HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-06; City Council; 6326-1; PALOMAR WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITYa li 0 Page 7 of
- CITY OF CARtSGe
Initial :
AGENDA BILL NO. 6326, Supplement No. I - Dept. Head
DATE: January 6, 1981 C. Atty
DE PA RTM E N T : - City Manager
. SUBJECT: PALOMAR WASTEWATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER:
The City Council on 8/5/80 authorized preparation. of an assessment district feasi study on the subject project. That study was prepared by Don Owen & Associates E presented to Council on 11/24/80. The conclusion of the report was that a projec generally described in the report was feasible. Council re-affirmed their suppov water reclamation in general and of a proposed project in the vicinity of Palomar
Staff had several meetings relating to'the proposed project and the actions nece prior to the formation of an assessment district. an agreement with the property owners guaranteeing preliminary expenses. (2) P focused study to determine the specific details of the project and its financing Retain consultants to design the project, prepare environmental assessment docum function as Assessment Engineer and Project Manager, act as Bond Counsel. The C ney is preparinri a revised property owners agreement. This Agenda Bill addresse preparation of a focused study and selection of a Design Engineer.
Focused Study:
To save time (two-to-three months) it was proposed that Don Owen & Associates be to commence the focused study immediately while the designer selection process I: Koll Company offered to put up the necessary funds.
Don Owen has submitted a proposal which provides for the necessary focused stud? of proposal) and further proposes to prepare a plan for a non-potable system (PI - It is probable that the non-potable plan would be of more benefit to the City i-
conjunction with neighboring agencies involved in water reclamation. The City E instituted discussions with the local reclamation group to accomplish this end. ceeding with Phase I of the Owen proposal, we could still keep on the time tracl assessment district.
Design Engi neer.:
Attached is a draft request for proposal (RFP) prepared by the City Engin$er.
concurs, staff will send the RFP to qualified firms with the understanding that would not be approved until the property owners' agreement is signed and prelim
i ng guaranteed *
Other Consul tang:
Subsequent Agenda Bills will be prepared dealing with Bond Counsel, EIR Consult Assessment En g i neer/ Pro j ec t Manager .
It was agreed that we must:
0 1
0 0
Agenda Bill No. 6326, Supplement No. Page 2 of
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated cost of the study (Phase I of Owen proposal) is $20,000 to be paid Koll Company and others.
EXHIBITS :
1. 2. 3.
RECOMMENDATION :
If the Council concurs, it should, by minute motion, authorize the City Manager proceed with the preparation of the focused study and to send out RFP's to qual design consulting firms.
Letter proposal from Don Owen 8 Associates dated 12/22/80. Draft of request for proposal. Letter from City Manager dated 12/23/80.
Council Action:
1-6-81 Council authorized the City Manager to proceed with Phase I of the focuse report as outlined in the Don Owen letter dated December 22, 1980, and authorized staff to send Requests for Proposals for Sewage Treatment Plan Design Services to qualified consultant firms,
a w
EN & Assocr TES 3NC.
December 22, 1980
- HAUD DELIVERED
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbzd, California 92008
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This letter is in regard to the proposed focus pla
effort regarding the Palomar Airport Reclamation Facili
ouklined in the Financial Feasibility Study on this pro
recently prepared by Brown and Nazarek and Don Owen &
Associates. The proposed planning effort would be divi
into two stages. The first stage being the preparation
those planning elements to define the first phase of co struction. The second stage of the planning effort wou involve the preparation of a focus plan for a non-potak
water supply system for the City of Carlsbad,
PHASE I - DESIGN REPORT --
Phase I Design Report would require severr specific
tasks to be completed, These tasks need the input of t
EIR consultant, the Desigr, Engineer and the financing t
In addition, some policy questions will have to be ansk
by the City Council; therefore, considerable input fron
Carlsbad City staff will also be required,
Task 1 - Alternative Sizing Analysis;
Task 2 - Analysis of Relationship between Size, Growth Policies and Financing Requireme3t
Task 3 - Critical Resource Analysis (Specific
Attention to Water and Energy);
. Task 4 - Cost Effective Location for Plant Site;
Task 5 - Treatment Process Evaluation;
EXHIBIT NO. 1
2061 Btistness Center Drive. Suite 203- Irvine, Cattfornia92715- (7 14) 752-9032
e I. .. .I
City of Carlsbad
December 22, 1980 Page Two
Task 6 - Definition of Specific Facilities to be
Designed and Design Criteria; and
Task 7 - Cost Estimates.
The extent of work to be accomplished under this p
posal would be to draft and complete all of the plannin
phases and focus specific design input so that at the t
the Design Engineer was em2loyed by the City, the Desig
Report could be completed and the City could move rapid into preparation of plans and specifications,
FOCUS PLAN FOR NON-POTABLE SYSTEM -
There are ten identified tasks under the preparati sf this planning effort- They axe:
Task 1 - Determination of Specific Market dor Reclaimed Water:
Task 2 - Description of Present and Future Service Area;
Task 3 - Coordination with San Marcas Effluent Ein and Other Satellite Plants;
Task 4 - Development of Master Plan €or Distributi
System:
Task 5 - Analysis of Storage Requirements;
Task 6 - Storage Plan;
Task 7 - Salt Balance Calculations;
Task 8 - Development of Total Dissolve Salt Progra
Task 9 - Cost Estimates; and
Task 10 - Institutional Plan for Non-Potable Water
Sale (Including Financing Plan) .)
Several of the aspects to be determined in the foc
non-potable water plan must be determined and used as i
in the drafting of the Phase 1 Design Report, Those fz
necessary under the Phase 1 facility may vary in size,
capacity and/or location because of the planning detern
a b ...
I. *.
d*
City of Carlsbad December 22, 1980
Page Three
made for the overall sale and distribution of reclaimed
water.
REPORT & SCHEDULING -
Two reports will be prepared. The first will be tl
draft of the Phase 1 Design Report and this will be com-
pleted at the end of two months. The final report will
prepared in conjunction with the Design Engineer and cor
Dleted three months from the authorization of the plann:
Gf fort 0
The second report will be completed five months frc
the initiation of the planning effort and it will consiz
the master plan for non-potable water system for the Cil sf Carlsbad,
COSTS
7-
The total estimated costs, exclusive of the Design
Engineer's activity, would be $35,000. An initial authc
zation of $20,000 would allow for the completion of all
studies necessary for the Design Report draft.
BASIS OF PAYMENT -
-$ It is proposed that we would charge on the basis oJ
actual fee and the above cost estimates should be consic as a not to exceed figure for the authorization. Attacl
is our fee schedule and the resumes of the two engineer:
would be involved in the conduct of the work.
i If I can be of r'urthei- assistance in further Zefin:
.i the) necessary planning as I see it and/or explaining otl
matters, please feel free to call upon me.
Very truly yours,
Langdon W. Owen
LWCb:rs
Enc: losure s
I U'L r7 f e * 6
RE : IREQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR DESIGN OF A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLAflT
2
The City sf Carlsbad is soliciting proposals for the design of a sewage trl
ment plant to be located near the Palomar Airport, The facilities will be
structed through an assessment district proceeding which has not yet been
approved by the Carlsbad City Council, The successful design proposal wil
not result in a contract until the City receives an amended petition reque
ing formation of an assessment district and has executed an agreement with
affected property owners for private financing of project reports, environ
mental review and project design.
The City has previously entered into an agreement with Don Owen and Associ
of lrvine for a "Focused Study" which will address such issues as project
size of facility, discharge requirements, reclamation facilities, etc. Dt
this st~dy~ it is desirable to have the design engineer available to revie
and comment on the findings of the study.
It is anticipated that the treatment facility will have a capacity of appr
mately 29 mgd average daily flow and will be expandable to 5 mgd. Prefer;
the treatment process will be of the oxidation ditch type, similar in desi
to the recently completed take Calavera Hills Sewage Treatment Plant in Ct
bad. The plant will have the following major features:
LV>
1. influent structure with dual bar screens, barminutor, and possible gi
remova I ;
2. Dual oxidation ditches for extended aeration biological treatment, e;
ditch 1.2 mgd with two brush type aerators with appurtenances;
3. Dual circular secondary clarifiers, each 1.2 mgd;
4. RAS/UkS pumping system;
5. Chlorine contact chamber;
6.
7. Effluent pumping station;
8. Aerobic sludge digester with mechanical aerator;
9. Sludqe concentration facility; and
10. Standby power system with engine generator set and automatic transfe
Chlorine hand1 ing faci il i ties;
sw i t ch .
EXHIBIT NO. 2
'. 0 Q
A combined office/laboratory/shop building will also be a part of the desi
as well as housing for standby engine generator facilities and chlorine SI
SCOPE OF tlORK
TASK NO. 1: Assist Don Owen and Associates in preparation of a "Focused !
by reviewing and commenting on the findings made in the study particular11
they relate to the site, size, process, cost and compatibility of the pro1
facility with a reclamation system.
TASK NO. 2: * Prepare a preliminary design for the sewage treatment facili.
identified in the Don Owen and Associates' "Focused Study". The Prelimin*
Design will consist of the following:
1. Basis of design and project description, A description r:.f cach procc
and its purpose.
2. Site plan - Show location of all proposed facilities, access roads,
channels, processes, structures, etc.
3. Preliminary Design Date - Should include anticipated influent and efi
flow and strength; description of preliminary treatment processes (ni
size, capacity, etc.); oxidation channel description (size, ca%acity,
detention time, mechanical equipment); clarifier size and capacity;
effluent disposal processes should be described and defined.
4. Flow diagram.
5.
6. Sol ids balancing schematic.
7. Building floor plans and elevations.
8. Discussion of odor control systems.
9. Discirssian of noise control systems.
10. Discussion of energy conservation systems.
11. Preliminary landscape and screening plan.
Hydraul ic prof i le.
TASK NO. 3: The consultant will subinit plans and specifications for preli
plan checking. The plans should show a11 site preparation and grading, dr
access roads, landscaping, structures, process equipment and pipe runs. C
fications should be provided to adequately describe the plans. A written
tion and prel iminary layout of instrumentation, internal water systems anc
trical systems should be provided.
-2-
, a e
TASK NO. li: Submit final plans and specifications detailing all aspects c
the treatment plant construction. An operations and maintenance manual wi
also be provided by the consultant prior to completion of the facility.
CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL
The proposal should include a resume of recent project undertaken by the c
sultant which would show ability to perform the tasks described above. Tt
proposal s+hould also list key personnel in the firm who would be assigned
the Carl shad project.
A statement of availability to perform the work should be included in the
proposa 1.
FEE -
,
The fees for the contract described in this request for proposal will be
cost plus fixed fee to be negotiated prior to award of contract.
Questions regarding the scope of work for this project should be addressec
Les Evans at (714) 438-5541.
LES EVANS C i ty Eng i neer
LE:ls
<
?
B t
5
-3-
m m 1 %-.-b-
'* i200 ELM AVENUE
' CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Manager
aitp o€ c&at.&b&
December 23, 1980
Mr. Berriard Fipp President Southern Division The Kola Company 7290 Cl a,i remont Mesa Boul evard San Diego, Californ-ia 92111
Dear Mr. Fipp:
As you know, a group of landowners .iin the Pafamar 8irpou.t ckra-inacje bas- have ask.ed the City Council to consider the formation of an assessment district: for the financing and construction of a proposed Palornar Airpc Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Plant, In order to facilitate thc City Counci 1 's evaluation of that request, the property owners proposet that the City retain consultants to do a feasibility study of t.he asse: ment district and an analysis of the various policy and legal consider; tions that would bear on the City Council's decision of whether or not proceed.
We obtained a proposal, dated July 28, 1980, from the law firm of Brswr Nazarek!, offering to do the study and analysis -in association with Don
ti Associates, Inc.s at a cost not to exceed $20,000- Your tetter of 31 7980 approved the proposal and authorized us to proceed at your expenst
At the August 5, 1980 City Council meeting, the City Council approved i
July 28,, 1980 proposal and authorized us to proceed on the basis of yoi July 30!, 1980 letter.
The study has been completed and was presented to the City Council. TI Council,, based on the study, reaffirmed thdr interest in reclaimed wai and directed staff to pursue the possibility of the Palomar Sewer and Reclamation Facility Assessment District. The next steps in that proct are the preparation of an agreement with the property owners for the ac vancement of the preliminary expenses of the district and the drafting circulation of a petition. The agreement would be followed by consulti selection and the accomplishment of a focused and detailed study to ari at a final definition of the project (size, location, components, etc,
.*+
EXHIBIT NO. 3
- 9 I .c
I. -.
bJe appreciate your interest in seeing the project move ahead as fast as possible. In that regard, time can be saved by starting part of the study rm~, We have a proposal dated December 22, 1980 from Don Owen and Associates offering to do part of the focused study at an estimated cost of $35,000. If you wish to go
forward on that basis, it will be necessary for the property owners to place $20,000 an deposit with the City.
\!e would propose to authorize the consultant to undertake the study as
outlined in the proposal, and to utilize the $20,000 on deposit with the City to pay for that study. would be without any obligation on the part of the City to proceed with the assessment district, provide sewer service or to approve any develop-
ments in the area. excess of the $20,000 over the cost of the study will be refunded. and when an assessment district -is approved and bonds sold for the pro- posed project, the City anticipates that the cost will be reimbursed to the contributing property owners from district funds, .is not approved, there would be no reimbursement.
If the terms of this letter are acceptable to you, and to the other con- tri buting property owners within the proposed assessment district, pleas sign the enclosed copy of this letter as your acceptance and return it ti me wittf'yyour check in the self-addressed, stamped envelope.
we have your reply, we will place the matter on the City Council agenda, If the Council approves, we will direct the consultants to immediately undertake this study.
A copy is enclosed,
You, of course, understand that this
If this partial study costs less than $20,000, any If
If the district
As soon as
L?
FRANK ALESHPRE
City Manager
Enclosure
cc: F. Flackenzie Brown City Attorney