Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/20/2001, C5 - FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1384 AMENDING THE WATER ALLOCATION REGULATIONS council n.E,D. Mar.20,01 j aGEnba REpoizt C5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: John Mandeville,Long-range Planning Manag Prepared By: Glen Matteson, Associate Planner SUBJECT: FINAL PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 1384 AMENDING THE WATER ALLOCATION REGULATIONS CAO RECOMMENDATION Grant final passage to Ordinance No. 1384. DISCUSSION On March 6, 2001, the Council voted four to none (one absent) to introduce Ordinance No. 1384 to print. This ordinance will amend the Water Allocation Regulations by deleting a reference to the Residential Growth Management Regulations. Ordinance No. 1384 is now ready for final passage and will become effective thirty days after the date of its final passage. ATTACHMENT Ordinance No. 1384 resgrow\carfina12001.doc ' 1 i ORDINANCE NO. 1384(2001 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL. AMENDING THE WATER ALLOCATION REGULATIONS TO DELETE A REFERENCE TO THE RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS WHEREAS,the City Council conducted a public hearing on Marsh 6, 2001, and has considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and WHEREAS,the Community Development Director has determined and the Planning Commission has concurred that the proposed amendment is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act,because it has no potential for physical changes to the environments and WHEREAS,the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and with the purposes of the Residential Growth Management Regulations and the Water Allocation Regulations. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 2. Municipal Code Amendment, Chapter 17.89 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended by the deletion of part 17.89.070.A,which reads as follows: A. During any calendar quarter in which water-use allocations are limited pursuant to this chapter,the residential growth management regulations(Chapter 17.88 of this code) shall be suspended. SECTION 3. Publication. A summary of this ordinance,together with the names of Council members voting for and against,shall be published at least five(5)days prior to its final passage,in the Telegram-Tribune,a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty(30)days after its final passage, but no sooner than the effective date of annexation of the subject site. INTRODUCED on March 6,2001 AND FINALLY ADOPTED on by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at its meeting held on the day of ,2001,on a motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES:' ABSENT: 011384 �� Ordinance No. 1384 Page 2 of 2 Mayor Allen K. Settle ATTEST: City Clerk Lee Price,CMC VED A FORM: City Attorney Jeff Jorgensetf council ��ep,�_�- za ac En as nEpont Tw. C I T Y OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Director of Public Works N)o Prepared By: Birbara Lynch Civil Engineer ZL— SUBJECT: FOOTHILL BLVD CULVERTS AT STENNER CREEK, SPECIFICATION NO. 90197 CAO RECOMMENDATION 1. Direct staff to request the State to hold a load limit hearing 2. Direct staff to continue monitoring effort 3. Direct staff to temporarily close Foothill Blvd. if a large storm event is forecast 4. Direct staff to close Foothill Blvd.if monitoring indicates rapid settlement and/or instability 5. Appropriate $50,000 from the General Fund and $200,000 in grant funding for design and environmental services 6. Authorize staff to proceed with advertising of a proposal for consultant services for environmental and design work 7. Authorize the CAO to award the design and environmental services contract if the proposal cost is within the fee estimate of$250,000 DISCUSSION Background: On the night of March 4`h, the City experienced a heavy rainfall. The following morning a noticeable depression had developed on Foothill Blvd at the Stenner creek, crossing east of Santa Rosa Street. This crossing consists of 2 -13 '/2 foot steel culverts. City staff was unable to enter the culvert until the end of the week due to high water levels. City Fire personnel went through the culvert the weekend of March 10`h and observed the steel culverts were distorted. Public Works staff went into the culverts the following Monday, March 12`h, and observed that the distortion was severe. At that time, Public Works removed the bus traffic from the street and, since that time, has been contacting other companies using heavy vehicles asking them to stay off the street. Contact was made with the Structures Division of the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) who normally performs biennial inspections of all such structures and last inspected this structure in 1999. This type of structure (culvert+backfill) can support traffic loads when the curvature of the steel culverts and a tightly compacted backfill work together. If either of these elements is not present, the structure will not work. The Caltrans inspectors arrived on site Tuesday, March 13`h, and started a review of the culverts. Wednesday, test borings were made between the two pipes and revealed a wet, loose sand backfill. Late Wednesday the inspectors reported their findings to City staff. The State bridge inspectors do not see this as a salvageable structure; the steel culverts have lost their curvature and the necessary backfill appears to be gone in certain areas. They have recommend posting a 3 ton load limit; essentially automobile traffic only. They estimated the structure had about a 20 year lifespan at the time of construction in 1964 and it is not only appropriate but highly recommend that the City replace it. Council Agenda Report—Foothill Blvd Culverts at Stenner Creek Page 2 Is failure imminent? Because there have been instances of sudden complete failure of these types of structures, the City must be very careful in.how much and where traffic is allowed on the bridge. A full review of information nationwide shows little information on what these types of structure will do once they begin to deform or lose their backfill support (we have both). Some engineers have theorized they may remain stable even if they deform as much as 20% of their diameter. The Federal Highway Administration considers 5% to be a reasonable amount of deformation for a culvert such as ours. In the worst areas, we have 7.5%, or about a 12" deflection. The Structures Division representatives from Caltrans indicated there is too little experience with these steel structures in partial failure to accurately determine what is likely to happen. However, they did say this is the worst failure they have observed anywhere in their experience in the State of California. At this time, elevations at the surface are being taken twice a day to determine if there is continued downward settlement. Recommended by the Caltrans representatives, monitoring in this way is a standard procedure, one used by the State with structures at a. similar point of failure. If the street begins to settle quickly or even if it just continues to settle without stabilizing, we will have to close the street completely. If it remains fairly stable, we can continue to operate with two lanes of traffic on the less damaged side. There remains a certain amount of judgment that will have to be used in determining if the street can remain open. What now? Caltrans staff recommends, and staff concurs, that we continue to monitor the bridge on a twelve-hour basis and allow automobile traffic only on the north side, while proceeding with replacement planning. It is understood that anything significant found during monitoring would trigger an immediate closure. Due to the high likelihood that high flows caused by heavy storms would cause more erosion of backfill material from around the culverts, staff is recommending street closure during heavy storms. A review would be made after the storm and prior to reopening. Staff will request a.State hearing for the permanent establishment of load limits until the structure is replaced. Permanent Solution. Staff is already working with the Local Assistance office of Caltrans to begin the environmental and design process for bridge replacement. Once funding for design has been approved, we will proceed with the advertising of a Request for Proposals. The initial plan at this time is to go forward with a bridge to span over the existing structure. We could build the whole bridge (probably in phases) over the top of the existing structure without creek permits, as we would not be impacting the creek. While that was ongoing, we would pursue obtaining permits for the removal of the culverts and the construction of any remaining portion(s) of bridge. The initial phase would provide traffic lanes even if the culverts collapsed. Council Agenda Report—Foothill Blvd Culverts at.Stenner Creek Page 3 CONCURRENCES The State representatives agreed that monitoring and load limits are appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT Project Costs. When the settlement was first observed, staff budgeted for some repairs to be included in the 2001-05 Financial Plan. The budget will need to be changed to reflect a total replacement project. The State inspectors assure us that the bridge will be eligible for Federal Funding through the Federal Highway Administrations Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRR.) This program reimburses the City for 80% of eligible costs for replacement. Below are estimated expenses for the complete replacement of the structure. Total Cost JCity Share of Cost HBRR Share of Cost Environmental Review&Desi $250,000 $50,000 $200,000 Construction $750,000 $150,000 $600,000 Construction Management _ _ $200,000 $40,000 $160,000 Estimated Project Total: $1,200,000 $240,000 $960,000 As shown, getting this project started will require $250,000. Ultimately, an additional $950,000 will be required to make the repairs. Of the $1.2 million projected for this project, 20% ($240,000) will have to be funded by the City. It is important to note that these cost estimates are based on a very preliminary assessment before any design work has been completed. As such, we will not have an accurate picture of construction costs until we complete the environmental review and design work. Based on past experience, construction costs may be higher once we have a better understanding of environmental concerns, design issues and construction requirements. Funding. The City's Share for this project is not available within existing resources. As such, we recommend appropriating $50,000 from the unreserved General Fund balance for the initial environmental review and design costs (funding for the construction phases will be included in the 2001-03 Preliminary Financial Plan). Based on the Mid-Year Budget Review for 2000-01 and Council-approved changes since then, funding the City's share of the initial costs will result in an ending fund balance that is 25% of operating expenditures, compared with our policy minimum of 20%. Additionally, this will reduce the estimated carryover balance available for 20001-03 to $1.3 million. However, we will also need to fund the construction phase in 2001-03 from this carryover. As such, the net fiscal result of this project is to reduce the carryover available for new initiatives in 2001-03 to $1.1 million. ALTERNATIVES 1. Close the street to through traffic. Council Agenda Report—Foothill Blvd Culverts at Stenner Creek Page 4 The City could close the bridge right now. This would allow the discontinuance of -"twice-daily"-bridge monitoring but also mean significant delay to automobile traffic to and. from California Street and the Cal-Poly area. Traffic would most likely find and start using the Murray to Casa by-pass and put enormous strains on those two streets. Leaving the bridge open as long as possible keeps traffic as normal as can be expected. 2. Install a temporary bridge over the site. The Caltrans Structure representatives indicate erection of a temporary structure would cost the City about $150,000. In addition, the City would pay about $8,000 a month in rental. There is a possibility the State has all the necessary pieces of a temporary bridge at their yard in San Francisco. The City would have to go up and assist in sorting through the State inventory and arrange for shipping. Once installed, significant street ramping would be necessary to get traffic up and on the temporary bridge. If the culvert remains stable,the $150,000 could be used to greater effect to build a new structure. There is no alternative to immediately beginning the design process short of an extended or permanent closure of Foothill Blvd. ATTACHMENTS Location Map g:\_cumem projects\bridges\foothill stenner\staff reports\car loadlim&startl.doc IL IPA ONE a ��i!iiii�Illllllllll Illiiiiiiii�ll « • � . � _ ,