HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/97 B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
September 19, 1997
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGERShip7
SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This week, Public Works and Planning staff, along with Councilmember DeMond and
Senator Jim Costa, had a conference call with representatives of the CalTrans Rail
Program to discuss their negative comments on our draft Project Study Report (PSR)
for the Amtrak station. CalTrans has continued to throw up barriers in our efforts to
become lead agency on the Amtrak station and expedite the project. Senator Costa
was quite helpful in motivating them to better cooperate with us. We are now on a
schedule where we should have the Fund Transfer Agreement done by next week,
which will officially designate us as lead agency. CalTrans has also agreed to
expedite approval of the final PSR and forward it to the CTC by mid-October. We
hope to have the initial funding for the project by December.
2. A memo from the City Clerk is attached which advises you of the options available
in filling the open position on the Planning Commission due to Matthew Brady's
resignation.
3. Enclosed is correspondence from the DTSC which summarizes their review of the
draft Remedial Action Plan for the Panorama Burn Dump Site. The final draft is
expected to be submitted this week.
4. A report from EDCD is attached on the Chester Avenue Streetscape project. Staff
held a pre-construction meeting this week with the two general contractors.
Construction will begin next week and completion is anticipated to take about 12
weeks. We have emphasized to the contractors the importance of minimizing
disruption to merchants and business in the area.
5. Also enclosed are letters from Moxley International and Medcath, Incorporated
thanking staff for the assistance provided to the Bakersfield Heart Hospital project.
AT:rs
cc: Department Heads
Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk
Trudy $1ater, Administrative Analyst
BAKERSFIELD
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
September 17, 1997
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: Pamela A. McCarthy, City Cle~
SUBJECT: Resignation of Mathew Brady, Planning Commissioner
On September 10, 1997 I received a letter of resignation from Planning Commissioner
Mathew Brady (copy attached). His resignation was effective immediately. Mr. Brady's
term would have expired in April 17, 1998.
Usually, upon receipt of a resignation, the Clerk will begin the recruitment process. This
process includes preparing a news release announcing the vacancy, accepting
applications, and then placing on an agenda for Council action. This process takes
approximately two months from start to finish. Currently two regular positions (one being
Mr. Brady's) and the alternate position will expire in April, 1998. The process for this
recruitment will begin in February, 1998.
With only six months remaining on Mr. Brady's term, the Council may wish to consider
appointing the alternate Commissioner, Betsy Teeter, to fill this unexpired term, and
proceed with the recruitment process as scheduled for April, 1998.
If you need additional information, please let me know.
:pmc
Attachments (1)
cc: John Stinson, Assistant City Manager
S:kM EMO SkTANDYkRE C RUIT. PC.wpd
~IENKINS, BARNES ~ BRADY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
.j. CRAIG JENKINS TELEPHONE
MATHEW tel. BRADY BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA g3301
(805) 631-2~99
.JENNIFER A. McGILL ~/[I""' ~,' ..... ~,i J i ti~8'~jenkinslaw.com
September 9, 1997
HA.ND DELIVERED ''" '~
Honorable Bob Price, Mayor
Members of the City Council
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: RESIGNATION FROM PLANNING CO~ISSION
Dear Mayor Price and Me~ers of the City Council:
This correspondence will serve to notify you of my decision to '
resign my position as a Planning Commissioner for the City of
Bakersfield effective immediately.
I have enjoyed my time as a me~er of the Planning Commission
and leave the Commission reluctantly after giving the matter
careful thought. I do wish to thank the City Council for providing
me with the opportunity of sewing the City in this capacity.
Very truly yours,
Council Members:
Irma Carson
Patricia J. DeMond Distdbut~to:
Patricia M. Smith Mayor
Kevin McDermott
Randy Rowles Council
Jacquie Sullivan C~M~
Mark C. Salvaggio
CityAU~
Other
By City Clerk
Date ¢-/~ ~¢'7
Honorable Bob Price, Mayor
September 9, 1997
Page 2
cc: Judy Skousen, City Attorney
Stanley Grady, Planning Director
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
September 17, 1997
TO: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director
FROM: Donna Barnes, Development Associate ~4~
SUBJECT: Pre-Construction Meetin~ Chester Avenue Streetscape
On September 16, 1997 the City held a pre-construction meeting with the two general
contractors, Granite for the hardscape and Elite for the landscape/irrigation. Construction is
scheduled to start September 22, 1997. The hardscape portion is scheduled to be completed in 70
working days and the landscape portion in 80 working days. Regular working days are Monday
through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The contractors can work on the weekend, but this is at
their expense.
The importance of minimizing disruption to Chester Avenue merchants and businesses was
emphasized. Staff asked general contractors and their subs not to obstruct entrance to any
business. Pedestrain traffic can be diverted around a work area for safety reasons. Vehicle lane
closures are allowed between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. One lane in both directions must remain
open at all times. However, it was suggested that once motorists realize construction is underway
it would be better to use alternate routes.
Granite intends to start construction at the north end of the project on September 22.
Partnering meetings will be held on Tuesdays at 7:00 a.m. in the Public Works basement
conference room. The first meeting is September 30, 1997. Mark Fick is the Public Works
Inspector assigned to the project.
BAKERSFIELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301
(805) 326-3724
RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR * CITY ENGINEER
September 12, 1997
To: Distribution
RE: PANORAMA BURN DUMP PROJECT FILE
Attached is a letter form Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) concerning
review of the draft RAP. It is quite technical in nature, yet we are providing a copy for
your fries.
These items were previously provided to us verbally by DTSC and in a revised draft. The
final draft should be submitted to DTSC by September 19, 1997.
S e~vi ~~rincerelyz
Solid Waste Director
KB: smp
c: Alan Tandy, City Manager
Raul Rojas, Public Works Director
Judy Skousen, City Attorney
Don Anderson, City Real Property Agent
William D. Brown, Daley & Heft
RECEIVED
SE? 1_! 1997
September 9, 1997
Cai~EPA OiT¥ OF B$~K~.RSt-iELD/-
Depar~ent of ~. Kevin Barnes Pete ~ikon
Toxic Substances Solid Waste Director Governor
Consol Depa~ment of Public Works
City of Bakersfidd ov ..... "~' '
10151 Croydon W~ 4101 Tin.un Avenue Secremqfor
Suite 3
Sacramento, CA Bakersfield, Califo~a 93309 Environmental
Protection
95827-2106
~W OF ~FT ~MED~L ACTION PLAN: PANO~ BU~ DUMP
SITE
Dear Mr. Barnes:
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has concluded its review of
the draft Remedial Action Plan (draft RAP) and Health Risk Assessment (I-IRA) for the
Panorama Burn Dump Site submitted by the City of Bakersfield (City) on July 11, 1997.
DTSC's review of the draft RAP and HRA generated the following specific comments
which must be addressed by the City prior to the document being released for public
review and comment.
Draft Remedial Action Plan: Specific Comments
1. Page ii: DTSC's address needs to be changed to 10151 Croydon Way, Suite 3,
Sacramento, California, 95827-2106.
2. The draft RAP needs to contain an executive summary and a statement of reasons.
3. Throughout the draft RAP, there are inconsistencies as to exactly how many of the
homes the City actually owns. Please review, and insure that the document
accurately reflects the number of homes presently owned by the City.
4. Section 1, Introduction, Page 1: The first paragraph, second sentence refers to
metals as "chemicals of concern." Specify which metals comprise the "chemicals
of concern."
5. Section 1, Introduction, Page 1: The second paragraph, first sentence, change the
words "remedial action investigation" to remedial action plan.
6. Section 1, Introduction, Page 1' The fifth paragraph, second sentence, change the
word "certified" to approved.
7. section 2, 'Site BaCkground, Page 2: FirSt paragraph, third sentence is irrelevant
and should be delete& '~ .....
8. Section 2, Site Background,Page 2: Mention in this paragraph the status of the
other five privately-owned homes.
Mr. Kevin Barnes.
September 9, 1997
Page 2
9. Section 2, Site Background, Page 2: First paragraph, seventh sentence, the word
"of" needs to be inserted between the words "many" and "the."
10. Section 5.4, Page 15: The presentation of alternatives 3A and 3B need to be
separated. Further discussion of these two alternatives need to be presented on an
individual basis.
11. Section 5.4, Page 15: The draf~ RAP discusses the need to place deed restrictions
o~ a portion of the homes onsite. The City needs to present in the draft RAP a
more detailed discussion of the type of land use controls that will be
incorporated into the deed restriction, i.e., excavations below 3 feet.
12. Section 5.4, Page 15: The draf~ RAP states, that in the future the City must be
present to oversee any excavation below three feet. Does this mean the City will
be responsible for disposal of any of the excavated soil? Please clarify these
provisions. ·
13. Section 5.5, Page 15: In the first paragraph, the City states a fence will be
constructed along the northern property lines. Then, in the subsequent paragraph,
the City states that realignment of northern property lines will be considered.
There appear to be inconsistencies between these two paragraphs. Please clarify.
14. Section 6.5, Page 17: The first sentence states three additional homes will need to
be purchased. Why would three additional homes need to be purchased if
remediation is not going to occur on those properties?
15. Section 6.5, Page 18: In the second paragraph, the City states that regulatory
concurrence will need to be obtained from the Integrated Waste Management
Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board for placement of excavated
soil from the site to the adjacent landfill. The statement needs to be revised to
reflect the need for DTSC's concurrence: ~' ~" ~' ~' '
16. Section 6.6, Page 18: The fourth paragraph, last sentence, change "project
certification" to "certificate of completion."
17. Section 7.1, Page 20: The third paragraph, last sentence should be rewritten to
state that DTSC will draft the deed restriction and then forward the document to
the City for their review and comment.
18. Section 8, Page 22: The schedule for implementation of the response action needs
to be revised to reflect delays in reviewing the drat~ RAP.
19. Appendix A, Plates 4,5,7,10,11,16,& 23: Please revise the plates to reflect the
agreed upon lead cleanup levels.
20. Appendix B: Please provide a table showing which discrete samples comprised
each of the composite samples.
drapcom.let
Mr. Kevin Barnes
September 9, 1997
Page 3
Health Risk Assessment: Specific Comments
1. Section 2.4.1., Page 18, last paragraph: This paragraph summarizes the reasons
for believing the concentration of arsenic detected in the soil at this site represents
background. A statement should be added to this section addressing the risk that
is associated with the background levels measured in this area.
2. Section 2.4.3., Page 19, first paragraph: This states that cadmium was detected in
22 percent of the samples analyzed: This is described as a low frequency of
detection. DTSC's does not consider a detection frequency of 22 percent to be
low and therefore requests this statement to be removed. See also pages 37 (first
paragraph) and 38 (second paragraph).
3. Section 3.2.4., Page 29: This section addresses exposure by inhalation of
resuspended dust, and states that "no chemicals of concern were noted in airborne
dust..." However, there isno air monitoring data in the document to support this
statement. In addition, there is no description of the equation and input parameter
values used to convert chemical concentrations in soil to concentrations in air for
use in the intake equations. These deficiencies should be corrected.
4. Section 3.3.1., Page 30, last paragraph; and Table 3-2: This paragraph discusses
the percentage of the area of each yard which is exposed soil, while Table 3-2
tabulates those percentages with street addresses. The text states that 3608
Panorama contains a large exposed area, whereas this Table indicates that 3708
Panorama contains the large exposed area (72 percent). Please check, clarify or
correct.
5. Table 3-1, Page 32: The footnote to this table gives U.S. EPA Region 10 citation
for the use of 275 days/year for the typical residential exposure frequency and nine
years for the typical residential exposure duration. This is.not an adequate
reference, since California is not in Region 10. Please providethe original
references used by U.S. EPA Region 10 to support these values.
6. Section 3.3.5., Second paragraph: The subject of this paragraph is the
bioavailability of dioxins in the carder used in the studies from which the toxicity
criterion was derived compared to the bioavailability of dioxins in soil matrix.
None of the studies cited appear in the reference section of this document. Please
correct the reference section to include these references. Please provide to the
Human and Ecological Risk Division (HERD) for review, a copy of the primary
reference, Shu et al (1988), supporting the relative bioavailability factor used in the
intake equations.
7. Section 3.4.1.1., Page 45, last sentence; Table 3-4; and Appendix F: As stated in
this sentence, the U.S. EPA lead model assumes the indoor dust concentration of
lead relative to outdoor soil to be 50 percent, whereas, the Table indicates that the
percentage used was 30 percent. Please check, clarify or correct. Table 3-4
indicates that an outdoor lead concentration of 0.1 ug/m3 was used in the DTSC
AP.law
dmpcom,let
Mr. Kevin Barnes
September 9, 1997
Page 4
spreadsheet in place of a default value. However, Appendix F, it appears that the
outdoor lead concentration value used in the spreadsheet is 0.01 ug/m3. Please
check, clari~ and correct. Provide justification for the use of 0.01 ug/m3, such as
monitoring data from the air basin.
8. Section 4.2.3.2, Page 60 · This section describes the health impacts of lead. A
short discussion should be added to the section summarizing the findings of the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Office of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) that lead is a carcinogen.
9. Section 5.1.3., Page 64, first paragraph; and Table 5-1: This paragraph states that
the soil ingestion pathway as the major contributor to the risk. However, nowhere
in this document is there a tabulation of the risk posed from each exposure
pathway evaluated. Table 5-1 should be revised to include these data.
As for the health based cleanup number for lead proposed in the HRA, DTSC is
currently involved in discussions both intemally as well as with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to resolve this issue. As you know the lead cleanup number
currently proposed in the HRA is higher than numbers previously accepted by DTSC due
to an increased dietary concentration value used in DTSC's Leadspread model. DTSC and
EPA are reevaluating the dietary concentration value currently used to generate health
based cleanup numbers for lead. DTSC anticipates that a decision regarding the
application of the revised dietary concentration parameter will be made within the next
two weeks.
If you should have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact
Mr. Adam Palmer, Project Manager, at (916) 255-3669.
Sincerely,
Megan Cambridge
Chief
Expedited Remedial Action unit
cc: Mr. David Norman
Senior Project Manager
Kleinfelder
1410 "F" Street
Fresno, California 93706-1608
AP .law
dmpcom.let