My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:152 (3)
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:152 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2006 3:56:14 PM
Creation date
9/14/2006 3:55:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/19/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:152
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />obligation had not then been triggered) ended up funding a large portion of the realigned <br />Vineyard Avenue and some core underground utility facilities within or adjacent to the <br />roadway. Later, when residential development within the VCSP area proceeded, one of the <br />VCSP developers (in lieu of paying VCSP fees) constructed the sewer pumping station within <br />the VCSP, since the sewer pump station was mandatory prior to occupancy of any <br />development there. The City, through its Sewer Expansion Fund, constructed the off-site <br />gravity sewer main for the VCSP along Vineyard Avenue from Pietronave Lane to Bernal <br />Avenue (for which, like the water facilities discussed in this report, the City will presumably <br />be reimbursed by Specific Plan fees as full development of the area occurs). <br /> <br />The VCSP water facilities that the VCSP Financing Program envisioned the City would <br />fmance (the tank and access road, pumping station and turnout) were described and budgeted <br />in the City's FY 2003/04 CIP budget. At that time, the total cost of these facilities was <br />estimated at approximately $3.9 million ($3,885,000). Of the $3,885,000, staff proposed at <br />that time the sources of funding to include $3,135,000 as a loan from the Water Replacement <br />Fund, to be paid back by VCSP fees as development occurred; $645,000 from the Water <br />Expansion Fund, reflecting the need to up size the tank size and some pumping facilities to <br />serve existing and new development in some of the Ruby Hill and adjacent Bonde Zone areas; <br />and $105,000 from the Water Replacement Fund (but not as a loan) to reflect improved <br />service to existing customers in the Bonde Zone. As provided for in the VCSP Financing <br />Program, staff also began collecting higher Specific Plan fees in the VCSP area based upon <br />the revised water facilities cost estimate, to assure the Water Replacement Fund would be <br />repaid. Of the $3.9 million budgeted, approximately $400,000 has been spent for tank design <br />and portions of the pump station and turnout design. <br /> <br />Escalation of the Reservoir and other VCSP Water Facility Costs <br /> <br />Approximately a year and a half ago, City staff was notified by the tank design engineers <br />(Tetra Tech) that the tank construction portion of the project was now estimated at $2.4 <br />million rather than the $1.9 million estimate included in the FY 2003/04 project budget. The <br />escalation in costs was due primarily to the increases in the cost of reinforcing steel and <br />concrete since the original FY 2003/04 budget estimate. In addition, at about that same time, <br />the pump station design consultants were estimating an escalation of the pump station <br />construction costs of approximately 50%, from $1 million in the 2003/04 estimates to <br />approximately $1.5 million. Consequently, as provided for in the VCSP Financing Program, <br />the Specific Plan fees were again adjusted to account for this estimated increase in costs. <br /> <br />When the reservoir and rough grading of the access road were put out to bid in May 2006, the <br />engineer's estimate was $3.4 million. The lowest responsible reservoir bid received by the <br />City was $3.9 million. When staff inquired about this difference, a contractor who is very <br />familiar with the tank construction industry noted that recent engineering and construction <br />trade journals were reporting that some construction costs have averaged an escalation factor <br />of approximately 20% per year during each of the past three years. This partially explains the <br />SR 06:152 <br />Page 8 of 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.