HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1993 0707 CC REG ITEM 11CTO:
DATIE:
SUBIECT:
AGENDA REPORT
THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
DIRK LOVETT, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER l
JULY 1, 1993 (C.C. MEETING OF JULY 7, 1993)
ITEM.
Council Meeting
�''1 1993
ACTION: L
ff /I � rii�rnnc.L�KL�1.i L�NlGd
By Yia.xi�s tJ
CONSIDER A REQUEST BY GERALD BRIDGEMAN REGARDING OFF SITE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR LDM 90 -7
At t City Council meeting on 12/16/92, the applicant, Gerald Bridgeman requested the City
Cou it to consider revising a condition of the subject four -lot subdivision relative to street
impr vements on Wicks Road adjacent to his property frontage. The condition calls for a 40 -ft.
curb o curb street improvement plus sidewalk.
This tem was continued at Council's direction so members could become more familiar with the
proje t.
The • pplicant was directed to provide City Engineering preliminary plans and estimates for the
condiltioned improvements.
On J, uary 6, 1993 the applicant's engineer provided a very inflated cost estimate and rough plan
sketc of the proposed retaining wall which would be necessary to make the required street
impr vements in front of the existing house.
This
revie
that
attacl
stimate and rough sketch were submitted to the City Council on January 20th, 1993 for
t. It was the Council's direction to continue this item for future discussion until such time
i approved cost estimate and conceptual plan is received and reviewed for all associated
ing costs. The December 16, 1992 and January 20th, 1993 Staff Reports have been
;,d for your reference.
AG NDA REPORT
Jun 29, 1992
Pap 2
Con4eptual plans and cost estimate:
In I ay, Engineering received conceptual full width street improvement plans for Wicks Road
alon the frontage of the Bridgeman property (attached as Exhibit A).
The ew plans show a retaining wall averaging 8 feet in height rather than the 20 foot wall
shom n in the previous submittal. The new cost estimate, however, still showed an unreasonably
high cost for the wall ($124,000). After discussions with the developer's engineer, it was
deLei mined where the error was. The engineer revised the estimate and resubmitted it on June
1, 19P3 (attached as Exhibit B). The engineer's new estimate for all improvements is $185,000,
of w ich $68,000 is for the wall.
Belic ving that the wall estimate is still high, Staff had two reputable contractors provide rough
estirr ates. These estimates ranged from $30,000 - $36,000. $40,000 would be a very
cons rvative number to be used for discussion at this point. Actual costs will need to be refined
and i nay go up or down depending on soils engineering tests and recommendations, and City
Engi eering plan check corrections.
The reliminary plans and estimate are acceptable for City Council discussion, assuming that the
wall rice is $28,000 too high, but Engineering will not proceed with formal plan check until we
recei e direction regarding the extent of improvements that the City will require.
Cum ntly, all plan check fees for the improvements ($4,409.88) have been expended in the
prelh iinary review of several versions of conceptual plans and estimates, correspondence, staff
repor s, field reviews with the developer and engineer, and attendance at meetings. When the
City ouncil decides the extent of the improvements to Wicks Road, we would like to request
that r. Bridgeman pay all new plan check fees (based on the new cost estimate) and any
outs nding costs expended during our preliminary review work (should not exceed $700
inclu ing City 30 %).
1) Authorize Staff to collect additional plan check fees to cover costs incurred to date
and for further plan check; and
of the following courses of action:
DIL
KDA REPORT
29, 1993
3
(Continued)
2) Modify Street Improvement Conditions as deemed appropriate; or
3) There be no change to the condition, but the applicant be allowed to pay for the
costs of improvements in lieu of construction at this time with the additional
stipulation that he sign the appropriate documents recognizing that the garage may
have to be removed or modified at his expense at a later date, and provide the
necessary offers of dedication for future slope easements with such provisions
applicable to subsequent owners. (Recommended per the staff report dated
December 16, 1992).
nts
-P
-P
'O
I
N`I CKS
• y r►
Ck
toP
I� !f N
;0 IO 110 10
1�
-P
`O
1LP
�CP
C:)
O
•O ,
k
'-�(5000—s
• Cp
w
H
H
H
599.36
� U
If
VDAEW
cV
EDGE OF P 5 �♦ a >' w g9°
oi° N Gtl {�� z in .y am' tC � " t
1 s.
6.6!� = � � �19G "G.v: y.t•! {I�"'. n� � � + 59.18
4
Klo�,cprs?"1 � �.�+'•'�" ~ \`. 588.30
rr*R 6.09 ,
585.54
7 ' 582.76 1 -� 586.
mii 42 GPGE
-
4.89 58'.00 ! .3- '583.89 HOUSE ` \ 6'
1
-�'
+
C)
O) A-
1, k
t
k
'-�(5000—s
• Cp
w
H
H
H
599.36
� U
If
VDAEW
cV
EDGE OF P 5 �♦ a >' w g9°
oi° N Gtl {�� z in .y am' tC � " t
1 s.
6.6!� = � � �19G "G.v: y.t•! {I�"'. n� � � + 59.18
4
Klo�,cprs?"1 � �.�+'•'�" ~ \`. 588.30
rr*R 6.09 ,
585.54
7 ' 582.76 1 -� 586.
mii 42 GPGE
-
4.89 58'.00 ! .3- '583.89 HOUSE ` \ 6'
1
-�'
+
C)
EXH
BIT B L.B. KOVACS, M.S., P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
798 MOORPARK AVENUE
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021
NSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE - LDM 90 -7
CITY OF
MOORPARK
srREET
IMPROVEMENTS
Item
Unit
No.
Item Quantity
Unit
Cost
1.
Finish Aggreg. Rock Base .19 /in.. 9924
sq.ft.
$1.14
2.
Finish Asphalt Concrete .35 /in.. 9924
sq.ft.
$1.40
3.
oncrete sidewalk 4" thick....... 2155
sq.ft.
$2.44
4.
lonc. driveway res'l. 6" thick.. 416
sq.ft.
$3.90
5.
oncrete curb and gutter......... 431
ln.ft.
$12.50
6.
ksphalt concrete berm............ 115
ln.ft.
$4.67
7.
3aw cutting ...................... 453
In.ft.
$1.06
8.
Class "A" Reinforced Concrete.... 151
cu.yd.
$450.00
TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS...
REMOVAL
AND ADJUSTMENTS
Item
Unit
No.
Item Quantity
Unit
Cost
1. Asphalt
........................... 3300
sq.ft.
$1.50
2. A
just Water Valve Box to Grade... 1
each
$150.00
3. R
locate Power Poles .............. 2
each
$5,000.00
4. Tree,
Shrub and Fence Removals....
L.S.
5. R
locate Water Meter ..............
L.S.
6. Ralocate
Gas Meter ................
L.S.
TOTAL REMOVAL AND ADJUSTMENTS
ADDITIONAL
DIRECT COSTS
Item
No.
Item
Unit
1. GRADING
Remove, Import, Place & Compact Materia
L.S.
2. G
OTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
Initial Reports & Compaction Testing
L.S.
3. CIVIL
ENGINEERING
Design, Const. Drawings & Const. Stakin
L.S.
4. C
NSTRUCTION STAKING
L.S.
5. C
NSTRUCTION SUPERVISION
L.S.
TOTAL ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS
COST SUMMARY
Street Improvements
Removal &
Adjustments
Additional
Direct
Cost
Sub Total
Add 10%
TOTAL
Prepared
By: Les Kovacs
D
to Prepared: May 6, 1993 (REV 6/1)
C
ecked By:
D
to Checked:
L.B. KOVACS, M.S., P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
EXH I I T B 798 MOORPARK AVENUE
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021
LDM 90 -1 (BRIDGEMAN) 5/6/93
(REV 6/1/93)
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE OF RETAINING WALL REQURED
FOR STANDARD STREET IMPROVEMENTS ALONG A PORTION OF THE
SOUTH SIDE OF WICKS ROAD
-------------------------------------------------------
; CONC.
; TOTAL
FROM ;
TO
; LENGTH ;
HEIGHT
;CU FT /
;CONCRETE;
STA ;
STA
; FT
FT
LN FT
; CU FT ;
6 +60 ;
7 +00
; 40
8
; 16.3
; 652 ;
6 +20
6 +60
; 40
7
; 12.5
; 500 ;
5 +60 ;
6 +20
; 60
7.5
14.4
; 864 ;
5 +20
5 +60
; 40
8
; 16.3
; 652 ;
5 +00
5 +20
; 20
9
; 18.2
; 364 ;
4 +80 ;
5 +00
; 25*
12
; 25.4
; 635
4 +60 ;
4 +80
20
10
20.2
; 404
4,071
151 CU YDS
* INCLUDES
5 FT
RETURN
COST @ $450 PER CU YD - $67,950
p0r
JJ. ..
f
TO:
8
MOORPARK ITEM/to A .
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021
M E M O R A N D U M
The Honorable City Council
• Steven Rusny, City Manager
(805) 529 -6864
E: December 11, 1992 (CC Meeting of 12/16/92)
:OORPARK. CALIFC'"
CltY Council Meel:r.cg
of /,;z - lam/1 199
ACTK)N:_ K/ ' /,C
Consider Request from Gerald Bridgeman Concerning
LDM 90 -7
Several weeks ago -Mr. Bridgeman asked for Council
consideration to revise the conditions of the subject map to
allow him to not make improvements to Wicks Road consistent
with adopted City standards or to modify the required
improvements. The adopted City standards call for a 40'
s reet from curb to curb plus sidewalk. Mr. Bridgeman gave
a presentation to the Council explaining the impact on the
s. ope of this driveway which would prevent access to the
existing one car garage and the apparent removal of several
trees near the property line. This matter was referred to
t e Community Development Committee (Lawrason /Perez).
SION:
Committee and City staff, including representatives of the
C ty Engineer's office, have discussed this on two occasions.
A number of options have been discussed including:
1 Status quo (existing City standards);
2 Require no improvements;
3 Partial improvements to the north side as proposed by
Mr. Bridgeman;
4 Full improvement of the north side of Wicks Road;
5 Vacating the road and have the affected property owners
accept it as a private road;
6 Modification of the present City standard to allow a 20%
slope for the driveway which would result in a small dip
in the pavement in the vicinity of the driveway. This
option has been presented by the City Engineer.
PAUI W I Awl. ASON JR JOHN F. WO /NIAK SCOT i MON' ,,)Mf Ii'• REHNAHDO M Pf HI ! HOY f IAI I f Y J11 Mayor May Or PrO li)m COuno11Trer'I hr Coull "'Imendrer Grunt dn:,!mhr••
Allow Mr. Bridgeman to make any needed property
dedication for any slope easements that may be needed,
deposit the current cost of improvements and related
costs with the City to meet his obligation, sign a
waiver on potential future impact to the existing single
car garage and defer the actual improvements;
At Mr. Bridgeman's cost, perform a study to determine if
a 32' instead of a 40' street is acceptable. After the
committee meetings, the City Engineer informed me that
it would cost an estimated $8,000.00 to survey Wicks
Road between Moorpark Avenue and its terminus to
determine the precise location of the right -of -way. If
32' of construction is allowed, it would appear that we
would want to move it as close to the toe of the slope
on the north side as feasible to avoid the construction
problems on the south side. At this time, I don't know
the total cost of the improvements Mr. Bridgeman is
required to make to determine whether it would be cost
effective for him to perform such a study.
nce Mr. Bridgeman will receive the benefit of a
bdivision, he should meet the City standards for
provements to his property. He has indicated he does not
nt to make the improvements because of the impact on the
isting single car garage. In pure economic terms, he will
ve the benefit of three additional lots for sale or
velopment as a trade off for any changes to, loss of, or
stricted use of the existing garage. While there are
veral options to consider, I believe the best one is to
ve Mr. Bridgeman prepare the plans to conform to existing
ty standards and, at his option, deposit the equivalent
ount of monies for the improvements and related costs with
e City in lieu of actual construction. Minor improvements
the road as proposed by Mr. Bridgeman offer short term
nefits but does so at the expense of the long term
Drovement of the road.
RECOMMENDATION:
is recommended that there be no change to the condition
t the applicant be allowed to pay for the costs of
provements in lieu of construction at this time with the
ditional stipulation that he sign the appropriate documents
cognizing that the garage may have to be removed or
dified at his expense at a later date, and provide the
cessary offers of dedication for future slope easements
th such provisions applicable to subsequent owners.
..
\wp51 \ccagenda \Bridgemn.LDM
�.UQrIL &
2710 WEST KELLY ROAD
NFWBURY PARK, CAI IFORNIA 91320
TELEPHONE (805) 499 -0481
er 15, 1992
Ci y Council Members
Ci y of Moorpark
79 Moorpark Avenue
M rpark, CA 93021
Mb Puz
LDM Land Division Map 90 -7, Applicant Bridgeman
Dekr Council Members:
I has recently come to my attention that Mr. Bridgeman is
a ealing the condition placed on his land division map
r uiring him to improve the south side of Wicks Road. I would
s ongly urge the Council not to waive this condition. Policies
m t be applied uniformly. The original developer on the east
e of Wicks Road was required to make road /water /sewer
improvements and I do not understand why Mr. Bridgeman considers
h s project to be any different.
AE a property owner on Wicks Road, I strongly urge the Council
t support staff recommendations and require Mr. Bridgeman to
i prove the road as a condition of his land division map.
R spectfully yours,
G �.,o,_
$ LENE HOLMES
DEC 15'92 21 =16
fid5499P4Ft Pi ;f =:. ���: