HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/02/1989 Donald K~. Ratty, Chair
James H. Childs
Kevin McDermott
Staff: John Stinson
AGENDA
BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
Thursday,.March 2, 1989
12:00 Noon
City Manager's Conference Room
1. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (Park Survey)
2. MID-YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT
3. CONTRACTING/BID ORDINANCE
4. SALE OF FIRE STATION
5. AMENDMENT TO COURTHOUSE RACQUETBALL LEASE (Tim Gannon)
6. HOMELESS CENTER UPDATE
7. DEFERRED LOAN PROGRAM (CHANGE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT)
8. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
MEMORANDUM
' ~' ~March 1, 1989
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: J...DALE HAWLEY, CITY MANAGER
sUBJECT: THE HOMELESS FACILITY
The attached is a report from Dennis Needham regarding the Homeless
Facility. Within the report there is an accounting of the costs that
have been expended, to this point. There is also a detail on future
costs regarding the various alternatives as the Facility is presently
conceived. Any and all alternatives are still available to the
Council and can be considered, even to the extent of building the
facility or not building the facility.
I have met with Mr. Paul Castro, Executive DirectOr of the Kern County
Housing Authority, who has offered some other alternatives regarding
the Homeless Facility, that we are analyzing. A report will be
forthcoming regarding his proposal next week.
__This information .is to keep you informed and updated regarding this
'very visible issue.
JDH.alb
Attachment
MEMORANDUM
,,WE CARE"
22 Februar.. A989
:TO: Dale Hawley, Clty Manager .,
. FROM: D.S. Needham, Fire Chief ~/
SUBJECT: Homeless Facility
At the Council Meeting of February 15, 1989, staff requested Councilmembers
authorize plans and specifications for the homeless facility to be redone due to
changes necessitated by the hydrocarbon contamination and remediation process,
and other changes;in the design. A discussion ensued regarding the increase in
....... cost of the facility from $488,000.00 (Report #3-88 March 2, 1988) to slightly
more than $1,000,000.00.
I attempted to explain the reasons for the increase to our Councilmembers.
After considerable discussion, they voted· to authorize the plans and specifica-
tions to be redone, but they seemed somewh'at confused and perplexed as was I.
The purpose of this memo is to reflect briefly on some of the history of the
homeless facility process and give a more accurate account of the cost's (past
and future) of the facility, than I was able to share on February 15th. This
information should be shared with our Councilmembers as they need an accurate
accounting hereof.
The Homeless Coalition Task Force was appointed by the City Council and County
Board of Supervisors during April 1987.and was charged to make recon~endations
regarding the homeless needs in Bakersfield.
,The report from the Ho~eless Coalition.Task Force was received by tile City
Council on August 26,'1987 and referred to the Intergovernmental Relations
Cor~nittee. The Intergovernmental Relations Con~mittee report was presented at
the Council Meeting of January 20, 1988 and was referred back to the Inter-
governmental Relations Committee for further study to be placed on the Council
agenda at the earliest possible date. The Intergovernmental Relations Committee
presented the revised report at the Council Meeting of February 24, 1988. After
a long session, the Council referred the matter back to staff to look at alter-
native sites next to the Beale overpass to be brought back to the Council
Meeting of March 2, 1988.
On March 2, 1988, the report was presented and passed by a 4 to 3 vote. The
motion passed by the City Council was as follows:
1. That the Council approve and adopt the proposed negative declaration.
2. That Community. Development Staff be authorized to acquire the property
located at 1530, 1600, and 1610 East Truxtun Avenue to be developed as a
homeless facility.
3. That the Mayor be authorized to..sign an agreement No. 88-42 with Archi-
tectural Enterprises to develop the overall master plan, plans and speci-
fications for the facility.
4. That the Mayor be authorized to sign' an agreement No. 88-43 with the County
of Kern for the acceptance of $72,000.00 of Stewart B. McKinney Emergency
Shelter Grant Funds, to be used for this project.
5. That the Mayor be authorized to sign an agreement No. 88-44 with tile Bethany
Service Center/Good Shepherd Center to relocate their existing night shelter
program to this site.
6. That the Council approve the continuing role of the Homeless Coalition Task
Force in the overall development of the master plan; assistance in identify-
ing an existing non-profit organization to provide the overall operations
and maintenance of homeless facility; and to provide input in tile develop-
ment of services and programs to be Provided in the new homeless facilities.
Enclosed in the March 2nd report was Attachment ."C" Homeless Facility Sunznary
of Costs. Please see copy of Attachment "C" on next page.
ATTACHMENT "C"
HOMELESS FACILITY
SUMMARY COSTS
BEALE/SUMNER SITE BEALE/SUMNER SITE (A) EAST TRUXTUN AVENUE SITE
ACTIVITY 41,400 SOUARE FEET 54,140 SQUARE FEET 65,000 SQUARE FEET
Acquisition $309,000 $379,000 $137,000
Demo/Site Prep. $ 8,000 $ 12,00 $ 15,000
Rehab/Development $262,000 $262,000 $275,000
Tank Removal 0 0 $ 22,000
Relocation $ 22,500 $ 40,500 $ 15,000
S~dewalk/Curb & Gutter 0 0 $ 2,200
Sewer Connection 0 0 $ 10,790
$601,500 $693,500 $488,090
(A) Includes 914 & 918 East 21st Street
The report also included Attachment "D", Homeless Shelter Funding Sources.
Please see a copy of Attachment 'ID" on next page.
ATTACHMENT "D"
HOMELESS SHELTER FUNDING SOURCES
SOURCE AMOUNT GRANTEE USE OF FUNDS
CDBG $271,000 City of Bakersfield Acquisition/Rehabilitation
Federal Kern County Rehabilitation of Shelter only
Stewart B. McKinney $ 72,000 (Bethany Service Center) Encumbered by April 18, 1988'
State. Bethany Service Center Rehabilitation of Shelter only
Stewart B. McKinney $ 91,962 Encumbered by May 16, 1988'*
Federal City of Bakersfield Rehabilitation of Shelter only
Stewart B. McKinney $ 39,038 Encumbered by Sept. 15, 1988
Total Available $474,000
* This could be encumbered by an agreement among City, County, and Bethany Service Center.
** This coul'd be encumbered by an.agreement among City, State, and Bethany Service Center.
Since March 2nd the process of working with the Homeless Coalition Task Force,
the architect, the County, and other City staff continued. Various code
requirements, construction, and service needs and concerns regarding the facil-
ity became evident that were not previously recognized.
The various changes include the following:
1. Eliminate the detoxification, inebriation center due to the potential
cost of approximately $800,000.00.
.2. Move the kitchen and seating area for meals from the detox center to the day
center. This necessitates enlarging the day center.
3' The day center was separated from the night shelter. These two functions
are not compatible.
4. Addition to the night shelter for females had to be relocated to the south
end of the facility due to the contaminated area.
5. Parking and utility layout must be redone due to changes in design.
6. Fire lane and parking requirements were added and.changed when the project
went through the site plan review process in order to conform to local
ordinances.
7. A ten foot high earthen berm with landscaping was required to help reduce
noise from the train activity north of the facility. A 45 foot strip of
land behind the facility is in the process of being donated by S.P.R.R.
8. Remediation for a leaking diesel tank on site #2 (east of Pennzoil site)
will be approximately $30,000.00. The Attorneys Office is in the process of
acquiring funding from the previous owners (please see Attachment "C").
9. Testing costs to the City for contamination on the Pennzoil site (Site #1)
and the parcel to the east (Site #2) total $16,440.00. These costs will be
recovered from the previous property owners (see Attachments "C" and "D").
Contamination on Site #2 is relatively minor compared to Site #1, the
Pennzoil site.
A more accurate accounting of the costs are as follows:~f~j~jJ~
Phase I. DESIGN/ACOUISITION SITE PREPARATION:
Estimated
Description/Item Cost to City Paid by Others Source/Donator Current Status
Property Acquisition:
Parcel #1 $111,000.00 Pennzoil Corp. (donated) Completed
Parcel #2 $137,000.00 CDBG - City Completed
Appraisal $ 2,708.00 CDBG - City Completed
Design - A & E $ 61,135.00 CDBG - City ..... 90% Completed
Redesign $ 14,000.00 CDBG - City By March 3!st
$ 20,000.00 Pennzoil By March 31st
Site Preparation - Demolition $ 35,700.00 CDBG - City Completed
$ 3,000.00 Valley Tree & Construction Completed
(donated)
Acoustical Testing $ 1,200.00 CDBG - City Completed
Environmental Investigation:
Site #1 ~$ 9,430.00 CDBG - City Completed
$ 29,436.00 Pennzoil Completed
Site #2 $ 7,010.00 CDBG - City Completed
Site Mitigation:
Site #1 $144,000.00 Pennzoil Scheduled
Site #2 $ 30,000.00~ Bakersfield Door & Supply Pending
Phase I Subtotal $268.183.00 $337,436.00
Phase II. CONSTRUCTION: ~
Estimated Cost Donated Labor
BUILDING: Description/Item Material/Labor (Estimated) Source/Donator
A. Night Shelter 7205 Sq. Ft. Rehab $ 64,000.00 $ 42,000.00 Building Trades Labor
2560 Sq. Ft. New Addition $135,000.00 $ 55,000.00 Building Trades Labor
B. Administration 600 Sq. Ft. Wood Frame Rehab $' 7,300.00 $ 1,700.00 Building Trades Labor
C. Day Center 4,000 Sq. Ft. New Metal Bldg. $180,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Building Trades Labor.
D. Family Shelter 1500 Sq. Ft. Rehab $ 20,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Building Trades Labor
1500 Sq. Ft. New Wood/Stucco Addition $ 30,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Building Trades Labr
Site Work: Utilities, Landscaping
Curb & Gutter, Sewer, etc. $130,000.00 $ 20,000.00 Building Trades Labor
Fencing, Outdoor Lighting, Walks $ 48,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Building Trades Labor
Site Services: Temp power, trailer
Toilets $ 8,000.00 $ 7,000.00 .W.M.I. Services
Remediation of Diesel Tank Leak Site #2 $ 30,000.00
Contingency $ 50,000.00
Phase II Subtotal $702,300.00 $207,700.00
Total Project Estimated Cost (Phase I and II) $970,483.00 $525,136.00
*(Total cost of $970,483.00 does not include cost of City Staff)
ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION:
Funding Sources:
Amount Proposed Use
Stewart B. McKinney - Bethany ESP II $23,200.00 New Construction/Equipment ,
Stewart B. McKinney - City ESP $39,038.00.. Rehab/New Construction
Stewart B. McKinney - Bethany ESP $91,962.00 New Construction/Equipment
Stewar~ B. McKinney - County ESG $83,000.00' Rehabilitation
Stewart B. McKinney - County ESG III $65,000.00
City CDBG $200,000.00 New Construction
County CDBG $200,000.00 New Construction
?
TOTAL $702,200.00
As is evident in the cost for total buildout it is necessary for the City and
County to each spend $200,000.00 in Community Development Block Grant Funding
converse to $197,000.00 as was stated at the Council Meeting of February 15th.
Total estimated cost based on total buildout is $970,483.00 which is $496,483.00
over the original estimated amount indicated in the March 2nd report.
It should be noted that in addition to estimated donations of labor and funding
presently totaling $525,136.00, all concrete will probably be donated by local
concrete companies and several cash donations may be made in the near future at
a.possible value of $50,000.00 plus. Staff, Councilmembers, and the Mayor should
put forth significant effort in acquiring additional donations of materials and
funding, which will reduce the cost to the City.
The Marc~h 2nd report mainly dealt with acquisition of the site, plans and
specifications, acceptance of $72,000.00 County Stewart B. McKinney funds, an
agreement for operation of the facility and the continued role of the task
force. There was insufficient information regarding the actual facility, of
what it will operate, and the extent of the various facilities incorporated
within it.
Through the advent of time, with the staff and the task force working together,
the project has evolved into a facility with four buildings.
Estimated Cost
Buildin~ Description/Item Excluding Labor
A Night Shelter/Showers $199,000.00
(9,765 +- sq. ft.)
B Administration $ 7,300.00 · (600 +- sq. ft.)
C Day Center $180,000.00
(4,000 +- sq. ft.)
D Family Shelter $ 50,000.00
(3,000 +- sq. ft.)
Total $436,000.00
Cost of other work is as follows:
Site Work for Utilities, Landscaping $130,000.00 Curb and Gutter, etc.
Remediation of Diesel Tank Leak - Site #2 $ 30,000.00
Fencing, Outdoor Lighting , Walks $ 48,000.00
Site Services $ 8,000.00
Contingency $ 50,000.00
'Total $236,000.00
Total Cost $702,300.00
As per Attachment "A", attached, City staff has asked County staff for $197,000.00
County CDBG funds for this project. This will be increased to $200,000.00 based
on the cost analysis herein. Donations will reduJe this amount.
The City would also have to Contribute $200,000.00 JDBG funds for full buildout.
CDBG funding will be reduced equal to future contributions such as concrete and
cash donations.
Alternatives to full buildout would be to defer or eliminate one or two facilities.
The family shelter {Building D) is the lowest priority and could be deferred
or eliminated {$50,000.00), plus site work - approximately $5,000.00, total
$5o,5oO. oo.
The day center (Building C) is necessary,.but could be deferred one year
($180,000.00), or bul]d the shell only the. first year ($100,000.00). If all
the concrete is donated, the floor would be poured and available for framing.
The night shelter (Building A) and the administration building (Building B) must
be built as soon as possible ($199,000.00 and $7,300.00 respectively).
It. is ~important to note that deferral of the day center will also defer the
removal of the homeless from Baker Street at meal time as this facility incorporates
and relocates the meals for the homeless to this site from Baker Street.
A tentative time schedule for development of the site is attached (Attachment "E"),
which indicates the redesign will be on the Council agenda March 29th, at which
time authorization for funding will be considered also.
Upon reading this report, you will most probably have questions. Please call me
and I will get the information promptly.
Al IAgHH~NI ,A"
CITY 0 F -~:~' ·
......
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION ,~ .. '
I'lZ', Ody Greenlee, Principal Planner
Kern County C.D. Department
2200 M. St., Suite 250
}3akers~ield, CA 93301
RE: Request for Proposed ~ncrease
in County CDBG Assistance -
Bakersfield Homeless Center
.(Phase II - Construction)
Dear Mr. Greenlee:
On January '13, 1989, we s~mitted a final application for a
minimum County allocation of $!00,000 in CDBG FY89-90 'funds for
~he construction of the .referenced project. We desire to ~end
our final application to reflect a request for an increase in
County CDBG assistance which we feel is co~ensura:e with the
City's financial contribution towards this project.
The attached revised cost estimate reflects non-CDBG anticipated
funding sources for construction to be S312,200 with an
a ..... onal approximate ~ount of $307,700 from labor donations.
Ass~ing the anticipated funds are utilized, the remaining monies
still needed to complete the project"are approximately ~3~5,100.
The City, :herefore, desires to revise its reques~ for financial
assistance from gl00,000 to $197,000, approximately half of the
o~tstandin9 non-committed construction costs.
The city feels its ~ended request is equitable in light of
~revious City CDBG expenditures (approximately $237,000 for Phase
f - Desicn/Accuis~tion) We pres~e our ~ended recues~ :or
financial assistance is still within the scope of your time fr~e
for preparing the FY89-90 budget and that .you will favorably
consider our need for additional funds. It is the City's desire
to copartner wish the County' as we set out to meet the needs of
.... the homeless.
Sincerely,
George ~n~ale~ ~
Com,munity Development coordinator
Vg/cw
xc: Homeless Coalition Task Force
~":'ql TRUXTU.N AVENUE · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 · (805) 326-3764
A'FFACHMENT' "B"
TO: .. ALLEN DANIELS . , /
FROM: RALPH E. HUEY
SUBJECT: .SOIL CONTAMINATION AT THE PROPOSED HOMELESS SHELTER SITE
Per our conversation, enclosed Please find the real estate
.. transaction documents for the eastern portion of the proposed Homeless
Shelter Site. This is the portion of the property which included an
underground diesel storage tank, which was found to have leaked, and
is known as Site Two (2).
OUr original expectations were that we would not be required to
clean uD this site: that simply "capping" the area over would be
acceptable. This has turned out not to be the case. We will be
required to mitigate the soil contamination at both Site One (1) and
Site Two (2).
All our focus has been on the Pennzoil DroDert}' "Site 1." .NoN
that we kno,~ we will incur clean Up.cost at Site 2. we need to address
..... that liability. This property was not ~reviously owned by Pennzoil or
donated to the City. The property, was purchased by the City for ,
uuv. The enclosed.documentation details that transaction and
identifies the previous owner. I believe ~4e may have legitimate
action against the former o~ner of the Site 2 property for the cost
incurred in clean uD of this soil contamination.
Estimated cost of mitigation would be about $30,000. Previous
Site evaluation cost "split between Site 1 and Site 2" approximately
Sl?,000. Final figures, of course, will not be available until
finalize a contract for that clean up.
.,
CITY
w' BAKERSFIELD
FIRE DEPARTMENT Fe~r'u~ry '* , 1'~¢ 210: H STFEE~
O. S. NEEDHAM BAKERSFIELD. 9330:
FIRE CHIEF 326-391
?!~. U~ha ~enra
ManaCer, Environmental Programs
Pennzoil Products Company
Pennzczl Pi,ace
P.O. Bo:< 2987
Hou-ston, TX ?7252-29S7
RE: Proposed Bakersfield HoMeless Shelter
Odar U~ha:
Per our discussion, the City o¢ Bakersfield ha~ reviewed our
associated with the ~nvestigation and clean up of the contaminated
soil at the proposed Homeless Shelter Site in Bakersfield.
'Specifically the section of this property formerly owned by-Pennzsii.
We do undsrstand that Pennzoil would like to reach a.n agreement that
would fully satisfy any financial as well as technical 5uppor~
liabilities with regards to this property. Pennzoil has been
extremely heipful to date and we would like to see a solution that
would properly identify the assistance and cooperation that Pennzoil
has Made throughout, the entire project.
The additional cost of the Site evaluation on the property has
been billed and COMES to $13,678.84. This covers additional
completed by 6spay'atoM, beyond the scope of the original contrac;.
PreliMinary estimates of Site Mitigation costs are $158,0~0. The
Me~hod will be vacuum extraction with cu~k=u~.ku~, u? the '/supra on the
~urface. This also necessitated a redesign of the facility to
acconmodate the clean up which COMES to $~0,000.
Our total additional e~penditure will be approximately
8 donation of this amount would satisfy any financial, as wet~ as
technical liabilities associated with this property. 0¢ course i¢ ~oe
find expenditures to be less than these current estimates we would be
pleased to refund the difference if ~o de,ired. The City of
Bakersfield would also be pleased t~ publicly note the level of
cooperation and assistance the Pennzoil CoMpany Has been on this
project.
Si. ncsrely Yours. '/
· ,7;': . ,
~ ".'~' ~'~ ' A'V[ACHMENT "E"
D~rT.
REVISED
January 30, 1989
Tentative Time Schedule for Redesign,
Remediation, and Construction of Bakersfield
Homeless Center
-.. Proposed Date Item/Description Responsible Party
1. 1-24-89 Submit change'order request City Council
for sub-agenda for approval
of redesign by City Council.
2. 1-31-89
Receive~.final report from.Geo- City and Penn-
systems and review, zoil
3. 2-01-89 Deliver to County copies of City-Fire
final Geosystems report for
site #1 and characterization
and mitigation report for Site
#2 (prepared by George Sweet
and Fire Hazardous Materials
Division ....
...... 4. 2-01-89 Begin final negotiations with City-Fire, City
Pennzoil regarding their Attorney & Pennzoil
financial involvement in the '
· .site remediation efforts.
5. 2-15-89 City Council approves change City Council
order for redesign.
6. 2-15-89 Redesign begins City/Architect
7. 2-17-89 Finalize RFP remediation design City & Pennz
requirements and Pennzoil's
financial responsibilities for
clean-up costs.
8. 2-20-89 Begin draftingconsultant's City-Fire &
agreement for remediation design. Pennzoil
9~' 2-20-89 * Submit subagenda letter to City City - Fire
Council requesting approval to
submit a 30 day,RFP for design
remediation and/or remediation
construction of sited #1 and #2.
VZTZME.i
-2-
Proposed Date Item/Description Responsible Party
10. 3-01-89 Receive County'Environmental City & Pennz
Health comments & review.
11. 3-01-89 Express mail final report with City CD
County comments to HUD - L.A.
area office. Cover letter to
request expedited review. If
applicable express mail County
comments to Geosystems for incor-
~'~'~ ~ f poration into final report. Also, City - Fire
' , mail copy to EPA-San Francisco.
12. 3-01-89 City Council meets and approves City request to advertise RFP.
13. 3-07-89 Redesign of the Center Complete Architect
14. 3-19-89 Complete final'review of the City & County
redesign.
15. 3-21-89 Submittal of final redesign for City/CD City Council subagenda.
16. 3-24-89 Receive HUD comments re: final City - CD
report and County Env. Health
division comments. Review and
initiate a second Fonsi for
construction phase.
17. 3-27-89 Completion of agreement City-Fire
for remediation contractor/
consultant.
· 18. 3-29-89 City Council approves redesign. City Council
19. 4-05-89 Receive consultants proposals and City and Pennzoil
20~ 4-10-89 Complete review of remediation City/Pennzoil
consultant/contractor agreement
21. 4-15-89 Begin negotiated procurement of City - CD
materials for Part 1 of
construction.
22. 4-15-89 Permitting of the redesign of the Architect/City
Center complete.~
23. 4-15-89 Select consultant/contractor. City/Pennzoil
VZTIME.2
Proposed Date Item/Description Responsible Party
24. 4-18L89 Submit negotiated bids and City'- CD
selection of remediation
consultant/contractor to
City Council subagenda.
25. 4-26-89 City Council approves selection City 0f consultant/contractor and
signs agreement.~, ~Remediation
design begins.
· 26. 4-26-89 City Council approves bids City for Part I construction.
27. 4-27-89 Finalize negotiations for City - CD
material bids.
28. 4-27-89' Encumber State ESP monies City/Bethany
29. 5-01-89. Part I construction begins City.
30. 5-10-89 Completion of second NEPA City release of funds.(Fonsi)
31. 5-11-89 Begin drafting County/City County/City
contract for CDBG entitlement
funds.
32. 5-18-89 Design remediation complete. Consultant
33. 5-20-89 ** Begin negotiated procurement of City CD,
material bids for Part II
construction,(final part).
34. 5-25-89 Review of design remediation City/Pennzoil
complete.
35~ 5-30-89 Advertise for construction'of City-Fire
design remediation.
36. 6-02-89 Last day.to finalize negotiated City
procurement of material bids
(Part II construction)
37'. 6-15-89 Receive and review bids for City/Pennzoil
remediation construction.
38. 6-20-89 Review of material bids for City/County Part II construction is complete.
VZTIME.4
Proposed Date Item/Description Responsible Party
39. 6-20-89 Submit low bid for remediation City Fire
construction to subagenda for
City Council action.
40. 6-28-89 City Council approves design/ City ,
remediation contractors low bid
and awards remediation construction
contract.
41. 7-3-89 Submit acceptance of bids City/County
(Part II construction) to
City and/or County subagenda.
42. 7-12-89 City approves bids. City
43. 7-18-89 · County approves bids County
44. 7-25-89 County executes contract with City CityfCounty
for CDBG entitlement funds.
(Part II construction)
45. 8-02-89 City awards contract for materials City, (Part II construction) ~
46. 8-02-89 Remediation construction is Contractor
complete.
47. 8-07-89 Part. II (2) construction begins City
48. 12-15-89 Final construction complete City
* The timeline for the design and construction remediation may
be shortened depending on the approved solution for remediation
and the recommended process for A/E & construction procurement
(e.g., a design and construction bidding process versus a design/
build bidding progress).
** Part II construction for the Center includes proposed items to be
procured and constructed with both City and County CDBG funds.
(see Bakersfield Homeless. Center Cost Breakdown for more detail)
VZTIME. 3
ATTACHMENT "F"
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EXPENSES TO DATE
02'23-89
Site #1 Site #2
~ CD Funded CD Funded
Toxic Drums $ 755.25 Tank Removal $2,950.00
..... Tank Removal $3,950.00 George Sweet-Site
Analysi s $4,060. O0
....... Toxic Drums $ 665.00
George Sweet-Site $7,010.00,
Analysis $4,060.00
CD Total $9,430.25
Pennzoil Funded
Geosystems $ 4,377.50
Geosystems $21,556.14
Geosystems $ 3,502.00
Total $29,435.64
MEMORANDUM i-
"WE CARE"
15 March 1989
TO: Dale Hawley, City Manager
FROM: D.S. Needham, Fire Chief ~_) -
SUBJECT: Use of Modular Units for the Homeless Shelter
'-Mr. Paul· Castro of the Kern County Housing Authority proposed that the City use
modular units available through D H I Mobilease Buildings in Novato, California
for the Homeless Facility.
Upon contacting a representative of the firm, I was informed that the units are
between 10 and 15 years old, fair to good condition, and cost between $25.00
and $35.00 per square foot; This cost is for the unit's °nly and does not
include any foundation utility, site preparation, etc.
Upon comparing the cost of this alternative to the cost of proceeding with the
proposed plan, it would be approximately $100,000.00 to $250,000.00 more for the
ni.ght shelter. The day center, with kitchen facilities, would cost approx-
imately $40,000.00 more. Total additional costs could be as high as $290,000.00
for the project.
This does not appear to be a viable alternative.
DSN:trs