Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/14/97 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM March 14, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER /~7'/z~ SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Per our request, the DTSC has provided us with a schedule for the Panorama Bum Dump Site. Their letter is enclosed for your information. 2. Status reports from the Director of Parks and Recreation are enclosed regarding Tevis Park and landscaping for the Mohawk extension. 3. A memorandum from the Fire Chief regarding future fire station locations for the southwest area is enclosed. 4. The "2% at 55" retirement program is taking one of the City's "favorites". Lee Andersen will be leaving in July to work on his golf and fishing. He will be missed. 5. The Redevelopment Agency approved your request for the District Attorney's building revenues to be contributed to the off-street parking fund. 6. A County staff report on issues which, in their view, stop mandatory collection consideration is enclosed. AT:rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst March 10, 1997 Cal/EPA Department of Pete Wilson Toxic Substances Governor Control Mr. Raul Rojas Public Works Director James M. Strock 10151 Croydon Way Public Works Department Secretary for Suite3 City of Bakersfield Environmental Sacramento, .CA 1 5 0 1 Truxtun Avenue Protection 95827-~2106 ....... BakersfieldT- California 9~33-01- SCHEDULE OF EVENTS: PANORAMA BURN DUMP SITE, BAKERSFIELD, CALI FORN I A Dear Mr. Rojas: This letter is a response to your memorandum received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) on February 5, 1997 regarding a cleanup schedule for the Panorama Burn Dump Site (Site). Since DTSC has had limited involvement with development of the' proposed cleanup schedule, we have developed the suggested Site schedule with corresponding activity due dates. 1. Site Investigation (SI) Report: The document is scheduled to be submitted on March 14, 1997. It is anticipated DTSC will complete its review within 30 days. please refer to Section 3.1.2. of the Site's Enforceable Agreement (EA), (Docket Number HSA 96/97-035) for clarification regarding the nec. e. ssar¥ compp~nen~ts of an S! R~eport. _ 2. Draft Remedial Action Plan (RAP): When DTSC determines that the SI Report has adequately addressed the lateral and vertical extent of contamination, then the City of Bakersfield (City) can submit the draft RAP. Because of the public participation and the California Environmental Quality Act requirements associated with completing a draft RAP, DTSC anticipates it will take up to four months to approve the RAP. The RAP is expected to be submitted on April 18, 1997. For assistance with developing a RAP, please refer to Section 3.1.3., 3.1.4., and 3.1.6. of the Site's EA. RECEIVED_ ~ APlOW.O~F~ Mr. Raul Rojas March 10, 1997 Page 2 3. Enqineerinq Desiqn: After DTSC has approved the RAP, the City will submit an' Engineering Design (Design) report. The purpose of this document is to present the technical and operational plans for implementing the approved RAP. DTSC will complete its review of this document within 30 days. This _. document is~ scheduled _to. be ~submitted on September 1, 1997. For assistance with developing a Design report, please refer to Section 3.1.5. of the Site ' s EA. 4. Implementation: The purpose of this phase is to implement the final response action which is consistent with the plans proposed in the RAP. It is anticipated that the implementation phase will occur from October through December of 1997. 5. Remedial Action Report: After the completion of all remedial activities required in the RAP, the City will submit to DTSC a remedial action report, which summarizes the remedial activities conducted at the Site. Submittal of the remedial action report is scheduled for February 1998. Refer to Section 3.8. of the Site's EA for guidance in preparing this report. DTSC encourages the City, along with their consultant, Kleinfelder, to initiate contact at their earliest-convenience-to discuss the schedule proposed in this letter. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (916) 255-3669. Sincerely, Adam Palmer Hazardous Substances Scientist Expedited Remedial Action Unit cc: See next page. APIOW.037 Mr. Raul Rojas March 10, 1997 Page 3 cc: Mr. Alan Tandy City Manager City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 .... Mr. Kevin Barnes Solid Waste Director Department of Public Works City of Bakersfield 4101 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93309 Mr. Dave Norman Kleinfelder, Incorporated 1410 "F" Street Fresno, California 93706 AP.mg APIOW.037 DIVISIONS OF RECREATION AND PARKS DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Lee Andersen, Community Services Manager FROM: Stan Ford, Director SUBJECT: Tevis Park Update The Tevis Park project is nearing the end of the scheduled 180-day maintenance period. The division issued a punch list to the contractor on March 5, 1997 that cited 13 items that must be corrected prior to the city's acceptance of the park. I walked the site yesterday morning and as a result have serious doubts about the condition of the park. Specifically, the turf. I noticed incomplete gemination, damaged areas, and weeds that appear to cover a very large area. It is my understanding that our contract requires the contractor to hydroseed the park with an "acceptable cover" if necessary. There was a crew installing slabs around the picnic tables. I will keep you informed of the status of the project as more information is available. If you have any questions or require additional information, please let me know. cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager RECEIVED MANAGER'S DIVISIONS OF RECREATION AND PARKS DATE: March 6, 1997 TO: Lee Andersen, Community Services Manager FROM: Stan Ford, Director SUBJECT: Landscaping for Mohawk Extension Previously, we discussed plans for the extension to Mohawk St. and what could be done in the interim time period. Since that time the following has occurred: · grading has been completed · installation of the irrigation system should be completed today · a sign with the wording "Future Mohawk Street Extension" is being designed Seeding will be done when the weather permits, probably in several weeks. Once the turf is established, shrubs will be planted in the area that borders the proposed bridge. As I mentioned, we will attempt to place them in a location that will not require their removal when the bridge is constructed. If you have any questions or require additional information, please let me know. cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager RECEJVED :C;TY MANAGER'S OFF!. BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: March 12, 1997 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: M~chael R. Kelly, Fire Chief-~ SUBJECT: Future Fire Station Locations A temporary fire station location has been identified in the vicinity of White Lane and Buena Vista Road. Due to the time flame associated with significant development in this area,, it is recommended that. a temporary fire station be considered for this site in approximately three (3) to five-(5) years. From the information we have received from the Development Services Department and the major land owner of this area, significant development should not occur in the immediate future. Funding has been requested in the 1997-98 CIP Budget to begin planning for this temporary station site. I feel if we can set aside a nominal amount of funding for the 1997-98 Budget, it will be of assistance in funding the remainder of the temporary station over a three-year period. The propoSed temporary fire station should be relocated farther west in the vicinity of White Lane and Allen Road when property, currently designated for agriculture use, begins to develop significantly. From the information we currently have, this development may be as far as ten years in the future. We are currently discussing a proposal to trade the property site the City currently owns at Buena Vista Road and Stockdale Hwy. for property in the vicinity of White Lane and Buena Vista Road. The property at White Lane and Buena Vista would then be traded for property in the vicinity of White Lane and Allen Road several years in the future when it is time to consider a permanent fire station. RECEIVED l ARtl MRK/kec MEMO~KELLY~STATION.LOC CITY MANAGER"$ OFFICE MEMORANDUM March 13, 1997 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: LELAND ANDERSEN, COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: RETIREMENT As expected the rumor of me retiring has surfaced. Therefore, I feel its time for me to go public. Please feel free to address my retirement with whatever notification is necessary. If you have questions, call me at your convenience. Thank you. krc L:\M:RETIRI= · ~-*'~ECEI~/ED ='~ _1 MANAGER"$ OFFlC~ CouHrf XASTE HAHA EHEHT DEpARTHEHT Daphne H. Ida hbloq Dirm0r 2700 'MI Street. Suite 5OO Bakersfield, CA 9330 I (8O5) 862-890O (8O0) 552-KEFU,4 (option 6) Fax: (8O5) 862-8901 March ] ~, 1997 Board of Supervisors Kern County Administrative Center 1115 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors: RE: Mandatory Garbage Collection (All S.D.'S) FUNDING: No Impact On December 17, 1996, your Board received a report from the Waste Management Department (WMD) titled "Progress Report - Mandatory Garbage Collection Program for the Bakersfield Metropolitan Area." In that report, we said that if all the parties did not agree on the terms of a mandatory collection program by January or February, it would be impossible for us to meet the goal of setting up a mandatory collection program by July of 1997. WMD has continued to work with the franchise haulers. We have evaluated the current proposal and explored options. Unfortunately, we have not resolved a few key issues. At this point, it is unlikely that WMD and the franchise haulers will agree on a mandatory garbage collection program in time to start the program this year. We intend this report to update your Board on the unresolved issues. New Twenty-five Year Franchises to Begin When Mandatory Collection Approved The County began issuing twenty-five year garbage collection franchises in 1957. On February 12, 1980, the County added an additional twenty-five years to all garbage franchises. All of the franchises had a few years remaining and the twenty-five years were added to that time. Most of the current franchises have 11 years remaining before they end in 2008. Now, the franchise haulers have requested ._. the' County add an additional 14 years to all existing franchises, to bring them back up to a full twenty- five-year term. These extensions would begin on the date that your Board approves mandatory collection. Under the proposed mandatory collection program, the haulers will need to upgrade some collection vehicles, purchase carts and purchase a few additional collection vehicles so they can collect additional customers. The haulers justify their request for a franchise extension by suggesting the proposed rate for automated mandatory collection is so low, that the eleven years remaining in the current franchises do not allow enough time to recover their capital investment. The haulers feel they need twenty-five years to recover equipment costs and make a reasonable profit. No detailed information has been provided to support this claim. . ..... A WMD survey of the collection industry has found the normal time for amortizing refuse collection vehicles and carts is five to ~even years. In addition, based on rates charged in other communities, the rate the haulers are proposing appears more than adequate to allow .for full cost recovery and a i, ....... RECEIVED I"1'~ MANAGER'S OFFICE Board of Supervisors Page 2 March 18, 1997 reasonable profit within the normal amortization period. The normal amortization period for equipment is well within the time remaining on the existing franchises. Granting twenty-five year franchises for refuse collection is very unusual. Most jurisdictions that grant refuse collection franchises, do so for five years. Longer franchises are normally associated with long- term capital investments such as a landfill, transfer station or material recovery facility. WMD has recommended the haulers drop their request for a franchise extension because the available information does not appear to support the need for such an extension at this time. However, the haulers continue to maintain they cannot provide mandatory collection without a franchise extension. Franchises to be Converted from Nonexclusive to Exclusive The haulers have requested the County convert all garbage franchises from nonexclusive to exclusive. As with the franchise extension, the haulers have not provided adequate justification for this change. WMD believes that converting the franchises to exclusive could limit your Board's future options in case of a problem with an individual hauler. Bulky Waste Collection Program On February 26, the haulers submitted their offer of a bulky waste program. Their proposal was: "Bulky waste pick-up program - pilot for one year (haulers to pick up costs for once a month collection in cooperation with coordinated City/County program; cost evaluations to be determined at end of City/County pilot program/six month mark)" We have not had an opportunity to discuss this proposal with the haulers. Issues we would like to discuss include:- The proposal does not commit the haulers ~to a long term bulky waste program. · The proposal leaves open the possibility that the haulers will charge extra or request a rate increase for bulky waste collection based on "cost evaluations." · How the program will operate is not clear, we have not discussed the level of service-and the proposal is subject to a great deal of interpretation. WMD cannot recommend a mandatory collection program until the issues in this report are resolved. We will continue to work with the haulers on these iSsues and we will report to your Board when progress has been made. We will also be working with the haulers to establish a rate for automated service as part of our annual report in June. IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED that your Board receive and file this report. Sincerely, Daphne H. Washington Director DHW:RBB:abr "'- " G:\WOR KGRPS~CLERICAL~BOARD~B528-RBB.AB R cc: County Administrative Office Environmental Health Sea'vices K~u Refuse, 24OI Rio Vista Drive, Bake~field, CA 93306 Rubbish Disposal Aasociauon, Bob Hampton, President, P.O. Box 80427, Bakersfield, CA 93380 City of Balu:rsf~id, Mt. K~vin Barnes, Solid W, asm Director, 4101 Truxtun Avenue, Bak~fleld, CA 93309 'Universal Service Proposal (discussion only) March 12, 1997 Metropolitan Bakersfield oni,y (map to be provided) 'All' single family residences to be on 'automated' collection service Mirror city program/service as much as possible Rate to be as close to the city's as possible - $10.83 ($10.68 to the haulers/$. 15 to' the county for enforcement and collection) Haulers to do the billing - no pays to be put on tax rolls for collection per the 'Tulare' plan Twice per week service - (1) tan cart and (1) green cart Haulers to buy the tan cans, green cans and trucks Haulers to be paid $6.00 per month for additional tan carts - no trading of green cans for tan cans County to reimburse haulers for green waste program (all related costs) if program falters, is dismantled or discontinued for reasons unrelated to the haulers Provision to re-negotiate the rate for the green waste program if it becomes substantially larger than anticipated (as agreed to by the city) 'Bulky' pick-up program (white goods) to be provided by the haulers and coordinated with proposed city/county program Special clean-up programs by the haulers - in targeted areas of the metropolitan area (as specified by members of the Board of Supervisors) Rural single family residences to be brought on service (automated) as 'occupied' residences achieve 250 'occupied dwellings' per square mile (see map for sphere of influence and franchised hauler boundry lines) NegOtiate agreements with Zone II franchised haulers for level of service, escalating penalties and additional conditions as specified Extend Zone II franchises fourteen (14) years Convert franchises (Zone II) to exclusive franchises Bullet List March 12, 1997 (for discussion only) Highest quality service with lowest long-term rates to the public Standardized service in the metropolitan area Significant cost containment through efficiencies of standardized equipment, service and collection Significant reduction in cost of service delivery for many existing customers (appx. 30% to see cost reduction) Enhanced ability of County to achieve year 2000 goals/objectives per AB 939 Escalate achievement of recycling goals at lowest practicable rates New 'Bulky Item' (White Goods) collection program and 'focused' clean-up efforts Minimize unauthorized dumping Reduce litter and help keep neighborhoods cleaner Convenience to the public (eliminate cost of trash cans and trash bags as well as ease of handling) Reduced liability through automation of service Stronger collection program for the public with additional service conditions and escalating penalties for non-compliance in new, mandated agreements between franchised haulers and the county Enhanced authority over franchised system by Board of Supervisors ....... March 12, 1997 OUTLINE Discussion Only Rate Comparisons Clovis: Mandatory Service 105 gallon carts Residential Rate $12.16 p/mo $ 3.38 p/mo for green waste $15.54 p/mo Second can $6.08 p/mo each Owns own landfill - 'no' tipping fee - included in residential rate Fresno: Mandatory Service twice p/wk pick-up 100 gallon carts Kesidential Kate $11.74 p/mo Second cart (64 gallon) $ 4.28 p/mo Tipping Fee $28.80 p/t - included in res. rate Lodi: 64 gallon cart Residential Rate $24.86 p/mo (incl. g.w. & recycling) Tipping Fee ' $29.41 p/t Page 2 Sacramento: 90 gallon cart Residential Rate $15.78 p/mo Green Waste $ 4.77 p/mo (billed separately) $20.55 p/mo Yard and garden waste is collected curbside weekly - not containerized Tipping Fees $37.75 north/south transfer areas $21.00 Kiefer Blvd. Landfill Stockton: 90 gallon cart Residential Rate $16.15 p/mo Green Waste $ 3.00 p/mo $19.15 p/mo - billed separately and picked up every other week Tipping Fees $30.00 p/t 110 gallon cart Split can Residential Rate $16.00 p/mo Green Waste $15.00 p/to Tipping Fee $31.00 p/t Processing Fee $28.00 p/t Second Cart (split can) $ 8.45 'p/mo Green Waste cart (additional) $ 4.00 p/mo .......