HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 5.C 08/16/2004'
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA August .1 '6., 2004
AG�:NAAA IL. L
". Agenda Title:.,Resolut on Authorizing: General Contractor and Meeting Date: August ,1'6;'2004
Electrical Subcontractor' Prequalification, for the, City -.of Petaluriia
Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility Project.
Meeting Time: 3.:00 PM
❑ 7:00 PM
Categorv'(check one): ❑Consent Calendar ❑Public Dearing ❑ New Business
® Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation
Department: Water Director.- Contact Person-: Phone Number:
` . Resources & Micha`e� �JJ. Ban; Margaret P.'Orr,, 778-4589-
Conservation P.E. �V,IY P.E.'ji�1.%,8
Cost of Proposal: Account Number: C500402
'The cost to prequalify' contractors is $47,000.
Amount Budgeted: $47,000 Name of Fund: Wastewater
Enterprise
Attachments to Agenda Packetltem:'
Resolution
Attachment A — Request for Qualifications from Interested .General . Contractors and Electrical
Subcontractors and Invitation to' Submit Prequalification Packages for The''*
of Petaluma Ellis Creek
Water Recycling Facility
Summary Statement: Contrae'tor_prequalification �is primarily efnployed to prequalifycontractors for'
large public works projects that require,',a,specific,skill or expe_rfise. The Ellis Creek Water Recycling
Facility Project is a large, complex public works project that requires: technical expertise and specialization.
Thus, Petaluma has developed a program for prequalifying general and electrical contractors for this
specific project.
Recommended Citv Council ActionlSuggesied•-1VMotion: 'City,Management recommerlds'the City
Council adopt a resolution Authorizing General. Contractor and Electrical Subcontractor Prequalification
for the City.of Petaluma.Ellis Greek= Water Recycling Facility.Project.
Reviewed by Finance, Director: 'Reviewed_ n'e Approved by City Manager:
Dater 1 Date:
zoo ... ��.
fiddav's Date: July 28', 2004 Revision # and Date'Revised: File Code: S:\water resources &
conservation\Wastewater\90i2\city council\Aueust
16 2004\Aeenda'Bill'Preoualification.doc -
si\water resources & conservation\Wastewater\9012\city council\August-I6 2004\Agenda Bill Prequalification.doc
.*
iz
CITY OF PETALV'MA, CALIFORNIA
•. August 16; 2004
AGENDA REPORT.
FOR
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING'SGENERAL�CONTRACTOR AND ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTORS
PREQUALIFICATIONTOR THE CITY OF.PETALUMA ELLIS CREEK WATER RECYCLING
FACILITY PROJECT
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY`
Contractor prequalification is pimi n ly;employed t'o.;prequalify contractors for large public
works projects that require''a specific: skill or expertise. ,The Ellis; Creek Water Recycling
.Facility Project is a large; complex public works,project that requires technical expertise and
.specialization. Thus, Petalui arias developed ayprogram forprequa'lifying,'general and electrical
contractors for this, specific p'roject:,;
g
ty mmends the City Council ado pt,a resolution Authorizing General
Ci Mana ement reco '
Contractor and Electrical Subcontract ors Prequalification,.for the Cityof Petaluma Ellis Creek
Water Recycling Facility Project'.
2. BACKGROUND:
rIntroduction
Prequalifying bidders, is'the.process by which the owner of a public works project screens
potential contractors according to. a,given set of criteria.prior to any competitive bidding. The
objective is to identify, a pool of biddersAhat have been determined to be responsible and
qualified.
In 1999, the California Legislature enacted a..law that, all"ows many public agencies to require
licensed contractors that wish to. bid, for public worlcs projects. to; "pre -qualify" for the right to bid
on a specific public works projects. The. legislation is codified in Public Contract Code Section
201.01.
The law applies to all cities,,counties and special districts, but does notapply to K-12 school
districts. The law does not -require any public agency to adopt 'a pre -qualification. ystem.
Instead, it authorizes every public agency to adopt,a pre -qualification system, and describes
certain requirements that must be met; 'if 'a public agency chooses to.adopt such,a system.. The
1999 law allows a public agency to,establish-two different kinds.of pre -qualification procedures
for public works projects:
1. The, law allows a public agency to establish a pre -qualification procedure linked to a
single, project, or;
1
S:\water resources & conservation\Wastewater\901,2\city council\August 16 2004\Agenda Bill Prequalification.doc
2. The public agency may. adopt a -procedure by which a. contractor may qualify to bid •
on. projects which, are put out forbid by that agency for a period of one year .after the
date of initial pre -qualification.
The 1999 law requires every public agency that creates either kind ofre-qualification procedure
to: '
1. Use a "standardized questionnaire and financial statement in, a form specified by the
public entity.";
2. Adopt and apply a uniform system of rating bidders on objective criteria, on the basis
of the completed questionnaires and financial statements;
3. Create an appeal,procedure, by which a contractor that is denied pre -qualification
may seek. a reversal of;that defermination.
Information from City of Redwood., City and City of Brentwood
The Petaluma City Council considered contractor prequalification on February 23; 2004.
Subsequent to the'February 23rd meetirig,'on June 21, 2004; City Management'presented
information gathered on the experience of the City of -Redwood City and the City°of Brentwood,
two municipal, agencies similar'to'Petaluma that have experience with contractor:
prequalification.
At the June 21, 2004 meeting City Management indicated that Redwood City'uses�-contractor
prequalification for very specific, projects only, projects, that require unique skills, or a specialty
contractor., They have used contractor prequalification for"construction of�a new Fire Station, ,a --
new- City Hall and for a project'.,that°involved micro tunneling under Highway 1>0L: When used,
the contractor prequalification package;is adapted for, the specific project. 'They do not use a
scoring system, (they, were notaware of the 1999 law 6n contractor prequalification).. Redwood
City has not.received. any protests from contractors that were determined to 'be. unqualified.
At the June 21, 2004 meeting information was also presented about the A City of.Breiitwood.
The City of Brentwood is located in eastern Coiifra'Cosia County andprovides a full -range of
municipal services to its 25;000 residents.. The City covers approximately.'t 1 square miles.
Their FY 04/05 Capital.Iinprovement Program budget is °$60 nnllionl : Like..Redwood City;
Brentwood employs contractor prequalification for specialty projects. SO far they have only
used:it once: for their new Wastewater Treatment Facility.
New Water' Recycling Facility
The City developed the contractor prequalification package for construction of the new Ellis
Creels Water Recycling Facility for,the following reasons:
1) Tls-is the .largest public works project in.the City of Petaluma's.history::
`Prequalification of large projects is important to ensure that Contractors bidding
the work have -the; ability -to provide the proper bonding and `insurance.. ,
According to the FY,02/03 — 06/07 CIP budget.
2' J
SAwater resources& conservation\Wastewater\9012\city council\August 16 2004\Agenda Bill Prequalification.doc
2) The. proj ect,'s „a .complex network of structures, mechanical equipment, piping;
and electrical: systems for icceive, process, and recycle wastewater. The
• co m lexit , of theJob ob demands ;ex erience to coordinate the necessar end resul' p. Y J P Y t
of an.integrated'!system.tliat meets the expectations of the City, regulators, and the
environment: i' ''a ,safe and cost efficient manner.
3) The projectis very °complex technically. ,Coordination of hydraulics, structural,
mechanical;, electrical aid'firiall'ycoiitrol wi11 be orchestrated via the contract,
documents by,;a.,General contractor The 'contractor'must have experience in
building these fac 'litaes,and properly integrating all functions successfully.
4) Wastewater'is a. sp;ecialized.construction ',field•. The .City of Petaluma is looking
for a contracting firm in the General' and,El.ectrical areas`that,have the special
resources; neede. to; build -the large. structures Ieeded, install mechanical
equipment appropriately and wire them property for control from the office, field
Or home.
5) A project,ihis,siz.e will have significant number of construction workers employed
onthe site each day working,with major'construction equipment. With all .ofthis
activity safety„needs--to be:properly addressed to attempt,to ;avoid numerous
accidents and,incidents. Prequalification.will,also; assist in, providing, contractors -
who have esiablishedininimum acceptable safety practices and standards.
Prequalification cannot guarantee there won't be any challenges with this project, but through.
this process the Citywill.•kriow,that-the .General and, Electrical contractors'.bidding on the project
have met the minimam;standatds1 established in the package. This will help provide a qualified
• planning for this ro e our.' ro ect ` �will,, and safe contractor for p j . Predualification,;also require contractors to begin .
p g p r j ct, •and' will prevent..unqualified contractors from bidding on this project, at
the last minute.
Prequalification Package
The prequalification package consists ofasix sections (Attachment,A): The requirement of each
section is highlighted below.
Part I consists of'essential.requirements for qualification. Contractors must have a valid
contractor's license, .provide insurance as defined in the package;=provide reviewed and audited
financial„statements; .provide a notarized,st'atement from a.surety insurer. authorized to issue
bonds,in'the;S'taie of California, notliave a contractor's, license that has been revoked,in the last
five years, not hdve,b'een'default terniinated,by-the owner over, the past. five years, not been
debarred,, and 'not been" convicted of a crime' involving the' awarding of a contract of a
government,construction•projec't (Attach>ent A, pages; `8).
Part II consists ofinformation from the submitting contractor concerning current organization .
and structure ofthe"business; history ofthe, business, and.organizati_onal per-forrnance, licenses,
criminal mattersand related c vit,suits, bonding,, compliance with -occupational safety and health
laws, and prevailing wage and: apprenticeship compliance record (Attachment A, pages 9 through
17)
3
S; \water resources &conservation\Wastewater\9012\city. council\August 16,200' \Agenda Bill Prequalification.doc
Part III requires the. coiitractor,to.provide information about six public°works,projects completed
over the past.five years. At least three of.those projects must be wastewater;or water projects of
similar size and complexityas`the Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility. The,general contractor
must list at least one project with, a minimum completion value of $35.0 million: The•electrical
contractor must .list at least onerproject with- a.mimm"um_ completion value of $5.0million
(Attachment.A,.pages 18' and 19).
Part ,IV requires the contractor to provid'e.information about the current status of open contracts.
after September 1, 2004 valued at $10.0million for general contractors orq!$2`.0 million for
electrical contractors. This allows the City ofPetaluma to determine: if the .contractor,has the
tirme,and bonding capacity to efficiently complete the Ellis Creek Water Recychrig.F.acility'
(Attachment A, page 20).
Part V requires the contractor to provide information about ,the experience of proposed
personnel. A minimum of -five years experience is -required for the pro ject`superintendenf and
their, backups. ,Similar requirements are necessary fbftheproject scheduler. •Part VI,requires.
that backups to proposed keypersonnel have similar experience '(Attachment: A, pages 21 and
22).
The prequalificationpackage includes the evaluation page, that will .be utilized for scoring; the,
responses., Also included:are`potential� interview questions to verify pro"ect experience. •Aii
appeals process .has ,been delineated and the month- , of November set aside,,'if.need'ed, to -complete
that°pr"ocess°prior to bid (Schedule Section below): Attachments consist of Workers'
.Compensation Experience Modifier, Insurance. Requirements, and Affidavit of 'Safety,
Compliance:
Schedule
The.,,Elli"s Creek Water. Recycling Facility is scheduled to break ground for, construction iri June
,of 2005.. As shownin Table 1, the contractor prequialification package is an integral component
of the bid phase..
. . Description
City Council. consider and discuss prequalification package
City Advertise prequalification package to contractors
,Contr-actors submit.prequalification package to'City
City notifies prequalified firms
Appeal Process (ifneeded)
Advertise ,fof Bids,
'Open Bids
Award Construction Contract
C:onstruction/ Start Up Complete-
�. Date
August 1=6, 20.04
September 1, 2004,
j October 7, 2004
November 2, 2004
Month: of November 2;004
_December 1, 2004
1 February 1, 2005
March 7; 20.05
March 2008
•
•
•
4
S:\water resources & conservation\Wastewater\9012\city "council\August 1"6 2604\tlgenda Bill Piequalification.doc
p 3. ALTERNATI-VES:
Alternative 1 - Adopt the resolution'Authorizing General. Contractor and Electrical
Subcontractors Prequalification. for the City of Petaluma Ellis. Creek- Water Recycling
Facility Project.
Alternative 2' — Take no464on' at this time. Utilize the normal bidding procedure and
documents to gather infortnafion on contractor qua'li_ficatons,forIthe work.
Alternative 3 —Take no action at, this time. Provide direction to City'Management as to
how to proceed on.the'project
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS',,
Costs for implementing"contractor, prequalification include professional services time to develop
the prequalifi'cation"documerits and to review and apply the. documents and is estimated at
$47,000. This work is being completed as part of the construction management services
contract, which was approved by theGity Council on June 7, 2004.'
5. CONCLUSION:
I..
Contractor prequalificatiori is�;primarily employed„to.,prequalify'contractors for large public
works projects that re uire a sped " or ex ert ' p require cific 'skill ' p > e: The Ellisl Creek Water Recycling
Facility Project is'°a large, complex public works project that -'requires technical expertise and
s eciahzation. Thus Petaluma has° develo 'ed ai. ro'''kn for re ualif 'r general and electrical
p � ,, . p P �' p. q yl g
contractors for this specific project.
y
6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE 'MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:'
Successful construction and, start up of'the'Ellis Creek Wdidr Recycling Facility.
7. RECOMMENDATION: „
g' _ ` nu mmends t City Council adopt a. resolution" Authoriziifg General,
City Mana erne Greco he'
Contractor and Electrical Subcontractors�Prequalificafion,for the City ofPetaluma Ellis Creek
Water Recycling Facility Project.
F
5
S:\waterresOUTM & conservation\Wastewater\0012\city counci]\August 16 2004\Wgenda Bill Prequalification.doc
f
E
i
i2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
., 23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
3'3
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44.
45
n :Auth izrng�, Geneal' C and electrical
Resolutio or' ' ®ntractor .a
Subcontractor Pr q ' ` "'fication.'for the City lof, Petaluma Ellis Creek
e .uali -
Water Recycling, Facility
WHEREAS, in 1938, the original wastewater treatment processes were constructed at
950 Hopper Street;
WHEREAS; to meet the community's needs and changing' regulatory requirements,
various upgrades and additions :0 the wastewater treatment plant were conducted through
the 1960s;
WHEREAS,,,in 1972-; the; oxidation` ponds were constructed at, 4400 Lakeville Highway
to provide additional'treatment capacity;
WHEREAS,°in 1988, with influent flows exceeding 75%.ofthe permitted capacity of the
wastewater -treatment. facility; and necessary upgrades to thefacility to increase treatment
capacity and continue to meet the needs of the community wemdete'nnined to be too
costly, the City determined to replace the existing wastewater treatrent facility;
WHEREAS, in 199.1 the City executed a Memorandum of Understanding with
Envirotech Operating Services: (EOS) to design, build, construct; own and operate (20
years) a new' wastewater .treatment ,faci'lity (Resolution No. 91-107)
WHEREAS; on July 31, :1991, EOS submitted an application to the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) seeking an exemption from; CPUC regulation under the
Califordia.Local Government`Pr vatization Act of 1985;
WHEREAS, ,on'October 2,1, ,199.1,- Administrative Law Judge Ramsey determined that
1.the MOU did not,:meet th&requirements of the Public;Util ties Code'and ordered that "the
application is -denied without prejudice ,to refiling after. -amendment'
WHEREAS, in_Febraary,1992- EOS and the City mutually agreed to rescind the MOU;
WHEREAS, o g p. P P y. n June 20, 1,994, followui are orf re a"red b Ernst and Young, the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 94-,156, which directed -that thb Service Agreement
Approach (privatization) be utilized for procurement of �a new 'wastewater treatment
facility;
WHEREAS, on June 17 '1?9,91.6 ;the,City Council:adopted'Resolution No.' 96-163, which
certifiedilie Final EIR documents; Resolution No 96464;'which approved the" project,
and Resolution;No.196-1.65,, which�approved and authorized'issuance of the Request For
Proposal;
WHEREAS, on July 1'7, 1,996, the RFP was issued to five pre -qualified vendor. teams;
' Page 1 of 6
SAwaterresources & conservation\Wastewater\9012\city;council\August 16 2004\resolution certifying prequalification.doc
I WHEREAS, in, January,l 997, the C'Ved proposals from Montgomery ityreceI
2 Water (MUW) -1 and I US Filter/EOS; ry
4 WHEREAS, - the Citizens' Wastewater Advisory Committee considered - the proposals on
5 May 28,1997, June 3, 1997,,June 4;1997,Jul
y 2, 1997, October 20, 1997; October 30
6 1997, November, 4, 1 1997, November 18, 1907, and on December 3, 1997--,
8 WHERA-5, the City Council considered the;proposals on July 7, 1997, September 8
9 1997, September 15, 19 , 97, September 22, 19.97, September 29, 1907, October 6j 1997,
10 December 3, 1997, and December 8, 1997;
11
12 WHEREAS' on� January 5.1998, the City Council adopted Resolution No: 98-11, which
o: "selected MUW -for contract' negotiations;
14
15 WHEREAS, negotiations with MUW on technical, legal and agreement'issues;begat i on
16 Janu.-ary,27,.1-998,-and-proceedod'thrQ-Lig4 spring 1.99.9;.
17
18 WKEREAS, on September. l, 1998, the CityCouncil, recognizing'the need for,
19 developrrient,'of azp4blic alternative to the p
roposed',privatization prof_ ect,approved
20 preparation of the wastewater treatment facility Master plan;
.21
°22 WHEREAS, on September 21,,1959, the City° Council adopted Resolution N',,:09= 1 8'8,
,
23 which, terminated the priyatizatfon process and osiablished'City'ownershiD ofthe new
24 wastewater freatnienifacility. Reasons cited for this determination included, among
15 others:
26
27 Risk ofChangeAeFquired Over 3,0_'Y . ear Contract Term. Change&in,the
28 City.'s7neeas may occur -durii-igthe,3OTyeaTlife ,,of the contract. The City i9ata
'29 disadvantage by being. able to negotiate with, only one party for qha4ges -in the
30 facility's; capacity.
31 Reqtdrement of Fair Market Viial ue, Purchase. In order if6r N4UW to retain
32 tax ownership„ the.Cfty's option to purchase urdhase the facility at the, end -,of the contract
33 term.would, have to be at fair market value.. The price of the -facility,could not be.
34 fixed ;in the ,contract, but would .depend on the value of the facility at the time -of,
35 the exercise, of the:option, thereby putting, the City, and ratepayers at risk ofhavih-g-
36 topay f6r part of the plant twice,
37 Lack of CitY'APproval. of'Desiga. In order- for MUW to retain tax
38 ownership; S'ection 4.8. 1 of the agreement limited the City' s participation
I . cip ation in the
39 design process..
40 Third Party SerVices. In.,order forMUW to retain ' taxt,owifership, Section
41 5 2.4 would. allow the Company to provide services to others, (in addition to the
42 City) at the Project Site..
43 Inability -to Agree On Contract Language. After extensive,riegotiatibns
9,.
44: :between the City and'MUW, specific contract language on the above.,and other
45 critical issues could not be agreed upon.
Page 2 of 6
S:\water resources& conseT-vation\Wastewater\9012\city council\Auguei16'2604\resolution certifying prequ-7 alificatibn.doc
I'
2
WHEREAS,, on September. 21,,1-99'9, the City Council adopted' Resolution No: 99489,
3
which approved the Wastewater Treatment Master Plan,,wth the understanding that the
'
4
Master Plan's recommended'project would.,be firther reviewed to address questions
5
asked by the City's independent wastewater professionals;
6
7
WHEREAS, on October 29, 1909, the, City issued a Request For Proposal for
8
engineering services in support of the water -recycling- facilityproject (new wastewater
9
treatment facility);
10
11
WHEREAS, the City Council'adopted.,Resolution.No'. 2000-66 on, April 3, 2000, which
12
authorized the City Manager to, execute' a professional services agreement with Carollo
13
Engineers for engineering services -in support of Phase 1 — Proj eaReport of the Water
14
Recycling Facility. Project, 1
15
16
WHEREAS, five alternatives for the new water recycling facility were presented at a
17
Public Forum at the Community. Center on June 14; 2000;,
18
19
WHEREAS, the City Council, heard a discussion, on:the criteria for evaluating the
20
alternatives on September 5, 2000;
21
r .I
22
WHEREAS,, the"results„df:the' analysisand"comparison of the" alternatives, were presented
.�
23
at a Public Forum at the Community Center on November 8, 20 ft'' ,:
24
r .
25
WHEREAS, the City Council considered and discussed the.Draft. Water Recycling
26
Facility Project Report (Carollo,Engineers, Novem er'2000) on November 20, 2000;
27
28
WHEREAS, the:City.Council adopted Resolution,00-2,1'4 on December 11, 2000, which
29
approved the. Water RecyclingPacility Pro ject-Repor : (Carollo Engineers, November
30
2000), selected Alternative,5"�—', Extended Aeration as the preferred alternative for the new
31
water recycl_ih facility; aI identified Option A� Wetlands as the preferred alternative
32
for algae removal over Option'B — DAFs
33
34
WHERAS,.the City Council adopted Resolution 00-215on December, L1, 2000, ;which
35
authorized'the City -Manager to, execute ka professional services.agreernent with Carollo
36
Engineers for professional, engineering services in support of Phase 2 — Project
37
Development o'f:the Water:Recycling Facility Project;
38
39
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Water Recycling -Facility Project :and the
40
Draft Water Recycling Facility Predesign Report (Carollo Engineers, November 2001)
41
on November 14, 200,1, November 28, 2001, December 17, 2001 and January 7, 2062;
42
43
44
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2002-012 on January 7, 2002, which
approved design parameters for the preferred alternative for the water recycling facility
45
project and authorized completion!:of'the environmental impact report;
F
'
Page 3 of 6
I
S:\water resources & conservation\Wastewater\90,12\city,council\August•16 2004\resolution certifying prequalification.doc
n'
1
2
WHEREAS, the City prepared Water Recycling.Facility and River AccesslImprovements
3
Draft EIR .(April 2002) and distributed.it°to the California'State Clearinghouse and to all
4
responsible local, state and federal agencies involved.in the project and made it available
5
f6t-public review;
6
7
WHEREAS'.lhe City'Council..held noticed public hearings on May 13, 2002, and,May,
8
20, 2002, during which all `interested persons were provided an opportunity to_ comment
9
on they adequacy,of'the' Draft EIR;
10
11
WHEREAS, the"public review period ,for the Draft EIR began April"15; 2002; and
12
closed May 29, 2002;
13
14
WHEREAS,: the City ,prepared Water Recycling Facility and River Access'Improvements
15
Final•EIR and_Response To Comments (July 2.002), which responded to .comients
16
received on the Draft EIR. The Final EIR did not identify any new significant impacts
17
that'had not been previously evaluated:in the Draft.EIR.
18
19
WHEREAS; "the City Council held ,a noticed public hearing on. August 5, '20Q2; to
20
consider .the .Final_ EIR;
2;1
22
WHEREAS, that after due consideration; the Petaluma City Council; adopted Resolution,
23
2002-:135 certifying the Final, Envi"roninental,lmpact'Report for the Water Recycling
24
Facility and Raver Access Improvements Proj ect,.and made the following_ findings on
25
August 5,, 2002.
.26
27
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with
'28
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA.
20
Guidelines.
30-
2. The documents.referenced below constitute .the Final Environmental.Iinpact
31
Report and were presented and considered along with.both written and oral
32
comments received during the public review period on the project "and.
33
environmental documents:.
34
a. Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements'Draft
35
Environmental Impact Report, in two volumes (Apri1;2002).
36
b.-- Water Recycling Facility and RiverAccess Improvemenis,Final -
37
Environmental -Impact Report and Response To Comments '(July 2002).
38
3. The City Council, as the decision making -body of the City of Petaluma,
,3.9
independentlyreviewed,, analyzed and considered the information in the Filial EIR
40
and found that the contents of the Final-EIR reflect: the, independent -judgment of
41
the City of Petaluma
42
4. The Final EIR was published, made available. arid, circulated for review and
43
comment.
44
�-
Page 4 of 6
SAwater resources & conservation\Wastewater\9012\city:couhcil\August 16.2004Cresolutiori certifying:prequalification:doc
i-.
I
WHEREAS; the pi `0&"Ccerfi'fied in, the Final EIR_,included locating a portion of the'-
2
treatment plant at, 4.400.hakevil'le Highway; the current site of ;the City's oxidation ponds
3
(APN 0680-010-025, 032 and°',024),-with polishing treatment wetlands located at 4100
4
Lakeville Highway (APN 0.68-01,0=026,,,and 011-77170-002);,and
5
• 6
WHEREAS, ,the City completed approximately,50% design of the' facility in November
7
2002; and
8
9
WHEREAS, through the value engineering' effort conducted in December 2002, it
10
became apparent the alternative of locating4 the water. recycling facility at 4100 Lakeville
11
Highway and preserving the, oxidation pond,,site for its. current function warranted further
12
evaluation; and
13
14
WHEREAS, to construct the water recycling, facility at=the oxidation -pond site would
15
require the removal, drying and disposal of sludge from: the aerated- lagoon and oxidation
16
pond no. 1, construction bf a pipeline'to deliveninfluentto oxidation pond' no. 2, the
17
construction of aerators °in oxidation pond nos. 2 and 3 to'maintain•'and improve treatment
18
capacity, and require the placement of approxiiriately 25.0,000 cubic yards of imported fill
19
in the oxidation pond no. .1: ,and
20
21
WHEREAS, a feasibil,studydeterrnined.that locating the water recycling facility at
22
4100 Lakeville Highway was'feasible and yields many benefits; .and,
23
24
WHEREAS, the` City Counci,l;adopted resolution No:,2003-196 on August 1.8,, 2003,
25
which authorized the City' -Manager id'execute an amendment to .the professional services
26
agreement with Carollo,Engirieers for engineering seryIces, in supportof locating the new
27
treatment plant at 4100 Lakeville"Highway; and _
28
29
WHEREAS, the,City, Councilzuthorized acquisif__ion,of 4pproximately'261.33 acres of
30
land in the'4000 block,of,Lakeville Highway for construction ofthe Water Recycling
. 31
Facility and development of "theMarsh Acquisition, 'Enhancement and Access
32
Project on September'8, 20,03 .through Ordinance No. 2,16.1 N.C.S. for the purchase of
.33 ,
real property described as Sonoma County Assessor's parcel nos. 068-010-026 and 017-
34
'010-002; •and,
35
36
WHEREAS; .the, Citypurchased Parcel .nos., 068-,010-026 and. 017-010-002 in February
37
2004; and
38
39
WHEREAS, an Addendum :to -the Water' Recycling., Facilityand River Access
40
Improvements,'EIR was prepared to evaluatepotential changes to the environmental
41
affects of the Project due to�the proposed Project revisions; and
42
43
WHEREAS, the EIR Addendum, concludes that the determinations of the Final EIR
" 44
•
remain valid for the'revised Project'in that none of the Project modifications will have
4 5
new significant impacts or°substantial) increase the seventy of previously identified
T� p Y Y p Y
Pa e 5 of 6
' g
it I
S:\water resources & conservation\Wastewater\9012\city counci]\August 16 2004\resolution certifying prequalification.doc
I significant, effects, or otherwise meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section
2 15162 which outlines the standards by whichaubsequent EIlZs -are required;. and
3
4 WHEREAS', the,ETR Addendum was,publislied.on April 15, 2004 and was available for
5 public,, review 4t the, City,of Petaluma City. Hall, Petaluma Library, Petaluma Community
6 Center; Petaluma Senior Center, sand the Santa Rosa -:Junior, College, Petaluma campus;
7 and
8
9 WHEREAS,'the City Council adopted.,Resolution No.. 2004-101 N.C.S. Re-certifying-
10 Water Recycling Facility, and River Access Improvements Project Final Environmental
11 Impact Report Addendum, wand Adopting Findings and Statement of Overriding
12 Considerations, and Adopting Revised Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program:
13
14.. WHEREAS,; the City Council adopted:Resolutiois No. 2004-092 N.C.S. Authorizing'the
15 City Manager to execute a�Professional Services.Agreement with The'Covello Group for
16 Construction Management Services Task-1 and Task 2. for the City`of"Petaluina.Ellis'
.17 Creek Water. Recycling Facility Proj ect;.'and '
18
19 WHEREAS; the Ellis Creek Water Recycling:Facility is a large, complex public works
-20 - project'that regwfes'techtiicaI expertise and specialization; and
.21
22 WHEREAS; the:prequalificafion process helps, provide a qualified and safe contractor
23 for the=•project; S
24
25 NOW THEREFORE RE IT RESOLVED;; by the City Council that:
26
27 1. 'The above recitals are true and.correct and hereby -declared to be findings. of the
28 City Council of the City of Petaluma:
29 2. 'The City Management -is hereby authorized to obtain General Contractor and
30 Electrical Subcontractor Prequalification,for•theCity of Petaluma Ellis Creek
31 Water Recycling, Facility Project.
32 - 3. The resolution shall become effective immediately.
33 4. All portions of this resolution are Severable. ;Should any individual component of
34 this resolution be, adjudged to be invalid -and unenforceable by•a body -of
35 corrlpetent jurisdiction, then the remaining resolution portions shall .be and
36 continue .in full force ,and :effect; exceptas' to ,those resolution portions that have
37 been adjudged invalid. The. City Council of the City of Petaluma. hereby,declares
38 that`it; would have adopted this resolution: and each section,; subsection, clause;
39 sentence,, phrase and other portion hereof; irrespective of the fact that :one>or more
40 section subsection, clause sentence, phrase brother portion maybe held- n-valid:or
41 unconstitutional.
•
Page 6 of 6
SAwaterresources & con servation\Wastewaier\90]2\city council\August 16 2004\resolution cefitifying prequalification'.doc