The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/05/1989, 8 - SUBMITTAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR ""CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, OLD GARDEN CREEK, CENTER STRE" Ill��l11111111I III 4� f MEETING DATE �I III �� city o san lugs oBIspo Sept. 5, 1989 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: Q' David F. Romero W o gyne A. Peterso� Prepared by: Bridget O.Fraser Public Works Director City EngineerLLi Engineering Assistant SUBJECT: Submittal of Plans and Specifications for "Creek Improvement Project, Old Garden Creek, Center Street to 250' Southerly, City Plan No. J-14H". RECOMMENDATION: By resolution, approve the plans and specificatons, authorize the Staff to advertise for bids and authorize the CAO to award the contract in accordance with Purchasing Control Procedure 403-3. BACKGROUND: This project consists of modifying the channel to provide a more uniform flow and to increase the capacity of Old Garden Creek which is currently impeded by a hump in the profile of the bed. This hump slows the water velocity and allows silt and debris to deposit upstream along the creek bed and through the Center Street culvert, thus reducing the hydraulic capacity of the culvert and increasing the risk of flooding during wet years. Gabion walls will be constructed downstream of the culvert to provide protection to the creek banks which are eroding and to create a uniform cross section. Vegetative gabions will be used so as to quickly re-establish growth along the disturbed banks. All of the larger trees (7 total) will be saved with the exception of a 9-inch walnut. Approximately 9 of the 16 small plum and almond trees may need to be removed. Once construction starts an attempt will be made to save more of the smaller trees. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this project will be appropriated from Zone 9 allocations. The estimated costs are as follows: Base Bid: $41 ,600.00 Contingencies: 3,400.00 Total: $45,000.00 CONCERNS OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS: This project has received permit approval from the Department of Fish and Game and the Army Corps of Engineers. This project has been given an EIR clearance by the Community Development Department. Status: Negative Declaration. The Community Development Department also assisted with the design to preserve as many trees as possible. 0 II��I��Ni�VNIIIIIIIP �I�IU city of saui Luis OBISPO nii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT City Plan No. J-14H Meeting of September 5, 1989 Page Two. CONSEQUENCE OF NOT TAKING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The project may be more expensive to construct at a later date, and the risk of flooding will increase as the capacity of the stream and culvert continue to decrease. The banks along the creek will continue to erode leading to loss of trees and backyards. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Approve the Plans and Specifications, authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the CAO to award the contract. APPROVED.*----- City A inistrative Officer City Attorne inance Directo 1--2 l Public Works Director bof2/j14h-sr I U�� JRESOLUTION NO. (1989 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS AND AUTHORIZING CAO TO AWARD CONTRACT TO SUCCESSFUL BIDDER WHEREAS, funds for the improvement of Old Garden Creek are available through the zone 9 allocations; and WHEREAS, the project has received a Negative Declaration status from the Community Development Department and is therefore exempt from an EIR, and is not of sensitive or exceptional community interest; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves the Plans and Specifications for City Plan No. J-14H, "Creek Improvement Project: Old Garden Creek - Center Street to 250' Southerly"; directs staff to advertise for bids; and authorizes the CAO to award the contract to the low bidder if �' . bids are below the Engineer's Estimate.. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: da of the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this Y 1989. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED:__ City A inistrative ficer ityAttor oC Public rkes Director , bof2/j 14h-sr �'� -METING AGENDA- 8' GATE ITW # ►VIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIhIIIIII��IIIIIIIIIII� II city of san- hues OBISPO ,. 955 Morro Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 August 17, 1989 MEMORANDUM,,"" TO: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer FROM: Dave Romero, Public Works Director =�-00- r SUBJECT: Letters from Richard_ Schmidt Regarding Old Garden Creek Project The Planning and Public Works staff worked very closely on this design. There was a detailed review and several joint field trips. Numerous changes were made to accommodate environmental concerns. Almost all of the trees are being saved, while still ! accomplishing the primary goal of reducing the flood potential of the restricted culvert under Center Street and stopping the bank undermining taking place along certain areas of this creek. The project was given a negative declaration only after Planning staff. was satisfied that all reasonable measures had been taken to protect the environment. Fish and Game has also approved the project, as has Zone 9. In actuality the project is very minor in nature and, with the vegetative gabions proposed, will very quickly return to a natural appearing state. Richard has misinterpreted my comments regarding the reasons for creek cutting. It is true the San Luis Obispo Creek has cut several feet in the past few years. This is caused by the enlargement of the channel near the sewer plant, by City removal of a number of check dam throughout the system (and impeded free flow and fish migration) . The City has also had an aggressive program for the past 15-20 years of removing all creek obstructions including water, sewer and gas lines hanging under bridges, and private projects such as decks and debris extending into the waterway. This is in addition to the annual program of cleaning major trash and clearing underbrush to keep the channel clear and open. The undercutting of San Luis Obispo Creek is desirable, rather than negative, in that it now gives greater protection for the City because of increased creek capacity in heavy rains. n i 1 Schmidt Page Two CJ I did not tell Richard that the work in San Luis Obispo Creek would affect the flow line of Old Garden Creek channel. I believe the undercutting near Richard's house is directly attributable to the fact that in 1956 the City replaced a very inadequate culvert at Mission Street, the first street crossing downstream of Richard's house. The newer culvert, now 33 years old, has allowed a freer flow of water; however, the channel cannot cut below the floor of that culvert. The channel cutting is a natural phenomena and again, in my view, is desirable since it increases the capacity and reduces the flood potential for houses in the neighborhood. The project we are proposing to construct this fall lies downstream of a second culvert (Center Street) with a solid bottom and will have virtually no effect on Richard's property. The floors of the two culverts will control the depth of erosion at the bottom of the channel. c: Randy Rossi schmidt/dfr#18 X �� MEETING AGENDA RECE�'_Y_ ED s .� DATE ��L &2 ITEM AUG 15 ISW 112 Broad Street LM San Luis Obispo *De by�Pow \, VA�CGd. CALIFORNIA 93401 R - August 14, I089 Respond by: 5nuOrbi Regarding Item C-3, Aug. 15 Agenda -- AGAIN! 4AW. City Council ERO City of San Luis Obispo O Dear City Council : This is a follow-up to my previous letter on this matter . Subsequent to writing that letter , I reviewed the staff report , plans and specs for this project . I am dumbfounded! This is not the minor project I had been told it was by staff . THIS IS A MAJOR CREEK REBUILDING along an entire block of very natural creek . This project has never had public review. This project's environmental review was handled with a negative declaration , which is a highly dubious procedure , given its magnitude and the array of obvious issues not dealt with . The rationale for a project of this magnitude is not supported by documentation presented in the staff report . Why is a Project of this size and type being handled in this "secretive" manner : no Public review• no routine to the citizen creek constituency organizations for comment : cursory staff report accompanying hard-to-understand Plans (could a developer get away with these?) and boiler Plate specs ( is the creek being paved?) submitted for approval as a CONSENT ITEM on the Council agenda?' Really! This is absolutely incredible , given the public's concern about protecting creeks. Is this what has become of "open government , " of "community involvement?" As I said, I am dumbfounded. This may be good "management , " but it's rotten public policy. I certainly hope you don' t follow the recommended action . ' J Q� r' Schmidt , Page This issue needs airing -- both the creek project itself , and the out-of-public-view manner in which the project has been handled. Sincerely , Richard Schmidt P. S. The creek's name is, and always has been , Old Garden Creek . There's no need to cutesy it with Olde . C� N!EFING AGENDA DATE �- � ITEM # y 112 Broad Street San Luis Obispo [Ren�es ail&by i_ead Person CALIFORNIA 93401 ,. August 12, 1989 Regarding Item C-3, Aug. 15 Agenda 7org. fibCity Council City of San Luis ObispoI Dear City Council : I wish to offer the following concerns about this item: I own a portion of Old Garden Creek several hundred yards upstream from this creek project . I am concerned that the environmental studies for this creek project are inadequate to determine whether this project will have adverse environmental impacts on portions of Old Garden Creek not directly involved in the project . I further raise the question whether anyone really understands what sort of impacts the project might have on other parts of the creek . My concerns stem from history. I have owned my property for 17 years, and during that time 1 have observed many interesting events in the life of the creek . Perhaps the most alarming of these events has been rapid bottom erosion ( i .e . , cutting down of the channel ) which began in the late 1970s and accelerated in the early 1980s. At my southern property boundary, where for years I put a summertime fence across the creek to contain my pet ducks and therefore have positive markers and points of reference to show where the creek bottom was formerly located, the bottom erosion in the past decade has amounted to at least two and a half feet on the vertical . Needless to say, it is no longer possible to fence this deeply eroded channel . The entire character of the creek has changed. For the first 8 years I lived along it , the portion through my yard and my upstream neighbors' was a gently flowing stream, nearly level in slope , with large still pools of water all summer long. Now the pools are all gone , and the creek is a steep cascading torrent in winter , and a barren relatively steep rock-strewn channel in the summer . I was at a loss to understand why this sudden vertical erosion , which is cutting away at the base of a massive stone retaining wall built in the 1930s, and at the base of a huge tree that has grown peacefully and beautifully for years. CITY OB S� sacs furs. T Schmidt , Page 2 About a year ago I had the opportunity to discuss this erosion on site with Dave Romero. He said the creek bottoms throughout town were all eroding in this fashion , and that the apparent cause was the widening done in the 1970s on San Luis Creek below the sewer plant . That project , he said, has speeded the flow of water through town , with the result that the flow lines have lowered into the earth . I was astonished, yet the idea does make sense . Nonetheless, I don' t recall this being one of the environmental impacts mentioned in the EIR on the San Luis Creek widening project . My point is this: if a project which sped the flow so far away could have the major effect noted in my backyard, what will be the effect of a speed-increasing project much closer to home? Does anyone have any idea? Or will this project be yet another environmental experiment? If the erosion is quickened, and trees, banks and retaining walls are lost , is the city planning to compensate private property owners for the damage it has caused? These questions about off-site environmental effects need to be addressed prior to commencement of any more creek altering projects. Sincerely, &I aj Richard Schmidt