HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - December 15, 2004 I-03AGENDA ITEM 1103
&Ift CITY OF LODI
%W COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Adopt resolution approving application for the California Office of Emergency
Services Hazard Mitigation Grant
MEETING DATE: December 15, 2004
PREPARED BY: Michael E. Pretz, Fire Chief
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That Council adopt a resolution approving application for the California
Office of Emergency Services (OES) Hazard Mitigation Grant application.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The California Office of Emergency Services (OES) through the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), now a part of the
Department of Homeland Security, offers hazard mitigation grants in
conjunction with disaster mitigation funds. As federally declared
disasters occur within the State of California, a portion of the disaster mitigation funds are set aside for
hazard mitigation projects.
Fire Department staff has written two grant applications for Fire Stations 1 and 2. Both grant applications
use engineering studies performed by structural engineers working for Wenell, Mattheis, and Bowe, an
architectural firm, commissioned to study and make recommendations as a part of the Old Public Safety
Building remodel.
The hazard mitigation study was based upon hydrological studies conducted by East Bay Municipal
Utility District as a part of their Emergency Action Plan for the Lower Mokelumne River Project. In
addition, both buildings have significant life safety deficiencies that need to be addressed.
Due to the current budget crisis faced by the City of Lodi, the search for sources of funding is particularly
important. Both grants require a 25% match. In the event that the applications are successful,
department staff will return to Council for the match funding.
FUNDING: 25% match should the grants be awarded.
MEPRh
Attachments
cc: D. Stephen Schwabauer, City Attorney
Ua=61VJ:4 D-3
E. Pretz,
R. Krueger, Finance Director
S. Keet6f, Interim City Manager
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
1. Project Title: Fire Station 1 Upgrade
2. Project Type: Seismic and Flood Mitigation of City Fire Station
3. Applicant Name: City of Lodi Fire Department
4. Applicant Type: City
5. Applicant Address: 25 East Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240 San Joaquin County
Federal Employer Identification Number (EIN): 94-6000361
6. Applicant's Agent/Contact
Name and Title: Michael Pretz, Fire Chief
Phone: 209-333-6735 Fax: 209-333-6844
Email: mpretz@lodi.gov
7. Alternate Contact
Name and Title: Richard Prima, Director of Public Works
Address: 221 West Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Phone: 209-333-6759 Fax: 209-333-6710
Email: rprima@lodi.gov
8. Project Location: 210 West Elm Street
Lodi, CA 95240
9. Is this project being considered or funded by Public Assistance? No
10. Total Project Cost
Federal Requested Share: $3.05 million
Applicant Match: $1.01 million
Total Project Cost: $4.06 million
11. Legislative Districts
State Assembly
State Senate
US Congressional District
Applicant Project Site
# 10 # 10
# 14 # 14
# 11 # 11
Notice of Interest 1
12. Brief Summary of the Problem:
The Lodi Public Safety Building (PSB) was constructed in 1967 and contains approximately 40,000
square feet on two floors and a basement. The PSB houses Lodi Fire Department (LFD) Station 1, a
courtroom operated by San Joaquin County, and offices previously occupied by the Lodi Police
Department (LPD). In Spring 2004, the LPD moved into a new police headquarters building across the
street from the PSB.
The Public Safety Building is located at the Lodi Civic Center complex in the central downtown area.
This site is located in a fully in-built urban environment with commercial development to the south and
east, and residential neighborhoods to the north and west. Although there are some buildings at the civic
center complex more than 50 years old, they are not designated as historical places, are not part of the
project, and will not be impacted by mitigation activities. The area around the PSB is completely
urbanized, and thus has no known archeological, paleontological, environmental, historical, cultural, or
wildlife consequences to mitigating the building's deficiencies.
The City of Lodi commissioned five studies during 1997 and 1998. An architectural, a structural
engineering, and a mechanical/electrical engineering firm all conducted extensive studies in 1997.
These were followed by a second mechanical engineering and a hazardous materials study in 1998. A
few of the findings of the technical studies include:
a. Does not conform to current code for "essential services" buildings.
b. Fire alarm and automatic sprinklers do not comply with current codes or ordinances.
c. Building does not comply with ADA requirements.
d. Telecommunications equipment is located in basement and is inadequate for current voice and data
requirements.
e. Emergency generator is located in basement and has limited capacity for additional power needs.
f. HVAC system is in poor condition and needs to be replaced.
g. Second floor and roof connectors do not have appropriate reinforcement.
h. Exterior windows are single -glazed, deteriorating, and need to be replaced.
i. Flat roof over apparatus bay has exceeded service life.
j. Asbestos is used in flooring material and plumbing insulation.
13. Brief Summary of the Proposed Solution:
The Fire Department proposes that Fire Station 1 be relocated and built to meet all essential facility,
building code, and legislated upgrades. The proposed relocation site is also in the central downtown
corridor, approximately 1/4 mile northeast of the current location in an area of mixed commercial and
residential development. The area around the proposed site is completely urbanized, and thus has no
known archeological, paleontological, historical, cultural, environmental, or wildlife consequences to
relocating and rebuilding Fire Station 1.
Notice of Interest 2
14. Detailed Description of the Problem:
The building does not meet essential facility standards for seismic resistance and fails to meet basic life
safety standards. In addition, should the building sustain damage, four essential systems (emergency
generator, telephone switches and connectors, city intranet servers, and voicemail servers) located in the
basement will be compromised at least, and destroyed at worst. Electrical panels are aged and the
integrity of molded -case circuit breakers is questionable. There have been a number of electrical fires in
the building, the latest caused enough damage to require partial interior demolition. The fire alarm
system consists of an occasional smoke detector in the ceilings of lobbies, corridors, and certain spaces
such as jail area chases. Functionally, the building presents a number of problems:
a. Second floor concrete diaphragm has inadequate drag and chord reinforcement.
b. Re-entrant corners and exterior wall connections to roof diaphragm need reinforcing.
c. Building construction includes vinyl asbestos flooring and asbestos plumbing insulation.
d. The fire alarm system is out of date and provides limited detection.
e. There is no automatic sprinkler system as required by current code.
f. The electrical distribution system is aged and requires replacing. The interior lighting system consists
of T12 lamps and magnetic ballasts. Some fixtures may contain capacitors with PCBs.
g. The emergency generator has limited capacity (150KW), no printed rating for non-linear loads, and
because of increased electronics use is "derated" 33 percent. Therefore, the emergency generator is
too small for its intended use (supporting the civic center campus).
h. Telecommunications and computer equipment is inadequate, spread through four rooms in the
basement, and features surface -mounted wiring and power connections.
i. Mechanical equipment and piping in the ceiling space needs improved bracing and anchorage.
j. Required occupancy separations are not provided.
k. There is no security system (cameras, intercoms, etc.) in the fire station portion of the building.
1. Hardware, signage, and clear space at doorways generally are not in compliance with Title 24.
m. All HVAC systems are at least 30 years old and have exceeded their useful life.
n. Visible building drain, waste, vent, and water systems are in fair to poor condition. Plumbing fixtures
and accessories do not meet ADA standards and are in poor condition.
Although the PSB is located in a 500 -year floodplain, it is downstream from the Lower Mokelumne
River Project (FERC No. 2916). The facilities include Pardee Reservoir and Powerhouse and,
immediately downstream, Camanche Reservoir and Powerhouse in the counties of Amador, Calaveras,
and San Joaquin. Pardee Dam is a concrete gravity arch structure rising 345 feet above the riverbed and
the reservoir has a gross storage of 197,950 acre-feet at a pool elevation of 567 feet. Camanche Dam is
a zoned earthen structure with an impervious core. Its crest is 171 feet above the riverbed and the
reservoir stores 417,120 acre-feet of water at a surface elevation of 235 feet. *
Pardee Dam Failure *
Severe Storm
Fair Weather
Cubic feet per second
601,000
31,000
Acre-feet per second
13.8
0.71
Maximum water depth (Hwy 99)
>24
10
Camanche Dam Failure *
Severe Storm
Fair Weather
Cubic feet per second
2,108,000
383,000
Acre-feet per second
48.4
8.8
Maximum water depth (Hwy 99)
24
18-24
* East Bay Municipal Utility District; Emergency Action Plan; May 2000.
Project Description 1
15. Detailed Description of How the Proposed Project will Eliminate or Reduce the Problem:
The proposed mitigation project is to rebuild Fire Station 1 to eliminate seismic and flood hazards found
in the Public Safety Building. Rebuilding Fire Station 1 will ensure the structure complies with essential
facility seismic standards as well as contemporary building and life safety codes. In addition, rebuilding
the station will eliminate the need to retrofit the entire PSB to comply with essential facility seismic
standards. Also, this project is intended to provide a comprehensive solution to numerous recurring
problems (e.g., electrical, HVAC, alarm/alerting system, roof) as well as eliminate the uncertainty
associated with performing isolated repair, replacement, or upgrades to individual systems or
components. When the station is in compliance with applicable codes, future risk of building damage
and consequent loss of service capacity will be eliminated or greatly reduced.
A construction contract has not been let, so detailed specifications, engineering studies, and other
preparatory work does not exist at the time of application. Since the city has not entered into any
agreements regarding mitigation of the building's defects, specific quantified information is not
available beyond the estimates contained in the application packet. The proposed solution is based on
incorporating current need with anticipated operational changes. (Specifically, a station large enough to
support three companies staffed by both men and women.)
This project will have no impact on neighboring jurisdictions since there will be no changes to
boundaries or alarm assignments. This project is in compliance with the city's general and emergency
operations plans, and does not conflict with the city's redevelopment plan or emergency plans of other
jurisdictions. Long-term solutions provided by this project include a stand-alone fire station built to
current seismic and life safety standards, a realignment of certain essential city infrastructure to
eliminate vulnerable locations, and improved response capability to support changing community
characteristics.
16. Project Alternatives Considered
Alternative 1 (No Action):
If no action is taken on the Public Safety Building, the deficiencies in the roof, mechanical systems, fire
alarm system, and electrical system will remain status quo. The building will not meet essential facility
standards and therefore a moderate earthquake will likely render the building inoperable. In addition,
non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, municipal ordinances, and various state and
local codes creates a perception of a double standard when the city is not following the very rules it is
charged with enforcing.
Alternative 1 Budget:
No cost.
Alternative 2:
Renovate and remodel the existing building to remedy the various building defects, comply with
essential facility seismic standards, and the ADA. Although the fire station occupies less than half of
the floor space, the entire PSB will have to be retrofitted to comply with essential facility seismic
standards. The consequences of this alternative include being displaced for an extended period (18
months or more), compromised security as a result of temporary quarters, and a significantly higher cost
of mitigation (up to 50 percent, due to partial demolition) than the requested action.
Project Description 2
Alternative 2 Budget:
$5,460,457
Alternative 3:
Abandon the existing building and rebuild on the same site. The consequences of this alternative
include being displaced for an extended period (18 to 24 months), compromised security as a result of
temporary quarters, and a significantly higher cost of mitigation (requires complete demolition) than the
requested action.
Alternative 3 Budget:
Asbestos & Lead Paint Abatement $75,000.00
Demolish Existing Building 40,000 sq ft @ $4 sq ft $160,000.00
Site Fill and Grading $50,000.00
Total Abate and Demolish Existing $285,000.00
Total Building Square Feet (WMB)
14,869
Estimated Cost Per Square Foot
$220.00
Construction Estimate
$3,271,180.00
Total Construction Cost Estimate(including Demo
$3,556,180.00
Design Costs 12% of Construction Cost
$426,741.60
& Inspection 1.5% of Construction
$53,342.70
-Testing
Construction Management 1.5% of Construction
$53,342.70
Design Team CM 1 % of Construction
$35,561.80
Total Project Cost **
$4,125,168.80
Project Cost p er Square Foot
$277.43
(*) Requires demolition of entire Public Safety Building
(**) Includes design and construction contract costs
*** Estimate does not include furniture or facility supplies****
Project Description 3
17. Work Schedule
A construction contract has not been let, so a detailed work schedule does not exist at the time of
application. Since the city has not entered into any agreements regarding mitigation of the building's
defects, it is possible actual work will not begin within six months of approval. The city will have to
issue appropriate RFP's for the different elements of the project, select contractors, and prepare detailed
drawings, plans, and schedules. Once work begins, based on previous fire station construction, the
project will likely take approximately one year to complete.
18. Budget
Total Building Square Feet 14,869
Estimated Cost Per Square Foot $220.00
Total Construction Cost Estimate $3,271,180.00
(*) includes 12 bedrooms and 4 apparatus bays
Property Acquisition
$272,000.00
Design Costs 12% of Construction Cost
$392,541.60
Testing & Inspection 1.5% of Construction
$49,067.70
Construction Management 1.5% of Construction
$49,067.70
Design Team CM 1 % of Construction
$32,711.80
Total Project Cost **
$4,066,568.80
Project Cost Per Square Foot
$273.49
(**) Includes Acquisition, Design, and Construction Contract Costs
Project Description 4
19. Historical Review Checklist
A. Are any of the structures in the project area over 50 years old? Yes
B. Does the proposed project affect historic properties on, or eligible for, the National
Register of Historic Places? No
C. Is the proposed project site located in a historic district? No
D. Will the project disturb previously undisturbed soil? No
E. Will the project disturb or have adverse effects outside the currently disturbed area or
outside the footprint of an existing facility? No
F. Does the construction site or surrounding area contain any cultural or archaeological
resources? No
G. Are photos with application? Yes
H. Is additional historical consultation information attached with application? No
20. Environmental Review
A. Are there any completed environmental documents, consultations, or permit applications
related to project, site, or area? No
B. Are there any biological studies completed in or around the project area? No
C. Does the project area contain any endangered species? No
D. Is there potential for controversy? No
E. Is additional environmental review information attached to application? No
21. Environmental Checklist
Land Use and Planning Would the proposal:
1. conflict with general plan designation or zoning? No
2. conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted agencies who have
jurisdiction of the project? No
3. be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? No
4. affect agricultural resource/operations from incompatible land, impacts to soils or farmlands,
or impact from incompatible use? No
5. disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community, including a low-
income or minority community? No
Population and Housing Would the proposal:
6. cumulatively exceed regional or local population projections? No
7. induce substantial growth, directly or indirectly? No
8. displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No
Geologic Problems Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts
involving:
9. fault rupture?
10. seismic ground shaking?
11. seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
12. seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
No
No
No
No
13. landslides or mudflows? No
14. erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
15. subsidence of the land?
16. expansive soils?
17. unique geologic or physical features?
No
No
No
No
Supplemental Information 1
Water Would the proposal result in:
18. change in absorption, drainage, or amount of surface runoff? L
19. expose people or property to flooding? No
20. discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality? No
21. changes in the amount of surface water in any body? No
22. change currents or course/direction of water movement? No
23. change the quantity of groundwater, through direct addition or withdrawal, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavation, or through loss of groundwater recharge
capability? No
24. alter direction, rate, flow, or quality of groundwater? No
25. substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies? No
Air Quality Would the proposal:
26. violate air standard, contribute to existing or projected air quality violation? No
27. expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? No
28. alter air movement, moisture, temperature, cause climate change? No
29. create objectionable odors? No
Transportation/Circulation Would the proposal result in:
30. increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? L
31. hazards from design? No
32. inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? No
33. insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? No
34. hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? No
35. conflict with policy supporting alternate transportation? No
36. rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts? No
Biological Resources Would the proposal resulting in impacts to:
37. endangered, threatened, or rare species or habitats? No
38. locally designated species? No
39. local natural communities? No
40. wetland habitat? No
41. wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No
Energy and Mineral Resources Would the proposal:
42. conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No
43. use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? No
44. result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources that would be of future value to
region and residents of the state? No
Hazards Would the proposal involve:
45.
risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substance?
No
46.
interference with emergency evacuation and/or response plan?
No
47.
the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?
No
48.
exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazard?
No
49.
increased fire hazard in areas with brush, grass, or trees?
No
Supplemental Information 2
Noise Would the proposal involve:
50. increases in existing noise levels?
51. exposure of people to severe noise levels?
L
No
Public Services Would the proposal affect or alter governmental services in any of
the following areas:
52. fire protection? No
53. police protection? No
54. schools? No
55. maintenance of public facilities, including roads? L
56. other governmental services? No
Utilities and Service Systems Would the proposal cause a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alteration to any of the following
utilities or services:
57. power or natural gas? L
58. communications systems? L
59. local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? No
60. sewer or septic tanks? No
61. storm water drainage? No
62. solid waste disposal? No
63. local or regional water supplies? No
Aesthetics Would the proposal:
64. affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? No
65. have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? No
66. create light or glare? No
Cultural Resources Would the proposal:
67. disturb paleontological resources? No
68. disturb archaeological resources? No
69. affect historical resources? No
70. cause change which would affect ethnic cultural values? No
71. restrict existing religious/sacred use in impact area? No
Recreation Would the proposal:
72. increase demand for neighborhood parks or other facilities? No
73. affect existing recreational opportunities? No
Mandatory Findings of Significance
74. Does project have potential to degrade quality of the environment, reduce habitat of fish or
wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten a
plant or animal community, reduce number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or
animals, or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No
75. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-
term environmental goals? No
76. Does project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
No
Supplemental Information 3
77. Does the project have adverse environmental effects which will affect human beings, either
directly or indirectly? No
22. Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands
A. Is the project in or near a wetland, swamp, marsh, etc.? No
B. Is the project in 500 -year floodplain
C. Does the project support development in a floodplain? No
D. Land use upstream and downstream Urban
E. Does the project have an impact on the wetland? No
F. Floodplain Manager David Morimoto, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
221 West Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Phone: 209-333-2645 Fax: 209-333-6842
Email: dmorimoto@lodi.gov
Supplemental Information 4
23. Benefit Cost Analysis
I. Structural Retrofit
Value of Public/Nonprofit Services:
A.
Introduction
Post -Disaster Continuity Premium:
B.
Building Location
Functional Downtime:
Day
City of Lodi Public Safety Building
Night
Day
210 West Elm Street
Night
Occupants
Lodi 95240
9 to 11
C.
General Information
9 to 11
9 to 11
Number of stories above grade:
2
7
Total floor area in square feet (SF):
40,000
7
Date of construction:
1967
24
Does the building have historical significance:
No
24
What is the building's function(s):
fire station
D.
Building and Site Description:
see attached
E.
Building Type: 18. Unreinforced masonry with concrete shear walls
F.
Demolition Threshold:
20%
G.
Replacement Value:
$6.7 million
H.
Contents Value:
$1.6 million firefighting equipment,
furnishings, computers/communication equipment
I.
Displacement Costs Due to Earthquake Damage:
$10,000 per month
J.
Building Occupancy:
K.
Value of Public/Nonprofit Services:
Weekdays
L.
Post -Disaster Continuity Premium:
Weekends
M.
Functional Downtime:
Day
Evening
Night
Day
Evening
Night
Occupants
9 to 11
9 to 11
9 to 11
9 to 11
9 to 11
9 to 11
Das per week
7
7
7
7
7
7
Hours per day
24
24
24
24
24
24
Months per year
12
12
12
12
12
12
K.
Value of Public/Nonprofit Services:
N/A
L.
Post -Disaster Continuity Premium:
lox
M.
Functional Downtime:
Building is a fire station. Functional downtime has to be as close to zero as possible.
Our best estimate is less than three days.
N.
Rent and Business Income Loss:
N/A
O.
Project Mitigation Costs:
$4.06 million (2004)
P.
Project Life of Mitigation:
30 years
Q.
Project Mitigation Maintenance Cost:
$0
R.
Relocation Costs:
$5,000
S.
Displacement Time:
Considering the structural deficiencies, a moderate earthquake will likely render the
building inoperable and displacement be permanent.
II. Seismic Retrofit of Pendant Lighting and Suspended Ceiling Systems in Schools
Not Applicable
III. Seismic Bracing of Emergency Power or Communications Systems in Medical Facilities
Not Applicable
Seismic Supplement 1
1. Please provide a 7.5 minute Quad Map and general area map with the location of the project on
Flood Supplement 1
the map. Are the maps attached?
Yes
2.
Were public facilities or structures damaged during a declared disaster?
No
3.
Describe the damage, the repair, and the cost of the repair?
N/A
4.
Were the damages addressed in a Public Assistance Damage Survey Report?
N/A
5.
Has the DSR been approved for funding by FEMA or OES?
N/A
6.
Attach a copy of the DSR.
N/A
7.
If there is no DSR for the repair of a damaged facility or structure, please explain why
there was
no DSR written.
N/A
8.
Were any non-profit organizations or institutions that perform essential governmental services in
the project area displaced during the flood event?
No
9.
What service does the non-profit provide?
N/A
10.
Did the non-profit or serviced provider temporarily relocate?
N/A
11.
Did another organization or government entity provide substitute services?
N/A
12.
What is the usual cost to provide the service?
N/A
13.
What were the additional costs to provide the service during and after the flooding?
N/A
14.
Please explain the financial benefits of the service to the community.
N/A
Worksheet A
N/A
Worksheet A 1
N/A
Worksheet A2
N/A
Worksheet B
N/A
Worksheet B 1
N/A
Worksheet B2
N/A
Flood Supplement 1
24. Private Nonprofit Status
A. Does the applicant have private nonprofit status? No
25. Grant Funding
A. What is the source of the applicant's matching funds?
City of Lodi Capital Improvement Program
B. Will your project require a funding advance? No
C. Identify the entity which will be responsible for the long-term maintenance of the project.
Facility Services (City of Lodi Public Works Department)
What will be the cost of maintenance per year for this project? $0
What is the funding source for the long-term maintenance of this project?
City of Lodi General Fund
Administrative Documents 1
26. Designation of Applicant's Agency Resolution and Certification
Be It Resolved By The City Council of the City of Lodi that
Janet Keeter, Interim City Manager
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lodi, a local government entity
established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it in the Governor's
Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, P.L. 93-288, as amended.
That the City of Lodi, hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the Governor's Office of Emergency
Services for all matters pertaining to such disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
Passed and approved this XX day of XX, 2004.
(Name and title of approving board or council member)
(Name and title of approving board or council member)
CERTIFICATION
I, Susan Blackston, duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that the above is a
true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the City Council of the City of Lodi on the
XX day of XX, 2004.
(name)
(signature)
(date)
Administrative Documents 2
27. Subgrantee Assurance
As the duly authorized representative of the applicant, I certify the applicant:
1. Has the legal authority to apply for federal assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial
capability (including funds sufficient to pay the nonfederal share of project costs) to ensure proper
planning, management and completion of the project described in this application.
2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, and if appropriate, the
State of California, through any authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all records,
books, papers or documents related to the assistance; and will establish a proper accounting system in
accordance with generally accepted accounting standards or agency directives.
3. Will not dispose of, modify use of, or change terms of real property title, or other interest in the site
and facilities without permission and instructions from the awarding agency. Will record federal interest
in title of real property in accordance with awarding agency directives and will include a covenant in the
title of real property acquired in whole or in part with federal assistance funds to assure non-
discrimination during the useful life of the project.
4. Will comply with the requirements of the assistance awarding agency with regard to the drafting,
review and approval of construction plans and specifications.
5. Will provide and maintain competent and adequate engineering supervision at the construction site to
ensure that the complete work conforms with the approved plans and specifications and will furnish
progress reports and such other information as may be required by the assistance awarding agency or
state.
6. Will initiate and complete the work within applicable time frame after receipt of approval from the
awarding agency.
7. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that
constitutes or presents the appearance of personal or organizational conflict of interest or personal gain.
8. Will comply with Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 USC §§ 4728-4763), relating to
prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the nineteen statutes or
regulations specified in Appendix A of OEM Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration
(5 CFR § 900, Subpart F).
9. Will comply with all federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include, but are not limited
to: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352), which prohibits discrimination on the basis
of race, color, or national origin; (b) Title IV of the Education Amendments of 1972 as amended (20
USC §§ 1681-1683 and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; (c) Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended (29 USC § 794), which prohibits discrimination on the
basis of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 as amended (42 USC §§ 6101-6107), which
prohibits on the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 93-255) as
amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol
Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-916) as amended,
relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) Sections 523 and 527 of
the Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 USC §§ 290 dd-3 and 290 ee-3) as amended, relating to
Administrative Documents 3
confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968
(42 USC §§ 3601, et seq.) as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of
housing; (i) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for
federal assistance is being made, and 0) the requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s)
which may apply to the application.
10. Will comply, or has complied, with requirements of Titles II and III of the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646), which provides equitable
treatment of persons displaced or whose property is acquired as a result of federal and federally assisted
programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real property acquired for project purposes
regardless of federal participation in purchases.
11. Will comply with the Lead-based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 USC §§ 4801, et seq.), which
prohibits the use of lead-based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residence structures.
12. Will comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act (5 USC §§ 1501-1508 and 7324-7328), which
limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or
in part with federal funds.
13. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (40 USC §§ 276a to 276a-7),
the Copeland Act (40 USC § 276c, and 18 USC § 874), the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 USC §§ 327-333) regarding labor standards for federally assisted construction sub -agreements.
14. Will comply with the flood insurance purchase requirements, Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234), which require recipients in a Special Flood Hazard Area to
participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of insurable construction and
acquisition is $10,000 or more.
15. Will comply with environmental standards which may be prescribed pursuant to the following: (a)
institution of environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190) and Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating facilities pursuant to
EO 11738; (c) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in flood
plains in accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved state
management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 USC §§ 1451, et
seq.); (f) conformity of federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c)
of the Clean Air Act of 1955 as amended (42 USC §§ 7401, et seq.); (g) protection of underground
drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 as amended (P.L. 93-523); (h) protection of
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (P.L. 93-205); (i) addresses
environmental justice in minority and low-income populations in compliance of EO 12898.
16. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 USC §§ 1271, et. seq.) related to
protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic rivers system.
17. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 as amended (16 USC § 470); EO 11593 (identification and preservation of
historic properties); and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 USC §§ 469a-1,
et seq.).
Administrative Documents 4
18. Will cause to be performed in the required financial and compliance audits in accordance with the
Single Audit Act of 1984.
19. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other federal laws, Executive Orders, regulations
and policies governing this program.
The undersigned represents that he is authorized by the applicant to enter into this agreement for and on
behalf of said applicant.
_Janet Keeter
(name)
_Interim City Manager
(title)
(signature) (date)
28. Authorization
I, Michael Pretz, do hereby certify as the authorized representative of the City of Lodi, that the
information contained in this application is true and correct.
(title)
(signature)
(date)
Administrative Documents 5
6. Applicant's Agent/Contact
Name and Title: Michael Pretz, Fire Chief
Phone: 209-333-6735 Fax: 209-333-6844
Email: mpretz@lodi.gov
7. Alternate Contact
Name and Title: Richard Prima, Director of Public Works
Address: 221 West Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Phone: 209-333-6759 Fax: 209-333-6710
Email: rprima@lodi.gov
8. Project Location: 705 East Lodi Avenue
Lodi, CA 95240
9. Is this project being considered or funded by Public Assistance? No
10. Total Project Cost
Federal Requested Share: $1.58 million
Applicant Match: $0.53 million
Total Project Cost: $2.11 million
11. Legislative Districts
State Assembly
State Senate
US Congressional District
Applicant Project Site
# 10 # 10
# 14 # 14
# 11 # 11
Notice of Interest 1
Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
1.
Project Title:
Fire Station 2 Replacement
2.
Project Type:
Seismic and Flood Mitigation of City Fire Station
3.
Applicant Name:
City of Lodi Fire Department
4.
Applicant Type:
City
5.
Applicant Address:
25 East Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240 San Joaquin County
Federal Employer Identification Number (EIN): 94-6000361
6. Applicant's Agent/Contact
Name and Title: Michael Pretz, Fire Chief
Phone: 209-333-6735 Fax: 209-333-6844
Email: mpretz@lodi.gov
7. Alternate Contact
Name and Title: Richard Prima, Director of Public Works
Address: 221 West Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Phone: 209-333-6759 Fax: 209-333-6710
Email: rprima@lodi.gov
8. Project Location: 705 East Lodi Avenue
Lodi, CA 95240
9. Is this project being considered or funded by Public Assistance? No
10. Total Project Cost
Federal Requested Share: $1.58 million
Applicant Match: $0.53 million
Total Project Cost: $2.11 million
11. Legislative Districts
State Assembly
State Senate
US Congressional District
Applicant Project Site
# 10 # 10
# 14 # 14
# 11 # 11
Notice of Interest 1
12. Brief Summary of the Problem:
Fire station 2 was built in 1980 as a one-story, slab on grade, pre-engineered steel structure with
exterior metal siding. At the time of construction, the structure was classified as Type V, non-
rated with a B-2 occupancy. The building consists of a +/- 15.5 to 16.5 foot high, drive-through,
central apparatus bay with a residential wing to the west and a service wing to the east. The
tower utilizes wide -flanged, channel, and tube sections for structural support. Light gage
corrugated siding and roofing on the tower matches the main building.
Station 2 is located just west of, and adjacent to, Highway 99 in an area zoned for commercial and
industrial uses. Commercial and industrial development can be found north, east, and south of the
station. To the west is mixed commercial and residential use. The area around Station 2 is completely
urbanized, and thus has no known archeological, paleontological, environmental, cultural, historical, or
wildlife consequences to mitigating the building's deficiencies.
The facility fails to meet basic life safety criteria or essential facility standards relating to seismic
resistance. A preliminary engineering report states:
The combined east -west lateral force resisting systems are not compatible, the 16 inch
wide footing with the #4 top/bottom is not adequate, the load path to resist out -of -plane
lateral forces is not adequate. The full -height CMU walls are located at both the front
and rear apparatus doorways . If the CMU walls perform poorly, as expected, the roll -up
doors may be damaged—trapping fire apparatus inside at a time when it is needed most.
The tower is of poor design. The moment frame connections are substandard; force -distributing
horizontal diagrams are missing; secondary members collect and retain rainwater. Many of the
primary and secondary members were installed incorrectly, have rusted through, and can no
longer carry design forces. Due to the unsafe structure, the tower is condemned and represents a
significant collapse hazard.
13. Brief Summary of the Proposed Solution:
The Fire Department proposes that Fire Station 2 be relocated and built to encompass all essential
facility, life safety, mechanical, and electrical codes. The proposed relocation site is approximately 3/4
mile east of the existing station, in a completely urbanized area surrounded in all four directions by
commercial and industrial development. There are no known archeological, paleontological, historical,
cultural, environmental, or wildlife consequences to relocating and rebuilding Fire Station 2.
Notice of Interest 2
14. Detailed Description of the Problem:
The single most important problem is the building does not meet essential facility standards for seismic
resistance. In addition, the facility fails to meet basic life safety standards. Functionally, the building
presents a number of problems which need immediate attention:
a. There is no automatic sprinkler or fire alarm system as required by current code.
b. The hose tower is condemned and is a significant collapse hazard.
c. The western roof over the dormitory and the eastern roof over the exercise room leak and the interior
ceilings need replacement.
d. Windows leak at the corners.
e. The apparatus bay floor has cracks, water "ponds" at the floor drains, and the parking lot is prone to
flooding.
f. The existing electrical service is only 400 amp, single-phase, and likely not able to support any
significant expansion.
g. The interior lighting system consists of T12 lamps and magnetic ballasts.
h. The emergency generator automatic transfer switch is over 20 years old and on the verge of failing.
i. The dormitory has inadequate closet space, air movement, and electronic convenience outlets.
j. There is no security system (cameras, intercoms, etc.).
k. There are repeated rodent and insect infestations.
1. There is inadequate space for storing fire fighting equipment, inadequate space for exercise
equipment, and the kitchen and dining areas are too small to support three full-time crews.
m. There are no public restrooms, the one existing restroom is not designed to accommodate male and
female firefighters.
n. Plumbing fixtures and accessories do not meet ADA standards and are in poor condition.
o. Hardware, signage, and clear space at doorways are generally not in compliance with Title 24.
p. There is rusted and dented metal throughout the facility, including walls, downspouts, vents, doors,
and restroom partitions.
q. Finishes, painted walls, and flooring need upgrading or replacement.
Although Station 2 is located in a 500 -year floodplain, it is downstream from the Lower Mokelumne
River Project (FERC No. 2916). The facilities include Pardee Reservoir and Powerhouse and,
immediately downstream, Camanche Reservoir and Powerhouse in the counties of Amador, Calaveras,
and San Joaquin. Pardee Dam is a concrete gravity arch structure rising 345 feet above the riverbed and
the reservoir has a gross storage of 197,950 acre-feet at a pool elevation of 567 feet. Camanche Dam is
a zoned earthen structure with an impervious core. Its crest is 171 feet above the riverbed and the
reservoir stores 417,120 acre-feet of water at a surface elevation of 235 feet. *
Pardee Dam Failure *
Severe Storm
Fair Weather
Cubic feet per second
601,000
31,000
Acre-feet per second
13.8
0.71
Maximum water depth (Hwy 99
>24
10
Camanche Dam Failure *
Severe Storm
Fair Weather
Cubic feet per second
2,108,000
383,000
Acre-feet per second
48.4
8.8
Maximum water depth (Hwy 99
24
18-24
* East Bay Municipal Utility District; Emergency Action Plan; May 2000.
Project Description 1
15. Detailed Description of How the Proposed Project will Eliminate or Reduce the Problem:
The proposed mitigation project is to rebuild Fire Station 2 to eliminate seismic and flood hazards.
Rebuilding Fire Station 2 will ensure the structure complies with essential facility seismic standards as
well as contemporary building and life safety codes. Also, this project is intended to provide a
comprehensive solution to numerous recurring problems (e.g., leaky roof, no accommodations for
women firefighters, frequent pest infestations) as well as eliminate the uncertainty associated with
performing isolated repair, replacement, or upgrades to individual systems or components. When the
station is in compliance with applicable codes, future risk of building damage and consequent loss of
service capacity will be eliminated or greatly reduced.
A construction contract has not been let, so detailed specifications, engineering studies, and other
preparatory work does not exist at the time of application. Since the city has not entered into any
agreements regarding mitigation of the building's defects, specific quantified information is not
available beyond the estimates contained in the application packet. The proposed solution is based on
incorporating current need with anticipated operational changes. (Specifically, a station large enough to
support two companies staffed by both men and women.)
This project will have no impact on neighboring jurisdictions since there will be no changes to
boundaries or alarm assignments. This project is in compliance with the city's general and emergency
operations plans, and does not conflict with the city's redevelopment plan or emergency plans of other
jurisdictions. Long-term solutions provided by this project include a fire station built to current seismic
and life safety standards and improved response capability to support changing community
characteristics.
16. Project Alternatives Considered
Alternative 1 (No Action):
If no action is taken on Fire Station 2, the deficiencies in the roof, mechanical systems, fire alarm
system, and electrical system will remain status quo. The building does not meet essential facility
standards and therefore a moderate earthquake will likely render the building inoperable. In addition,
non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, municipal ordinances, and various state and
local codes creates a perception of a double standard when the city is not following the very rules it is
charged with enforcing.
Alternative 1 Budget:
No Cost.
Alternative 2:
Remodel the existing building to remedy the various building defects, comply with essential facility
seismic standards, and the ADA. The consequences of this alternative include being displaced for an
extended period (18 to 24 months), compromised security as a result of temporary quarters, and a
building that complies with the various governing codes—but has outlived its useful life.
Alternative 2 Budget:
Project Description 2
Alternative 3:
Demolish the existing building and rebuild on the same site. The consequences of this alternative
include being displaced for an extended period (18 to 24 months), compromised security as a result of
temporary quarters, and a significantly higher cost of mitigation (requires demolition) than the requested
action.
Alternative 3 Budget:
Asbestos & Lead Paint Abatement $25,000.00
Demolish Existing Building 6,200 sq ft @ $6 sq ft$37,200.00
Site Fill and Grading $25,000.00
Total Abate and Demolish Existing $87,200.00
Total Building Square Feet (WMB)
9,111
Estimated Cost Per Square Foot
$220.00
Construction Estimate
$2,004,420.00
Total Construction Cost Estimate(including Demo
$2,091,620.00
Design Costs 12% of Construction Cost
$250,994.40
& Inspection 1.5% of Construction
$31,374.30
-Testing
Construction Management 1.5% of Construction
$31,374.30
Design Team CM 1 % of Construction
$20,916.20
Total Project Cost *
$2,426,279.20
Project Cost Per Square Foot
$266.30
(*) Includes Design and Construction Contract Costs
*** Estimate does not include furniture or facility supplies****
Project Description 3
17. Work Schedule
A construction contract has not been let, so a detailed work schedule does not exist at the time of
application. Since the city has not entered into any agreements regarding mitigation of the building's
defects, it is possible actual work will not begin within six months of approval. The city will have to
issue appropriate RFP's for the different elements of the project, select contractors, and prepare detailed
drawings, plans, and schedules. Once work begins, based on previous fire station construction, the
project will likely take approximately one year to complete.
18. Budget
Total Building Square Feet 9,111
Estimated Cost Per Square Foot $220.00
Total Construction Cost Estimate $2,004,420.00
(*) includes 6 bedrooms and 4 apparatus bays
Property Acquisition ?
$200,000.00
Design Costs 12% of Construction Cost
$240,530.40
Testing & Inspection 1.5% of Construction
$30,066.30
Construction Management 1.5% of Construction
$30,066.30
Design Team CM 1 % of Construction
$20,044.20
Total Project Cost **
$2,525,127.20
Project Cost Per Square Foot
$277.15
(**) Includes Acquisition, Design, and Construction Contract Costs
Project Description 4
19. Historical Review Checklist
A. Are any of the structures in the project area over 50 years old? No
B. Does the proposed project affect historic properties on, or eligible for, the National
Register of Historic Places? No
C. Is the proposed project site located in a historic district? No
D. Will the project disturb previously undisturbed soil? No
E. Will the project disturb or have adverse effects outside the currently disturbed area or
outside the footprint of an existing facility? No
F. Does the construction site or surrounding area contain any cultural or archaeological
resources? No
G. Are photos with application? Yes
H. Is additional historical consultation information attached with application? No
20. Environmental Review
A. Are there any completed environmental documents, consultations, or permit applications
related to project, site, or area? No
B. Are there any biological studies completed in or around the project area? No
C. Does the project area contain any endangered species? No
D. Is there potential for controversy? No
E. Is additional environmental review information attached to application? No
21. Environmental Checklist
Land Use and Planning Would the proposal:
1. conflict with general plan designation or zoning? No
2. conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted agencies who have
jurisdiction of the project? No
3. be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? No
4. affect agricultural resource/operations from incompatible land, impacts to soils or farmlands,
or impact from incompatible use? No
5. disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community, including a low-
income or minority community? No
Population and Housing Would the proposal:
6. cumulatively exceed regional or local population projections? No
7. induce substantial growth, directly or indirectly? No
8. displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? No
Geologic Problems Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts
involving:
9. fault rupture?
10. seismic ground shaking?
11. seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
12. seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
No
No
No
No
13. landslides or mudflows? No
14. erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
15. subsidence of the land?
16. expansive soils?
17. unique geologic or physical features?
No
No
No
No
Supplemental Information 1
Water Would the proposal result in:
18. change in absorption, drainage, or amount of surface runoff? L
19. expose people or property to flooding? No
20. discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality? No
21. changes in the amount of surface water in any body? No
22. change currents or course/direction of water movement? No
23. change the quantity of groundwater, through direct addition or withdrawal, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavation, or through loss of groundwater recharge
capability? No
24. alter direction, rate, flow, or quality of groundwater? No
25. substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies? No
Air Quality Would the proposal:
26. violate air standard, contribute to existing or projected air quality violation? No
27. expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? No
28. alter air movement, moisture, temperature, cause climate change? No
29. create objectionable odors? No
Transportation/Circulation Would the proposal result in:
30. increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? L
31. hazards from design? No
32. inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? No
33. insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? No
34. hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? No
35. conflict with policy supporting alternate transportation? No
36. rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts? No
Biological Resources Would the proposal resulting in impacts to:
37. endangered, threatened, or rare species or habitats? No
38. locally designated species? No
39. local natural communities? No
40. wetland habitat? No
41. wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No
Energy and Mineral Resources Would the proposal:
42. conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No
43. use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? No
44. result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources that would be of future value to
region and residents of the state? No
Hazards Would the proposal involve:
45.
risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substance?
No
46.
interference with emergency evacuation and/or response plan?
No
47.
the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?
No
48.
exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazard?
No
49.
increased fire hazard in areas with brush, grass, or trees?
No
Supplemental Information 2
Noise Would the proposal involve:
50. increases in existing noise levels?
51. exposure of people to severe noise levels?
L
No
Public Services Would the proposal affect or alter governmental services in any of
the following areas:
52. fire protection? No
53. police protection? No
54. schools? No
55. maintenance of public facilities, including roads? L
56. other governmental services? No
Utilities and Service Systems Would the proposal cause a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alteration to any of the following
utilities or services:
57. power or natural gas? L
58. communications systems? L
59. local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? No
60. sewer or septic tanks? No
61. storm water drainage? No
62. solid waste disposal? No
63. local or regional water supplies? No
Aesthetics Would the proposal:
64. affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? No
65. have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? No
66. create light or glare? No
Cultural Resources Would the proposal:
67. disturb paleontological resources? No
68. disturb archaeological resources? No
69. affect historical resources? No
70. cause change which would affect ethnic cultural values? No
71. restrict existing religious/sacred use in impact area? No
Recreation Would the proposal:
72. increase demand for neighborhood parks or other facilities? No
73. affect existing recreational opportunities? No
Mandatory Findings of Significance
74. Does project have potential to degrade quality of the environment, reduce habitat of fish or
wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten a
plant or animal community, reduce number of restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or
animals, or eliminate examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No
75. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-
term environmental goals? No
76. Does project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
No
Supplemental Information 3
77. Does the project have adverse environmental effects which will affect human beings, either
directly or indirectly? No
22. Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands
A. Is the project in or near a wetland, swamp, marsh, etc.? No
B. Is the project in 500 -year floodplain
C. Does the project support development in a floodplain? No
D. Land use upstream and downstream Urban
E. Does the project have an impact on the wetland? No
F. Floodplain Manager David Morimoto, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
221 West Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Phone: 209-333-2645 Fax: 209-333-6842
Email: dmorimoto@lodi.gov
Supplemental Information 4
23. Benefit Cost Analysis
I. Structural Retrofit
A.
Introduction
B.
Building Location
Weekends
City of Lodi Fire Station 2
705 East Lodi Avenue
Evening
Lodi 95240
C.
General Information
Night
Number of stories above grade:
4
Total floor area in square feet (SF):
4
Date of construction:
4
Does the building have historical significance:
Das per week
What is the building's function(s):
D.
Building and Site Description:
E.
Building Type:
F.
Demolition Threshold:
G.
Replacement Value:
H.
Contents Value:
24
equipment, furnishings
I.
Displacement Costs Due to Earthquake Damage:
J.
Building Occupancy:
1
6,000
1980
No
fire station
see attached
5. light steel frame
20%
$634,000
$75,000 firefighting
$10,000 per month
K. Value of Public/Nonprofit Services: N/A
L. Post -Disaster Continuity Premium: lox
M. Functional Downtime:
Building is a fire station. Functional downtime has to be as close to zero as possible.
Our best estimate is less than 3 days.
N. Rent and Business Income Loss: N/A
O. Project Mitigation Costs: $2.52 million (2004)
P. Project Life of Mitigation: 30 years
Q. Project Mitigation Maintenance Cost: $0
R. Relocation Costs: $5,000
S. Displacement Time:
Considering the structural deficiencies, a moderate earthquake will likely render the
building inoperable and displacement be permanent.
II. Seismic Retrofit of Pendant Lighting and Suspended Ceiling Systems in Schools
Not Applicable
III. Seismic Bracing of Emergency Power or Communications Systems in Medical Facilities
Not Applicable
Seismic Supplement 1
Weekdays
Weekends
Day
Evening
Night
Day
Evening
Night
Occupants
4
4
4
4
4
4
Das per week
7
7
7
7
7
7
Hours per day
24
24
24
24
24
24
Months per year
12
12
12
12
12
12
K. Value of Public/Nonprofit Services: N/A
L. Post -Disaster Continuity Premium: lox
M. Functional Downtime:
Building is a fire station. Functional downtime has to be as close to zero as possible.
Our best estimate is less than 3 days.
N. Rent and Business Income Loss: N/A
O. Project Mitigation Costs: $2.52 million (2004)
P. Project Life of Mitigation: 30 years
Q. Project Mitigation Maintenance Cost: $0
R. Relocation Costs: $5,000
S. Displacement Time:
Considering the structural deficiencies, a moderate earthquake will likely render the
building inoperable and displacement be permanent.
II. Seismic Retrofit of Pendant Lighting and Suspended Ceiling Systems in Schools
Not Applicable
III. Seismic Bracing of Emergency Power or Communications Systems in Medical Facilities
Not Applicable
Seismic Supplement 1
1. Please provide a 7.5 minute Quad Map and general area map with the location of the project on
Flood Supplement 1
the map. Are the maps attached?
Yes
2.
Were public facilities or structures damaged during a declared disaster?
No
3.
Describe the damage, the repair, and the cost of the repair?
N/A
4.
Were the damages addressed in a Public Assistance Damage Survey Report?
N/A
5.
Has the DSR been approved for funding by FEMA or OES?
N/A
6.
Attach a copy of the DSR.
N/A
7.
If there is no DSR for the repair of a damaged facility or structure, please explain why
there was
no DSR written.
N/A
8.
Were any non-profit organizations or institutions that perform essential governmental services in
the project area displaced during the flood event?
No
9.
What service does the non-profit provide?
N/A
10.
Did the non-profit or serviced provider temporarily relocate?
N/A
11.
Did another organization or government entity provide substitute services?
N/A
12.
What is the usual cost to provide the service?
N/A
13.
What were the additional costs to provide the service during and after the flooding?
N/A
14.
Please explain the financial benefits of the service to the community.
N/A
Worksheet A
N/A
Worksheet A 1
N/A
Worksheet A2
N/A
Worksheet B
N/A
Worksheet B 1
N/A
Worksheet B2
N/A
Flood Supplement 1
24. Private Nonprofit Status
A. Does the applicant have private nonprofit status? No
25. Grant Funding
A. What is the source of the applicant's matching funds?
City of Lodi Capital Improvement Program
B. Will your project require a funding advance? No
C. Identify the entity which will be responsible for the long-term maintenance of the project
Facility Services (City of Lodi Public Works Department)
What will be the cost of maintenance per year for this project? $0
What is the funding source for the long-term maintenance of this project?
City of Lodi General Fund
Administrative Documents 1
26. Designation of Applicant's Agency Resolution and Certification
Be It Resolved By The City Council of the City of Lodi that
Janet Keeter, Interim City Manager
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the City of Lodi, a local government entity
established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it in the Governor's
Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, P.L. 93-288, as amended.
That the City of Lodi, hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the Governor's Office of Emergency
Services for all matters pertaining to such disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.
Passed and approved this XX day of XX, 2004.
(Name and title of approving board or council member)
(Name and title of approving board or council member)
CERTIFICATION
I, Susan Blackston, duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that the above is a
true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the City Council of the City of Lodi on the
XX day of XX, 2004.
(name)
(signature)
(date)
Administrative Documents 2
27. Subgrantee Assurance
As the duly authorized representative of the applicant, I certify the applicant:
1. Has the legal authority to apply for federal assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial
capability (including funds sufficient to pay the nonfederal share of project costs) to ensure proper
planning, management and completion of the project described in this application.
2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, and if appropriate, the
State of California, through any authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all records,
books, papers or documents related to the assistance; and will establish a proper accounting system in
accordance with generally accepted accounting standards or agency directives.
3. Will not dispose of, modify use of, or change terms of real property title, or other interest in the site
and facilities without permission and instructions from the awarding agency. Will record federal interest
in title of real property in accordance with awarding agency directives and will include a covenant in the
title of real property acquired in whole or in part with federal assistance funds to assure non-
discrimination during the useful life of the project.
4. Will comply with the requirements of the assistance awarding agency with regard to the drafting,
review and approval of construction plans and specifications.
5. Will provide and maintain competent and adequate engineering supervision at the construction site to
ensure that the complete work conforms with the approved plans and specifications and will furnish
progress reports and such other information as may be required by the assistance awarding agency or
state.
6. Will initiate and complete the work within applicable time frame after receipt of approval from the
awarding agency.
7. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that
constitutes or presents the appearance of personal or organizational conflict of interest or personal gain.
8. Will comply with Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 USC §§ 4728-4763), relating to
prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the nineteen statutes or
regulations specified in Appendix A of OEM Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration
(5 CFR § 900, Subpart F).
9. Will comply with all federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include, but are not limited
to: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352), which prohibits discrimination on the basis
of race, color, or national origin; (b) Title IV of the Education Amendments of 1972 as amended (20
USC §§ 1681-1683 and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; (c) Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended (29 USC § 794), which prohibits discrimination on the
basis of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 as amended (42 USC §§ 6101-6107), which
prohibits on the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 93-255) as
amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol
Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-916) as amended,
relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) Sections 523 and 527 of
the Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 USC §§ 290 dd-3 and 290 ee-3) as amended, relating to
Administrative Documents 3
confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968
(42 USC §§ 3601, et seq.) as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of
housing; (i) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for
federal assistance is being made, and 0) the requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s)
which may apply to the application.
10. Will comply, or has complied, with requirements of Titles II and III of the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646), which provides equitable
treatment of persons displaced or whose property is acquired as a result of federal and federally assisted
programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real property acquired for project purposes
regardless of federal participation in purchases.
11. Will comply with the Lead-based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 USC §§ 4801, et seq.), which
prohibits the use of lead-based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residence structures.
12. Will comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act (5 USC §§ 1501-1508 and 7324-7328), which
limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or
in part with federal funds.
13. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis -Bacon Act (40 USC §§ 276a to 276a-7),
the Copeland Act (40 USC § 276c, and 18 USC § 874), the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 USC §§ 327-333) regarding labor standards for federally assisted construction sub -agreements.
14. Will comply with the flood insurance purchase requirements, Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234), which require recipients in a Special Flood Hazard Area to
participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of insurable construction and
acquisition is $10,000 or more.
15. Will comply with environmental standards which may be prescribed pursuant to the following: (a)
institution of environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190) and Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating facilities pursuant to
EO 11738; (c) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in flood
plains in accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved state
management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 USC §§ 1451, et
seq.); (f) conformity of federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c)
of the Clean Air Act of 1955 as amended (42 USC §§ 7401, et seq.); (g) protection of underground
drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 as amended (P.L. 93-523); (h) protection of
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (P.L. 93-205); (i) addresses
environmental justice in minority and low-income populations in compliance of EO 12898.
16. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 USC §§ 1271, et. seq.) related to
protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic rivers system.
17. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 as amended (16 USC § 470); EO 11593 (identification and preservation of
historic properties); and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 USC §§ 469a-1,
et seq.).
Administrative Documents 4
18. Will cause to be performed in the required financial and compliance audits in accordance with the
Single Audit Act of 1984.
19. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other federal laws, Executive Orders, regulations
and policies governing this program.
The undersigned represents that he is authorized by the applicant to enter into this agreement for and on
behalf of said applicant.
Janet Keeter
(name)
Interim City Manager.
(title)
(signature) (date)
28. Authorization
I, Michael Pretz, do hereby certify as the authorized representative of the City of Lodi, that the
information contained in this application is true and correct.
(title)
(signature)
(date)
Administrative Documents 5
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-284
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE
OF EMERGENCY SERVICES HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT,
AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS.
WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services, through the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, now a part of Homeland Security, offers hazard
mitigation grants in conjunction with disaster mitigation funds; and
WHEREAS, as federally declared disasters occur within the State of California, a
portion of the disaster mitigation funds are set aside for hazard mitigation projects; and
WHEREAS, Fire Department staff has prepared two grant applications for Fire
Station 1 and Station 2, using engineering studies performed by structural engineers
working with the architectural firm of Wenell, Mattheis, and Bowe commissioned to study
and make recommendations as a part of the Old Public Safety Building remodel; and
WHEREAS, both buildings have significant life safety deficiencies that need to be
addressed; and
WHEREAS, the hazard mitigation study is based on hydrological studies
conducted by the East Bay Municipal Utility District as part of its emergency action plan
for the Lower Mokelumne River Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council as follows:
Approves the filing of Application for the California Office of Emergency Services
Hazard Mitigation Grant for Fire Station 1 Upgrade; and
2. Approves the filing of Application for the California Office of Emergency Services
Hazard Mitigation Grant for Fire Station 2 Replacement; and
3. Appoints the Fire Chief and/or Public Works Director as agent to conduct all
negotiations and submit all documents including, but not limited to, applications,
agreements, payment requests, and so on, which may be necessary for the
completion of the Project.
4. Authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute for and on behalf of the City
of Lodi, a local government entity established under the laws of the State of
California, the applications and to file them in the Governor's Office of
Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial
assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act of 1988, P. L. 93-288, as amended; and
5. That the City of Lodi hereby authorizes the City Manager or its agent to provide
to the Governor's Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such
disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required; and
6. That the City Council hereby acknowledges that both grants require the City of
Lodi to provide a 25% match of funds, and further directs staff to bring this matter
back to the City Council, at which time the City is notified that a grant will be
received.
Dated: December 15, 2004
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2004-284 was passed and adopted by the
City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held December 15, 2004, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hansen, Hitchcock, Johnson, Mounce,
and Mayor Beckman
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
2004-284