Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - February 21, 2007 E-11 PHAGENDA ITEM Fw-w I t CITY OF Low COUNCIL COMMUNICATION T AGENDA TITLE: Set Pubic HearMg for April 18, 2007, to Consider Adoption of Resolution Estabil4hing Public Works Department Engineering Fees for Various Development -Related Engineering Services; Establishing Standard Unit Prioe SchedWe for Calculation of Engineering Fees and Improvement Security; and Establishing Requirement for Warranty Security for Public Improvements MEETING DATE: February 21, 2007 PREPAIWD BY: Public Works Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set a public hearing for April 18, 2007, to consider the adoption of a resolution establishing Public Works Department engineering fees for various development -related engineering services; establish a standard unit price schedule for calculation of engineering fees and improvement security; and establish a requirement for warranty security for public improvements. BACKGWUND INFORMATION: In an ongoing effort to recover Public Works Department staff costs related to development services, staff is recommending that the fee structure for engineering plan check and inspection services and reimbursement agreement preparation and payment processing be updated and that a new fee be established for the preparation of a partial acceptance of public improvements associated with any given development project. The proposed fees are shown on Exhibit A. Staff further recommends that a standard unit price schedule (Exhibit B) be established for the calculation of engineering plan check and inspection fees and that warranty security be required prior to acceptance of project improvements. These items are more fully explained below. Engineering Plan Chegk and laspection Fees To aid in our mission to recover staff costs for development services while maintaining fee schedules comparable with other San Joaquin County cities, staff contracted with Ruark and Associates to review the City's fee structure for engineering plan check and inspection fees, compare the fees with other San Joaquin County communities and make recommendations for changes to the City's fee structure for these services (Exhibit C). As part of this exercise, a standard unit pricing schedule for public improvements was also developed for use in determining the project construction value on which the plan check and inspection fees and improvement security requirements are based. It is common practice in many communities to use such a unit price schedule to provide consistency in fee and improvement security requirements and streamline the preparation of improvement agreements. The five communities chosen for the fee comparison were Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, Tracy and the Mountain House County Services District. They were selected because they are all located within San Joaquin County and are experiencing, or have recently experienced, significant growth due to development. The results of the survey indicate that Lodi is currently collecting, on average, lower plan check fees and slightly higher inspection fees than neighboring communities. It is recommended that the fees be revised accordingly. The proposed fee schedule and standard unit pricing schedule are shown APPROVED: Blair K ity Manager KAWP%DEV_8ERV\Deve4opment Fees1CC_FeeUpdate2007.doc 211512007 Set Public Hearing for April 18, 2007, to Consider Adoption of Resolution Establishing Public Works Department Engineering Fees for Various Development -Related Engineering Services; Establishing Standard Unit Price Schedule for Calculation of Engineering Fees and Improvement Security; and Establishing Requirement for Warranty Security for Public Improvements February 21, 2007 Page 2 on attached Exhibits A and B, respectively. To account for inflation, the unit price schedule shall be adjusted annually on January 1 using the Engineering News Record (ENR) 20 Cities Construction Cost Index. ReimtLuMW We@Ment EtgpWqtio and Pa m nt PL goMing Qharges On November 6, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1527 (LMC 16.40) creating a procedure for preparation and processing of public improvement reimbursement agreements. The Ordinance provides that the City Council may adopt charges, by resolution, for the City to prepare and process said agreements. Resolution No. 91-206, adopted November 6, 1991, established a charge for preparation of the reimbursement agreements (1% of the reimbursable construction costs, minimum $500) and a processing charge ($60) for collection and disbursement of each reimbursement payment. Since the agreement preparation charge is based on the cost of the reimbursable improvements, the charge has increased over time based on the rise in construction costs. The minimum charge, however, needs to be adjusted to reflect increased staff costs for the basic tasks common to all projects, whether large or small, resulting from increased personnel costs and the complexity of the reimbursement agreements. In addition, the processing charge was established as a flat fee and needs to be updated to cover increased City staff costs for collecting and processing reimbursement payments. Staff recommends that the charge for reimbursement agreement preparation be established as 11% of the reimbursable construction costs, with a minimum charge of $750, and the processing charge for each reimbursement payment collected be set at $200 (see Exhibit A). In addition, the minimum reimbursement agreement preparation charge and the payment processing charge shall be adjusted annually on July 1 based on the Consumer Price Index (San Francisco, Urban, unadjusted) for the previous calendar year, in keeping with the policy established for other engineering fees. Partial l ceptangg Fee It is becoming common practice for developers to request that a portion of the public improvements beim installed in conjunction with a subdivision or other development project be accepted before all the required improvements for the project are complete. If reasonable, staff has generally tried to accommodate these requests. Processing the partial acceptance request requires the determination of the cost of the completed improvements and preparation of a Council communication requesting Council approval. Historically, staff has performed these additional tasks at no cost to the developer. However, staff is of the opinion that, since the partial acceptance of improvements is requested by the developer for their benefit, the costs occasioned by the City should be recovered. Staff recommends that a partial acceptance fee be established based on time and materials using the established Public Works Engineering Hourly Rate with a minimum fee of $250 (see Exhibit A). The minimum partial acceptance fee shall be adjusted annually on July 1 based on the Consumer Price index (San Francisco, Urban, unadjusted) for the previous calendar year, in keeping with the policy established for other engineering fees. K MPTEV_5ERV1Development Fees1CC_FeeUpdate2007.doc 2J1512007 Set Pubk Hearing for April 18, 2007, to Consider Adoption of Resolution Establishing Public Works Department Engineering Fees for Various Development -Related Engineering Services; Establishing Standard Unit Price Schedule for Calculation of Engineering Fees and Improvement Security; and Establishing Requirement for Warranty Security for Public Improvements February 21, 2007 Page 3 Warranty, Security Under the terns of City of Lolly improvement agreements covering the installation of public improvements, developers are required to provide improvement security in conformance with LMC Chapter 16.28. The current requirements include improvement security for faithful performance and labor and materials in the amounts of 100% and 50%, respectively, of the estimated cost of public improvements to be installed with a given project. The improvement agreements also stipulate that the developer is responsible for the repair or reconstruction of any defective work for any improvements covered by the improvement agreement for a period of one year from the date of Council acceptance of the improvements. There is, however, no provision in LMC Chapter 16.28 for warranty security to insure compliance with this requirement. Currently, faithful performance security is released upon acceptance of the completed improvements by the City Council. Staff recommends that Council require that warranty security be provided prior to the release of the faithful performance security. This is common practice in other San Joaquin County communities. It is recommended that the warranty security be in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the cost of construction of the project improvements and the warranty period be two (2) years following the date of acceptance of the improvements. For those projects receiving partial acceptance during the course of construction, the warranty period for all required project improvements shall commence upon the date of final acceptance for the entire project. If this provision is approved, staff will add similar requirements to City contracts for major street and other appropriate construction projects. FISCAL WAPACT: There will be a modest increase in revenue to cover City costs for engineering plan check, reimbursement agreement preparation, collection and processing of reimbursement payments, and processing of requests for partial acceptance of project improvements. There will be a slight decrease in revenue for engineering inspection services. Warranty provisions will help reduce maintenance costs. FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable. Richard C. Prima, Jr. Public Works Director Prepared by Sharon A. Welch, Senior Civil Engineer RCP/SAW/pmf Attachments cc: Senior Civil Engineer Fujitani AAsoc4 to Civil Engineer Chang Senior Engineering Technicians Matsurmoto Fork and Associates K'MPOEV_SFMADeveloprnent Fee$\CC_Fe*Update2007.doc 2/15/2007 Engineering Fees Plan Check, First Submittal Plan Check, Final Approval Inspection Public Improvement Reimbursement Agreement Agreement Preparation Payment Processing (1) Partial Acceptance Proposed Fee No Change 5% of first $100,000 3.5% of next $200,000 2.5% over $300,000 4% of first $250,000 3.5% of next $750,000 3.0% over $1,000,000 1 % of construction costs, minimum $750 $200 Time & Materials, minimum $250 EXHIBIT A Existing Fee 90% of Estimated Final Approval Fee 5% of first $50,000 3% of next $200,000 2% over $250,000 4% of construction costs 1 % of construction costs, minimum $500 $60 (1) Fees shall be adjusted annually on July 1 based on the Consumer Price Index (San Francisco, Urban, unadjusted) for the previous calendar year KAWPOEV_SERVOevelopment Fees\CC_FeeUpdate2007_ExA.x1s UNIT PRICE LIST - 2007 Development Projects City of Lodi Public Works Department Description (1) Unit Unit Price (2) Site Preparation & Grading Clearing & grubbing Acre $1,000.00 Lot grading EA $1,500.00 Earthwork CY $2.00 Imported Fill CY $12.00 Remove existing pavement SF $6.00 Remove existing sidewalk SF $6.00 Remove existing curb & gutter LF $11.00 Remove concrete underground structures CY $30.00 Remove existing abandoned utilities LF $15.00 Tree removal EA $200.00 Remove existing barricade EA $500.00 Erosion Control Stabilized Construction Entrance EA $1,000.00 Concrete Washout Structure EA $4,000.00 Erosion Control Acre $2,000.00 Miscellaneous Landscape & Irrigation SF $10.00 Street Trees EA $200.00 Median Landscape & Irrigation SF $10.00 Masonry Wall 7' LF $100.00 Masonry Wall (8') LF $125.00 Retaining Wall < 2' LF $50.00 Retaining Wall < 3' LF $55.00 Retaining Wall 3' to 4' LF $70.00 Retaining Wall (over 4') LF $90.00 Fence Removal LF $5.00 Engineering & Surveying LS 3% of Construction Costs Contingencies LS 10% of Construction Costs Street System Roadway Excavation CY $20.00 Compact Original Ground (0.50') SF $0.20 Page 1 of 4 Description ��� Unit Unit Price (2) Compact Original Ground (0.67') SF $0.20 Compact Native Material 0.50' SF $0.25 Aggregate Base, Class II (0.30') SF $0.60 Aggregate Base, Class II 0.40' SF $0.70 Aggregate Base, Class II (0.50') SF $0.80 Aggregate Base, Class II 0.60' SF $1.00 Aggregate Base, Class II (0.70') SF $1.20 Aggregate Base, Class II 0.80' SF $1.35 Aggregate Base, Class II (0.90') SF $1.50 Aggregate Base, Class II 1.0' SF $1.65 Asphalt Concrete, Type B (0.25') SF $1.25 Asphalt Concrete, Type B 0.30' SF $1.35 Asphalt Concrete, Type B (0.35') SF $1.45 Asphalt Concrete, Type B 0.40' SF $1.60 Asphalt Concrete, Type B (0.50') SF $1.75 Asphalt Concrete, Type B 0.60' SF $2.00 Asphalt Concrete, Type B (0.70') SF $2.25 Asphalt Concrete, Type B 0.80' SF $2.50 Asphalt Concrete, Type B (0.90') SF $2.80 Asphalt Concrete, Type B 1.0' SF $3.00 Asphalt Overlay (0.10') SF $0.50 Asphalt Overlay 0.15' SF $0.75 Slurry SF $0.15 Sawcut LF $3.00 Grind SF $0.20 Rolled Curb, Gutter, & Sidewalk LF $22.00 Vertical Curb & Gutter LF $22.00 Sidewalk SF $5.50 Vertical Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk (5') LF $25.00 Vertical Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk 7' LF $35.00 Curb Return, including HC Ramp EA $2,500.00 Mid -block HC Ramp EA $2,000.00 Concrete subgrade compaction SF $2.50 Residential Driveway 16' wide EA $1,500.00 Commercial Driveway (24' wide) EA $2,500.00 Special Commercial Driveway EA $5,000.00 Median Curb LF $20.00 Dead End Barricade Standard Plan 128 EA $600.00 Dead End Barricade (Standard Plan 139) EA $750.00 Sidewalk Barricade EA $500.00 6" Asphalt Concrete Berm EA $20.00 5' Asphalt Concrete Ramp EA $600.00 Header Board LF $50.00 Street Name Sign & Post EA $450.00 Page 2 of 4 Description ��� Unit Unit Price (2) Flexible Paddle Markers/Delineators EA $60.00 Remove -Relocate Existing Sin EA $300.00 Street Lights (Pedestal Type 100 Watt) EA $3,000.00 Street Lights Mast Type 100 Watt EA $2,100.00 Street Lights (Mast Type 250 Watt) EA $2,500.00 Survey Monument EA $600.00 Traffic Signal EA $300,000.00 Traffic Signs EA $450.00 Traffic Striping LF $1.00 Storm Drain System 12" Storm Drain Pipe PVC LF $35.00 12" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $35.00 15" Storm Drain Pipe PVC LF $45.00 15" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $45.00 18" Storm Drain Pipe PVC LF $55.00 18" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $55.00 21" Storm Drain Pipe RCP LF $60.00 24" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $65.00 30" Storm Drain Pipe RCP LF $70.00 36" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $80.00 42" Storm Drain Pipe RCP LF $110.00 48" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) LF $150.00 48" Storm Drain Manhole EA $3,000.00 60" Storm Drain Manhole EA $4,000.00 72" Storm Drain Manhole EA $5,500.00 Side Inlet Catch Basin EA $2,000.00 Drop Inlet Catch Basin w/AC Apron EA $1,500.00 24" Riser EA $350.00 Connect to Existing Storm Drain EA $5,000.00 Adjust Manhole to Grade EA $500.00 Sanitary Sewer System 6" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $15.00 6" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $12.00 8" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $25.00 8" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $22.00 10" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $30.00 10" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $25.00 12" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $35.00 12" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $30.00 15" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $45.00 15" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $40.00 18" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $60.00 Page 3 of 4 1:/:11:1 k 9:1 Description ��� Unit Unit Price (2) 18" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (PVC) LF $65.00 21" Sanitary Sewer Pipe VCP LF $65.00 24" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (VCP) LF $65.00 Sanitary Sewer Manhole 48" EA $2,500.00 Sanitary Sewer Manhole (60") EA $4,500.00 Sanitary Sewer Drop Manhole EA $3,500.00 Sanitary Service with Cleanout EA $550.00 4" Service with No Cleanout EA $450.00 Sanitary Sewer Riser EA $350.00 Lamphole EA $550.00 Connect to Existing Sanitary Sewer EA $5,000.00 Adjust Manhole to Grade EA $500.00 Water System Domestic & Rec led 6" Water Pipe (DIP) LF $35.00 6" Water Pipe PVC LF $30.00 8" Water Pipe (DIP) LF $45.00 8" Water Pipe PVC LF $40.00 10" Water Pipe (DIP) LF $50.00 10" Water Pipe PVC LF $45.00 12" Water Pipe (DIP) LF $55.00 12" Water Pipe PVC LF $50.00 14" Water Pipe (DIP) LF $60.00 14" Water Pipe PVC LF $55.00 6" Gate Valve EA $1,000.00 8" Gate Valve EA $1,200.00 10" Gate Valve EA $1,500.00 12" Gate Valve EA $1,800.00 14" Gate Valve EA $2,100.00 Adjust Valves to Grade EA $500.00 Fire Hydrant Assembly EA $3,000.00 Blowoff Permanent EA $1,200.00 Blowoff (Temporary) EA $400.00 Connect to Existing Water EA $5,000.00 1" Water Service w/Meter Box EA $750.00 1" Water Service w/No Meter Box EA $600.00 1'/2' Water Service w/Meter Box EA $850.00 2" Water Service w/Meter Box EA $1,000.00 (1) For construction items not listed, the unit price shall be determined by the City Engineer (2) Unit prices listed are minimums. Page 4 of 4 Exhibit C City of Lodi Update Existing Fee Structure for Plan Checking and Inspection Services October 2006 Prepared By: Ruark and Associates 2303 Camino Ramon, Suite 270 San Raman, California 94583 (925) 820-7050 Table of Contents Executive Summary . 1 Project Understanding 2 The City of Lodi's Existing Plan Check and Inspection Fees 2 Comparison Communities' Existing Plan Check and Inspection Fees Average Charges 4 Modified Average 5 Recommended Fee for Plan Check Services 6 Recommended Fee for Inspection Services 6 3 ' Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi, California ' Executive Summary ' The City of Lodi has established plan check and inspection fees for development projects. The City has contracted with Ruark and Associates to compare the City's fee structure with five other communities within the County of San Joaquin and to make ' recommendations regarding the City's fee structure. The City of Lodi's charges are based on an approved estimated cost of public improvements. The estimate must be approved by the City. The following is the current fee for plan check and inspection services: Plan Check 5% for first $50,000 3% for the next $200,000 ' 2% for every dollar over $250,000 Insyection 4% for every dollar 1 After comparing the existing plan check and inspection fees for San Joaquin County ' communities of Stockton, Lathrop, Tracy, Manteca and Mountain House with those of the City of Lodi, the City is collecting fewer fees on the average than the other comparison communities for plan check services and slightly higher fees for inspection ' services than their neighboring communities. Ruark and Associates recommends that the City modifies their plan checking and inspection fees as follows: Plan Check 5 % for first $100,000 3.5% for the next $200,000 2.5% for every dollar over $300,000 ' lnsmction 4% for first $250,000 3.5% for the next $750,000 3.0% for every dollar over $1,000,000 Page 1 of 6 October 2006 Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi. California Project Understanding Background The City of Lodi has established plan check and inspection fees for development projects. The City has contracted with Ruark and Associates to compare the City's fee structure with five other communities within the County of San Joaquin and to make recommendations regarding the City's fee structure. This report will compare the existing plan check and inspection fees for the City of Lodi with the following communities: 1. The City of Stockton 2. The City of Lathrop 3. The City of Manteca 4. The City of Tracy 5. The Mountain House County Service District Comparison Communities ' The five communities above were chosen because they are all located within San Joaquin County and are or have recently experienced significant amount of growth due to development. ' The City of Lodi's Existing Plan Check and Inspection Fee ' The City of Lodi's charges are based on an approved estimated cost of public improvements. The estimate must be approved by the City. The following is the current fee for plan check and inspection services: ' Plan Check 5% for first $50,000 3% for the next $200,000 2% for every dollar over $250,000 ' Inspection 4% for every dollar Page 2 of 6 October 2006 Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi, California Comparison Communities' Existing Plan Check and Inspection Fees All of the comparison communities' charges are based on an approved estimated cost of public improvements. The estimate must be approved by the community. The following are the fees for plan check and inspection services for the comparison communities: City of Stockton Plan Check 5.5% for first $100,000 3% for the next $650,000 2% for every dollar over $750,000 Inspection 3.5% for every dollar Plan Check 5.5% for first $25,000 4.5% for the next $225,000 3.5% for every dollar over $250,000 Inspection 3% for every dollar Plan Check and Inspection together ther 2% for every dollar Plan Check 5.68% for every dollar Inspection 3.5% for every dollar Plan Check 7.22% for first $50,000 4.2% for the next $250,000 1.95% for every dollar over $250,000 Inspection 6.88% for first $200,000 3.85% for the next $300,000 2.75% for the next $500,000 2.25% for every dollar over $1,000,000 Page 3 of 6 October 2006 171 Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi. California Average Charges Table 1 presents the fees for plan check and inspection services for each community along with the average fee charged. The plan check fee charged by the majority of the communities is on a sliding scale. This sliding scale recognizes that the effort to check a small amount of improvements is greater on a dollar for dollar basis than when there are a lot of improvements. The sliding scale recognizes the economy of scale. Two cities (Tracy and Manteca) charge flat rates. However, most of the communities charge a flat rate for inspection services. The average fees charged are as follows: Plan Check 5% for first $25,000 4.83% for the next $25,000 4% for the next $50,000 3.58% for the next $150,000 3.25% for the next $50,000 2.87% for the next $450,000 2.70% for every dollar over $750,000 Inspection 3.65% for first $200,000 3.14% for the next $300,000 2.96% for the next $500,000 2.88% for every dollar over $1,000,000 Table 1 Existing Fees for Plan Check and Inspection Services Plan Check Lodi Lathrop Tracy Stockton Mountain House Manteca Average First 25k 5% 5.5% 5.78% 5.5% 7.22% 2% 5% Next 25k 5% 4.5% 5.78% 5.5% 7.22% 2% 4.83% Next 50k 3% 4.5% 5.78% 5.5% 4.2% 2% 4% Next 150k 3% 1 4.5% 5.78% 3.0% 4.2% 2% 3.58% Next 50k 2% 3.5% 5.78% 3.0% 4.2% 2% 3.25% Next 450k 2% 3.5% 5.78% 3.0% 1.95% 2% 2.87% Next 750k 2% 3.5% 5.78% 2.0% 1.95% 2% 2.70% Inspection First 200k 4% 3% 3.5% 3.5% 6.88% included in plan check fee 1 3.65% Next 300k 4% 3% 3.5% 3.5% 3.85% 3.14% Next 500k 4% 3% 3.5% 3.5% 2.75% 2.96% Over I Mil 4% 3% 3.5% 1 3.5% 1 2.25% 1 2.88% Page 4 of 6 October 2006 Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi, California Modified Average The above average indicates that two things are occurring with Lodi's existing fees. The City is collecting fewer fees on the average than the other comparison communities for plan check services and slightly higher fees for inspection services than their neighboring communities. However to get a more accurate average of the appropriate fees to collect, we recommend that the fees charged by the City of Tracy and the City of Manteca be removed from the averages since they do not recognize the economy of scale and skew the averages. Table 2 presents the revised averages. Plan Check 5.8% for first $25,000 5.56% for the next $25,000 4.3% for the next $50,000 3.68% for the next $150,000 3.2% for the next $50,000 2.49% for the next $450,000 2.36% for every dollar over $750,000 Inspection 4.35% for first $200,000 3.59% for the next $300,000 3.31 % for the next $500,000 3.12% for every dollar over $1,000,000 Table 2 Average Without Tracy and Manteca Plan Check Lodi Lathrop Stockton Mountain House Average First 25k 5% 5.5% 5.5% 7.22% 5.8% Next 25k 5% 4.5% 5.5% 7.22% 5.56% Next 50k 3% 4.5% 5.5% 4.2% 4.3% Next 150k 3% 4.5% 3.0% 4.2% 3.68% Next 50k 2% 3.5% 3.0% 4.2% 3.2% Next 450k 2% 3.5% 3.0% 1.95% 2.49% Next 750k 2% 3.5% 2.0% 1.95% 2.36% Inspection First 200k 4% 3% 3.5% 6.88% 4.35% Next 300k 4% 3% 3.5% 3.85% 3.59% Next 500k 4% 3% 3.5% 2.75% 3.31% Over 1 Mil 4% 3% 3.5% 2.25% 3.12% Page 5 of 6 October 2006 ' Update Existing Fee Structure For Plan Check and inspection Services Lodi, California IRecommended Fee for Plan Check Services I In order for a fee to be usable it must be easily understood and practical to use. The above averages while valuable for comparison has too many levels for simplicity sake. We recommend that the City should still use a sliding scale for plan check I services and that no more than three levels be used. However we recommend that the levels for changing the fees be slightly modified. We recommend the following for plan check services: Plan Check 5 % for first $100,000 3.5% for the next $200,000 2.5% for every dollar over $300,000 Recommended Fee for Inspection Services In order fora fee to be usable it must be easily understood and practical to use. The I above averages while valuable for comparison has too many levels for simplicity sake. We recommend that the City should still use a sliding scale for inspection services and that no more than three levels be used. We recommend the following for Iinspection services: lnsnection 4% for first $250,000 I 3.5% for the next $750,000 3.0% for every dollar over $1,000,000 Page 6 of 6 October 2006 CITY COUNCIL BOB JOHNSON, Mayor JOANNE L. MOUNCE Mayor Pro Tempore LARRY D. HA14SEN SUSAN HITCHCOCK PHIL KATZAKIAN CITY OF LODI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET P.O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 (209)333-6706 FAX (209) 333-6710 EMAIL pwdept@lodi.gov http:\\www.lodi.gov February 16, 2007 Ruark and Associates 2303 Carr�iino Ramon, ;lite. 270 Son Ramon, CA 94583 BLAIR KING City Manager RANDI JOHL City Clerk D. STEVEN SCHWASAIIER City Attorney RICHARD C. PRIMA, JR. Public Works Director SUBJECT: Set Public Hearing for April 4, 2007, to Consider Adoption of Resolution Establishing Public Works Department Engineering Fees for Various Development -Related Engineering Services; Establishing Standard Unit Price Schedule for Calculation of Engineering Fees and Improvement Security; and Establishing Requirement for Warranty Security for Public Improvements Enclosed is a copy of background information on an item on the City Council agenda of Wednesday, February 21, 2007. The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street. This item is on the consent calendar and is usually not discussed unless a Council Member requests discussion. The public is given an opportunity to address iterns on the consent calendar at the appropriate time. If you wish to write to the City Council, please address your letter to City Council, City of Lodi, P. O. Box 3006, Lodi, California, 95241-1910. Be sure to allow time for the mail. Or, you may hared -deliver the letter to City Hall, 221 West Pine Street. If you wish to address the Council at the Council Meeting, be sure to fill out a speaker's card (available at the Carnegie Forum immediately prior to the start of the meeting) and give it to the City Clerk. If you have any questions about communicating with the Council, please contact Randi Johl, City Clerk, at (209) 333-6702. If you have any questions about the item itself, please call Sharon Welch, Senior Civil Engineer, at (209) 333-6800, extension 2659. INUOR, —'� I#chard C. Prima, Jr. _�r t Plublic Works Director RCPlpmf Enclosure C#y Cleric NCC FEEUP0ATE2007.DOC Phuve Pt !thisfax, CITY OF LODI P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SUBMECT: PULIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING FEES FOR VARIOUS DEVELOPMENT -RELATED ENGINEERING SERVICES; ESTABLISHING STANDARD UNIT PRICE SCHEDULE FOR CALCULATION OF ENGINEERING FEES AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY; AND ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENT FOR WARRANTY SECURITY FOR PUI1LIC IMPROVEMENTS PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2007 TEAR SHMTS WANTED: Ore ill g"aaa SEND APF'IDAVIT AND BILL TO: RANDI JOHL, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3008 Lodi, CA 95241-1 91 0 DATIID: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2007 ORDIRED BY: RA14DI JOHL CITY CLERK J JM EA! F'ERRIN, CMS DANA R. CHAPMAN D _ Y Cl CLERK ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK forms\advins.doc _moi:: • • a PUBLIC HIIPRING TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION ESTABLISHIING PUBLIC WO�S DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING FEES FOR VARIOUS DEVELOPME RELATED ENGINEERING SERVICES; ESTABLISHING STANDARD UNIT"ICE SCHEDULE FOR CALCULATION OF ENG+NVEERING FEES AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY; AND ESTABLISHING REOUIREMENT FOR WA*RANTY SECURITY FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS On Friday, February 23, 2007, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a copy of a Notice of Public Hearing to consider resolution establishing Public Works Department engineering fees for various development -related engineering services; establishing standard unit price schedule for calculation of engineering fees and improvement security; and establishing requirement for warranty security for public improvements (attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A") was posted at the following four locations: Lodi Public Library Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February. 23, 2007, at Lodi, California. f- FER 14 PERRIN, CMC UTY CITY CLERK N:1Administration\CLERKIFormxXDECPOST3.DOC ORDERED BY: RAID JOHL CITY CLERK DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi 04 NOME OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: April 18, 2007 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Randi Johl City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF FUNLIC H EAIEMO EXHIBIT]A NOTICE 19 HERMY GIVIEN that on Wednesfy; April 18, 2007, at the hour of 7:00 p.m,, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter: a) Resolution establishing Public Works Department engineering fees for various development -related engineering services; establishing standard unit price schedule for calculation of engineering fees and improvement security; and establishing requirement for warranty security for public improvements Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Public Works Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6706. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 W. Pine Street, 2"d Floor, Lodi, 95240, at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing. If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior lo the close of the public hearing. aJohl f the Lodi City Council: City Clerk 00od: February 21, 2007 =—'MW AFS'A D. Stephen Schwebauer City Attorney 10MRKWu8HEARMTKV�W .do =1W