Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Wilson stated there is a need for vehicle access over the creek. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho reiterated the need for vehicle access over the creek for public safety vehicles <br />as well. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan questioned the funding plan and whether a plan has been developed. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho responded a funding plan will be developed and he was hopeful the City <br />would be successful in obtaining a grant. If the City was unsuccessful in obtaining the grant, <br />when staff returns to Council for the award of contract, funding sources would be identified at <br />that time. The city has been unsuccessful at estimating the costs of construction due to a <br />variety of factors. The cost of construction is increasing; the impacts of Hurricane Katrina are <br />being felt nationally and are having an impact in Pleasanton as well. A funding source will be <br />identified. He believed the engineers estimate is low, however, in order to move the project <br />forward, the City is using the engineers estimate. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan inquired whether the City was going out to bid immediately. <br /> <br />Mr. Fialho responded immediately. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan asked the consultant, Drew Goetting, Project Manager for Farwest <br />Restoration about the hydrology and the issue regarding flood control downstream. <br /> <br />Mr. Goetting responded a HEC-RAS model, an industry standard for assessing changes <br />to the geometry to a particular reach of a creek is essentially the most cost effective means to <br />answer questions whether there will be a negative or positive impact downstream due to a <br />particular project. In their analysis it was found that the model didn't show a tremendous <br />improvement or a negative impact downstream. He pointed out his firm does restoration <br />projects but most projects are flood control projects. Beyond the model, his sense is if the City <br />has larger storm events than what was modeled, the City would have significant benefits by this <br />project. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan inquired about what would happen if the upper most culvert were left in the <br />plans and not removed. <br /> <br />Mr. Goetting responded that in the original master plan they looked into replacing the <br />culvert downstream of Adams Way and replacing that bridge which was included in the first <br />estimate. He further stated there is concern regarding the culvert at Cherry Court because <br />there are two smaller pipes that have a history of clogging and erosion. The upstream pipe has <br />been problematic. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />03/21/06 <br />