 00(000000 0 00
t� 0U) 00Lo 000 00
d rNO00rOLO L() 6 L
M N 0 N.i v M 0 0 CN
U
U)
= O O
C
C
m�a amE
tq N O O
m O Q O N
ani �c0UJ
moo
c c mCDC��-n co
>, o � L c
° c
mow c cE m� m ou
p m w N a) N O N O=— p
CCop�@> 3g
E 8.— m 7 7 U 0 00
w0cnco wUaCD000
^
^
00000000000
0 0
0
CA
' r-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"T
0
CO
0 0
m
O
LO
O
CT
O
ci
NCOON
NO
ItNLo
N
It
0
N
N
CD
N
r
* * * *
00000000000
000
0 0
O
CA
' r-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"T
CA
CO
N
O
00 0000000 C
LO
O
O
O
LO C: L6 1- Ln O O O O O
C,
CA
t,
N
MLO M000OO(DOO)
0
N
N
O
.Ni mC\l .mi M M L) 0� O
M
CO
t,
r
N N
C
V
LO
r
It
U-O
0 0 O O U)
v
Efl
11
-----------
00000000000 o 0)
0000000000 LO N N
0000000000- It O
0(60-N Lo- OC1000h O 1,
rt Od' 0)00000N ODM O N
N O N Cl) N M LO O� OD N M t`
N r N to
... ...... ...
000,01,1000
0
000
0 0
N
'
0
0
CA
0
0
0
O
Ld
a)
}
N
N CON
r-
It N
M
N
0
0
6 d v
Lr)
M
m
64
rn
C
*
Q)
E
I
O O O
'
0
0
CA
O
CA
0
2
m
a)
}
N
n
000
C
m o
t`
w
o
N
0
0
6 d v
CD
1-
In
O
ti
NLOO
C O
o w
O@
E c a
m
r
It
U-O
0 0 O O U)
v
d
tO
r
o
co
U
p U
co- (6 c
°'E— o0) a)
°'
N
tO
c06
�m_mmaE�cUw
a�0am ao
cc'
c
m
m
m
m
m2-
d
�Um
w'
64
rn
C
N
Q)
E
Soo
0
000
0
0
2
m
a)
}
N
n
E °
C
m o
w
o
O
OC)
O
* a*
N A oO +' LSD
m c
16
p
tl:
co co
C
C
NLOO
C O
o w
O@
E c a
m
a))
It
U-O
0 0 O O U)
v
d
N
r
mE.�_—
c a a2S
co
U
p U
co- (6 c
°'E— o0) a)
°'
m
v m
c06
�m_mmaE�cUw
64
rn
C
N
Q)
E
c
`
co
2
O U
a
a)
}
N
n
E °
C
m o
w
o
N
a
N
0
* a*
N A oO +' LSD
m c
0)
_C
m
L
m
p
C
O Y *
C
C
7 w-
O
C O
o w
O@
E c a
a))
cn
U-O
0 0 O O U)
m
C w
o it
mE.�_—
c a a2S
U
p U
co- (6 c
°'E— o0) a)
°'
m
v m
c06
�m_mmaE�cUw
a�0am ao
cc'
c
m
m
m
m
m2-
d
�Um
w'
v
ti Lv
W
a)
N
m
(C
� 0
CT -0o
0 0 —
Z
3NNi
m
ITEM NUMBER: RAA -2
DATE: 5/13/08
Community Redevelopment Agency of
Atascadero
Staff Report — Administrative Services Department
Appropriation of Funds for Restoration of Historic City Hall
RECOMMENDATION:
Agency Board appropriate $6,527,700 to cover the current funding shortfall for
restoration of the historic City Hall and to assure the California Cultural and Historical
Endowment that the City intends to move forward with the project.
DISCUSSION:
On April 28, 2006, the California Cultural and Historical Endowment (CCHE) reserved
$2,000,000 from its Round Two cycle of funding from Proposition 40 bond funds for the
City of Atascadero's Historic City Hall Reconstruction Project. On February 15, 2007,
the CCHE Board approved the funding, and on April 24, 2007, City Council approved
the grant agreement between the City and CCHE.
In March 2008, City staff had a telephone conversation with a CCHE staff member, who
informed City staff that CCHE must liquidate all grant allocations by June 30, 2012.
Concern had been expressed by the CCHE Board that the City had not yet submitted a
claim for costs incurred for the restoration of historic City Hall. CCHE is aware of the
City's hurdles with disaster relief funding for this project, and that knowledge, coupled
with the lack of claims against the grant, raised some unease from the CCHE Board
that the project was not progressing.
The first reimbursable expenses on the City's workplan and schedule for the CCHE-
funded portions of the project are tasks associated with architecture and engineering:
programming, schematic design and design documents. Although the project architect
has been working on programming of the interior spaces of historic City Hall, more
effort was put into assisting City staff with elements of the appeal to FEMA until fairly
recently. For this reason, the City has not yet paid any invoices that could be claimed
against the CCHE grant.
15
ITEM NUMBER: RA A-2
DATE: 5/13/08
CCHE staff has recommended that the City give some assurance to the CCHE Board
that the City is financially prepared to move forward with the project, regardless of the
outcome of the City's first level appeal to FEMA. Based on the 2005 cost estimate
received from the City's consultants, following is the calculation of the recommended
appropriation, which is equal to the current funding shortfall for the project.
Cost of Construction $ 26,343,914
FEMA (current, pre -appeal obligation) (15,816,218)
CCHE grant (2,000,000)
Redevelopment match (2,000,000)
Current funding shortfall $ 6,527,69-6-
It
.527.696
It is important that the Redevelopment Board understand the full potential impact of this
project. The original cost estimate to restore City Hall, above, is calculated in 2005
dollars. This means that it reflects the costs of labor and materials as they were in
2005. Normal economic forces, together with recent huge increases in the costs of
materials, have caused this estimate to escalate substantially. Staff reasonably
estimates that the cost of construction may be closer to $35 million by the time this
project goes to bid.
Although this cost escalation is substantial, the majority of it would be funded by
disaster relief funding from FEMA and OES, if the City's first level appeal of FEMA's
funding determination proves successful. Based on feedback from FEMA and OES
officials during the April 18th meeting and site visit, staff is relatively confident that
FEMA will fund additional items in the repair scope of work. In this scenario, escalated
costs would be covered in the scopes of work that FEMA agrees to fund as repair.
However, other rising costs will remain the City's responsibility to finance, such as
compliance with certain codes, as well as architecture and engineering fees associated
with work that is not covered by FEMA funding.
The most significant unknown factor with the historic City Hall restoration project is the
future outcome of the City's first level appeal of FEMA's funding determination. Staff is
optimistic, but recognizes that this unknown is enormous in the face of the necessity to
make a financial commitment to the project. However, such a commitment would give
the CCHE Board the assurances they are seeking, and thereby alleviate the risk that
they will pull the grant due to inactivity.
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Board appropriate $6,527,700 to cover the
current funding shortfall for the restoration of historic City Hall. While it is true that the
Redevelopment Agency has already committed its available funds, staff reminds the
Board that the Agency has the capacity to issue bonds, effectively creating a funding
source for such projects as the reconstruction of historic City Hall.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$6,527,700 appropriation for the restoration of Atascadero's historic City Hall.
16 -
En
on
on
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not approve the appropriation
of this alternative would make i
source(s).
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
ITEM NUMBER: RA A-2
DATE: 5/13/08
and risk the withdrawal of the CCHE grant. The result
t necessary to locate additional funding from other
17
F5
ITEM NUMBER: RAA -3
DATE: 5/13/08
Community Redevelopment Agency of
Atascadero
Staff Report — Public Works Department
Atascadero Creek Bank Restoration Project
City Bid No. 2006-011
RECOMMENDATIONS:
:05 •
1. Accept Arthurs Contracting, Inc.'s work as complete.
2. Authorize the Public Works Director to sign and file the Notice of Completion.
DISCUSSION:
The bank along Atascadero Creek below City Hall was failing and had undermined a
portion of the building. The Atascadero Creek Bank Restoration Project was designed
in order to stabilize the eroding area with the use of planted rock slope protection, a
shotcrete wall, and creek re -vegetation.
Background:
The project was advertised from May 24, 2006 through June 23, 2006. Three bids
were received. They were opened and publicly read on June 23, 2006. Bids were
reviewed for accuracy and compliance with bid requirements; and Arthur's Contracting,
Inc. was found to be the successful low -bidder with a proposal of $796,150.75. The
Board awarded the contract to Arthurs Contracting, Inc. on June 27, 2006.
The Notice to Proceed was issued on July 20, 2006, and actual construction operations
began on July 24, 2006.
During construction, four Change Orders were approved which amounted to a net
r decrease in the contract amount of $79,798.17. The final contract amount was
$718,352.58.
��
ITEM NUMBER: RAA -3
DATE: 5/13/08
In October 2006, construction was substantially completed. The 12 -Month
Maintenance Period required under the construction contract commenced on
November 1, 2006. Work during this 12 -month period consisted of installing a
temporary irrigation system and maintaining the newly planted materials in both the
creek restoration area and the Butterfly Garden area adjacent to City Hall. At the end
of this period, the plantings were established, and the temporary irrigation system was
removed.
In January, the planted areas were assessed by Althouse and Meade, the City's
consultant biologist for the project. A list of plants and trees that had either died or
were missing was prepared and forwarded to the contractor. After all re -planting was
completed, a final inspection was conducted in February, 2008 and the project was found
to be satisfactorily completed.
As required by the project's environmental permits, Althouse and Meade will continue to
monitor the project for a period of three years following completion of the project.
Filing of the Notice of Completion with the County Clerk is recommended.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimated Project Expenditures
Design Wallace $
66,300
Environmental
31,647
Geomorphology Report & Re -Vegetation Plan
11,590
Arborist Report
900
Contract Administration
16,210
Testing, Inspection & Construction Administration
114,957
Staff Time
25,546
Construction
718,353
Other
11,293
Total Estimated Project ExpendituresF$
996,796
Budgeted Sources of Funds
Redevelopment Agency Bond Funds 1,210,000
Total Budgeted Sources of Fundsl $ 1,210,000
AMOUNT PROJECT UNDER BUDGETI $ 213,204
20