HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 1995/12/12
Notice is hereby given that the Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency has called and will convene a special joint
meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council on December 12, 1995 at 6:00 p.m., immediately following
the regular City Council meeting, in Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, California to consider, deliberate and act upon the following:
~
Revised Agenda
Tuesday, December 12, 1995 Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Public Services Building
(immediately following the City Council meeting)
Special Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agencv/Citv Council
of the Citv of Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL: Agency/Council Members Alevy -, Moot -' Padilla -'
Rindone -, and Chair Horton -
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None.
BUSINESS
The following item(s) will be considered, deliberated, and acted upon by the Redevelopment Agency. If you wish
to speak to any item described in the Agenda before or during consideration of that item, please fill out the
"Request to Speak Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or
the City Clerk prior to the meeting. The Dublic mav onlv address the Allencv on Closed Session items Drior to
the Allencv conveninll the Closed Session. (Complete the green fonn to speak in favor of the staff
recommendation; complete the pink fonn to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Comments are
limited to three minutes per individual.
3. JOINT
AGENCY
RESOLUTION 1477
and
COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 18133 FINDING THAT THE CITY'S FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS IS NOT
REQUIRED, AUfHORlZING THE APPROPRlA TION OF AN
ADDffiONAL $10,487 FOR CIP PROJECT GG-154; AND AWARDING
THREE CONTRACTS TO THE SELECTED LOW-BIDDERS FOR
EACH OF THE THREE COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT--Council
approved a C1P Project during the FY95-96 budget approval process for
remodeling and ADA compliance for Suite B of the Legislative Office and
"\ dec'are :inder penalty of perju¡-f'm!tqnj ¡y, Development Department buildings. As part of the City's
employed by the City of Chu!a Vista in the
CommunIty Development Department and that I posted
this Agenda/Notice on the Builetin Board at the
Public S~rVices Building an~~ity ~all ~
DATE:/o('-r-~GNED . i{u-,,-, , "T-"
Agenda -2- December 12, 1995
matching funds for the Federal Economic Development Agency grant, Council
committed to housing the Border Environmental Commerce Alliance in the
Civic Center complex. Council approved making modifications to the
Legislative Office Building to house the BECA and five Housing-related staff
from Community Development. Supplementary appropriation is needed to
complete funding of the project. Staff recommends approval of the
resolutions. (Community Development Department) (4/5ths Vote Required)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the generoJ public to address the Redevelopment Agency on any subject matter within
the Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the
Redevelopment Agency from taJ..ing action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Fonn" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to
the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up
action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
OTHER BUSINESS
4. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
5. CHAIR'SIMAYOR'S REPORTiS)
6. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to (a closed session and thence to) the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on
December 19, 1995 at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers.
. . . . .
CLOSED SESSION
Unless Agency Counsel, the Executive Director, or the Redevelopment Agency states otherwise at this time, the
Agency will discuss and deliberate on the following item(s) of business which are permitted by law to be the subject
of a closed session discussion, and which the Agency is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect
the interests of the City. The Agency is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of.ti11flJ action
taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed sessions,
the videotaping will be terminated at this point in order to save costs so that the Agency's return from closed
session, reports of.ti11flJ action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report of final
action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the Office of the Secretary to the
Redevelopment Agency and the City Clerk's Office.
Agenda -3- December 12. 1995
7. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
Give Instructions to Negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
. Proposed sale of property: Shangri-La Property at 980 F Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
Negotiating Party: John D. Goss on behalf of the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency and
Larry Killeen on behalf of the San Diego Unified Port District
Price and Payment Terms.
8. REPORT OF ACTION(S) TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
......
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), request
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting,
activity, or service request such accommodation at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and
five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment
Agency for specific information at 619.691.5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD)
at 619.585.5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing imp:rired.
[c: \ WP51 IAGENCY\AGENDAS\12- 12-95.AGD]
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 3
Meeting Date 12/12/95
ITEM TITLE:
JOINT
AGENCY RESOLUTION 1477
and
COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 18133 FINDING THAT THE CITY'S FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS IS NOT
REQUIRED, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF AN
ADDITIONAL $10.487 FOR CIP PROJECT GG-154; AND
AWARDING THREE CONTRACTS TO THE SELECTED LOW-
BIDDERS FOR EACH OF THE THREE COMPONENTS OF THE
PROJECT
SUBMITTED BY: Ch,;, S,'omoo,. Commoo;" D""opß~r;"""'
REVIEWED BY: John D. Goss, City Manag~ 1 5ths Vote: Yes X No_)
ncil Referral No. N/A
BACKGROUND: During the FY 1995-96 budget approval process, the City Council approved
CIP Project #GG-154 and appropriated a total of $41,000 to cover the staff estimated
remodeling and ADA compliance costs for Suite B of the Legislative Office Building (LOB) and
the Community Development Department. Since the staff estimated project cost was
significantly less than $50,000, the formal bidding process pursuant to Section 1009 of the
City Charter was not required. A copy of the original Supplemental Budget Report is included
as Attachment 1. The City Council had previously committed to housing the Border
Environmental Commerce Alliance (BECA) staff in the Civic Center complex as part of the
City's matching funds for the federal Economic Development Administration grant.
To that end, Administration evaluated various alternatives for housing the BECA staff and for
relieving the currently overcrowded condition in the Community Development Department.
Staff presented the recommended plan (which was approved by Council) to make
modifications to Suite B of the LOB to house three (3) BECA staff employees plus five (5)
Housing-related employees. The project also included minor modifications to the Community
Development Building in order to adequately house the remaining Community Development
Department employees. One Community Development staff member is currently housed
outside of the Department and the three BECA employees have been working in inadequate
office conditions in Suite C of the LOB.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council/Agency: 1) Find that the formal bidding
process is not required; 2) Authorize the appropriation of an additional $10.487 for CIP Project
#GG-154 from the following sources: a) $3,517 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing
Fund, b) $4,387 from GG-144, ADA building compliance funds, and c) $2,583 from HOME
funds; and 3) To direct the Mayor to execute three standard two-party public works contracts
with the selected project low-bidders as follows:
a. Walter Kirkwood Construction for Suite B of the Legislative Office Building
(including ADA compliance) ($31,125, includes ten percent contingency);
.:3 -I
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 12/12/95
b. Golden Pacific Construction for the Community Development Department
($10,780); and,
c. Com-Aid for the installation of communications cabling for both buildings
($9,583).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION: After the Council budget approval, Public Works and Community Development
staff had building modifications plans prepared and then competitively bid the project
(pursuant to Section 1009 "Contracts on Public Works" of the City Charter). in three distinct
components: 1) the LOB and ADA compliance (applicable only to the LOB), 2) the Community
Development Department Building, and 3) the "communications" component relative to both
buildings (ie., conduit and cabling for computers, phones, fax machines etc.,). After receipt
of the bids, staff then worked with the three low bidders in order to further reduce their
proposals. However, it is still necessary for an additional $10.487 to be appropriated in order
to execute the respective contracts and complete the project.
As the following two tables indicate, the selected low-bid contractors are: 1) Walter Kirkwood
Construction for the LOB and ADA, 2) Golden Pacific Construction for the Community
Development Building, and 3) Com-AID, Inc., for the computer and communications work for
both buildings.
Table 1: LOB/ADA Compliance and Community Development
II Contractor I LOB - Amount I CD - Amount I
Waycon Construction $39.451
Golden Pacific Construction $35.400 $9,800
M & M Construction $30,500 $16,300
Walter Kirkwood Construction $28,295 $12,836
Table 2: Communications
Contractor Amount
Com-AID $8,712
Construction Electronics $10,625
King Communications $13.426
NEC $15,874
Pursuant to the previously approved project, staff had provided a projected total project cost
of $41,000. Table 3 compares the "sources" of funds with the "uses" of funds to illustrate
the need for the additional funding:
3-2-.
Page 3. Item~
Meeting Date 12/12/95
Table 3: Sources and Uses of Funds
Estimated Actual Bid
Funding Sources Amount Use of Funds Amount
Low/Mod $26,000 LOB/ADA $28,295
ADA $8,000 CD Remodel $9,800
HOME $7,000 Communications $8,712
Sub-Total $46.807
10% Contingency $4,680
Total $41,000 Total $51,487
As the above table indicates the project bids came in $10,487 above the projections provided
by staff. It needs to be noted that the staff original projections did include a 10%
contingency, and that the contractor bids did not. Of the additional $10,487 needed for the
project, $3.517 is recommended to come from Low/Mod Funds, $4,387 from ADA and
$2,583 from HOME funds. Table 4 below shows how these recommended amounts were
arrived at:
Table 4: Sources of Additional Funds
Component Estimate Bid Difference Contingency Total
w/o cont. (10%) Needed
ADA (LOB) $8,000 $11,261 $3,261 $1,126 $4.387
Communications $7,000 $8,712 $1,712 $871 $2,583
(HOME)
Remodel - Both $26,000 $26,834 $ 834 $2,683 $3,517
Buildings
(Low/Mod)
Total $41,000 $46,807 $5,807 $4.680 $
Increase in Project Cost
It also needs to be noted that the project scope did not increase in any way. In fact, a
window previously planned for the Community Development Building had to be removed
because it was simply too expensive. The reason for the necessary additional amount is really
a function of not giving enough information to the Public Works staff at the beginning. Public
Works did not have the benefit, at the time of their original projection, of any preliminary
construction plans. They merely were working from what they knew about the project and
some very simple schematics drawn by staff and included as part of the original report to
Council. Without some level of approval by Council, staff did not feel comfortable with
,3-3
Page 4, Item~
Meeting Date 12/12/95
proceeding with construction bid drawings at that time which could have been used by Public
Works to provide a more refined estimate. Therefore, it is simply a case of Public Works staff
giving their best guess and really not knowing until the actual project is bid.
It should also be noted that even with the competitive bids increasing to a total of $46,807,
the project cost still falls below the $50,000 threshold established in the Charter for the
formal bidding process. It is only after inclusion of the 10% contingency that the costs
exceed that threshold. However, staff is confident that had the formal bidding process been
implemented (even though not required to do so), that the project bids would not have been
lower than the bids received.
FISCAL IMPACT: The project was originally approved utilizing three sources of "restricted
funds" which, in essence, do not have a material effect on the General Fund. It was
previously discovered and reported to Council that the HOME funds could not be used for any
modifications or rehabilitation activities, however, they can be used for physical capital
(chairs, desks etc.,). Therefore, the HOME funds were recommended to be used for the
communications component, and are being recommended for funding the additional amount
necessary to complete that portion of the project. Housing staff advises that there are ample
HOME funds available for completion of this project.
The ADA compliance funds are budgeted within the CIP GG-144 budget. Building and
Housing has been advised of the need for additional ADA compliance funds in order to
complete the required improvements for the Legislative Office Building. Building and Housing
advised Community Development staff that the additional request is reasonable and that the
funds are available for this project. It was determined that there was no need for additional
ADA work to be done on the Community Development Building.
The remaining portion of the project, the actual construction modifications in both buildings,
was recommended to be funded utilizing the restricted Low/Mod Housing Funds. It was
determined that it would be an appropriate expense since it was also discovered by staff that
housing funds could be used to fund modifications that will be used to house housing-related
employees, and could also fund any modifications to the existing building vacated by housing
employees in order to make it "useable" for other staff.
As will be provided in the mid-year budget report, the Low/Mod Fund is projecting a current
year $607,295 surplus with a projected ending fund balance of $2,095,023. The additional
$3,517 requested from the housing fund will have no material impact on the overall Agency
financial picture since the Agency budget is looked at separately, in terms of "restricted"
versus "non-restricted" funds.
m:lhomelcommdevlhayneslreportslremodel. , '3 ..3-tf
Attachment 1
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REPORT #~
June 6, 1995
6-~~
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council è,<':1~);C'-!7,~
f" ^ é?,\
VIA: John D. Goss, City Manager.f' /, c,?' .' 'n' '. '\~\
" I"'J r'c <'
, J I ",'" ".'J '. "
FROM: Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager J I" C, , . ,¡
Chris Salomone, Community Development D1~ector ,
SUBJECT: OFFICE SPACE MODIFICATIONS - LEGISLATIVE OFFIC~ BLDG.
AND ISSUES RELATED TO COUNCIL OFFICES
As Council is aware, Suites B and C in the Legislative Office
Building (LOB) became available for use by the City after the space
was vacated earlier this year by Assemblywoman Ducheny and State
Senator Peace (who relocated to the much smaller Suite E). As
illustrated on the layout of the LOB provided in Attachment 1,
approximately 2,900 sq. ft. of space is now available in LOB suites
Band C, with approximately 1,450 sq. ft. available in each suite.
Staff has reviewed several alternatives for the use of this vacated
space and is recommending that Suite B in the LOB be utilized for
the Border Environmental Commerce Alliance (BECA) staff, whom the
City has previously committed to house in the Civic Center complex,
and to help relieve the current overcrowded conditions in the
Community Development building. In order to accomplish these
changes, an additional CIP Project is recommended to be added to
the 1995-96 Capital Improvement Program to make some modifications
to Suite B in the LOB along with some minor modifications to the
existing Community Development building.
There are several remaining alternatives regarding the use of Suite
C in the LOB, and a related issue regarding providing more
appropriate individual offices for the four Councilmembers who
currently share one office area. Staff is therefore also seeking
Council direction regarding the options discussed in this report
concerning Suite C and the Council Office area.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Approve in concept the addition of CIP Project GG-154
(Modifications to LOB Suite B and Community Development) to
the 1995-96 Capital Improvement Program, and direct staff to
include an appropriation of $33,000 ($26,000 from Low and
Moderate Income Housing Funds and $7,000 from HOME funds) to
fund the project in the final FY 1995-96 CIP.
2. Provide direction to staff regarding the options discussed in
this report concerning LOB Suite C and the Council Office
area, or al ternati vely, appoint a Council Subcommittee to
further review these issues.
3-5
Honorable Mayor and city council
Legislative Office Building Modifications
June 6, 1995
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Backaround
The Legislative Office Building is broken into five suites. The
size and current status of each suite is summarized below and a
layout of the LOB is provided in Attachment 1.
Suite Sa. Feet Status
A 304 Senior Volunteer Patrol Program
B 1,450 Vacant (previously leased to State for Senator
Peace)
C 1,458 Vacant (previously leased to State for
Assemblywoman Ducheny)
D 575 Leased to County for Supervisor Cox
E 428 Leased to State for Senator Peace
When staff became aware that Senator Peace and Assemblywoman
Ducheny were going to vacate Suites Band C, staff checked with
Congressman Filner's office to see if they might be interested in
leasing one of the vacated suites, but the Congressman's office
indicated they are not currently interested.
The recommended use of Suite B and potential uses of Suite C (and
potential modifications to the Council Office area) are addressed
in separate sections below.
. Suite Band Communi tv DeveloDment Buildina
Under the proposed Border Environmental Commerce Alliance (BECA)
program, the City is responsible for providing the office space
necessary for the 3 additional staff members that will administer
the BECA program. The housing of the 3 employees is part of the
city's "matching grant" for the U.S. Economic Development Agency
(EDA) grant awarded to the city. The addition of the three BECA
employees will exacerbate an already overcrowded condition for the
Community Development Department. Currently the Department has 19
staff members, including' Joe Monaco, Environmental Projects
Manager, who is housed in the Management Services Department. The
3 BECA employees, who .are expected to begin work on July 5, will
bring the Department total to 22. Therefore, it was ~etermined
that the Community Development Department had the most immediate
and pressing need for additional space.
Given the immediate need for housing the BECA employees, staff also
analyzed the overall space needs for the entire Community
Development Department because of the existing overcrowded
3-~
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Legislative Office Building Modifications
June 6, 1995
Page 3
situation, including the lack of adequate conference room space in
the Department. The goal was to present a modest and feasible
"plan" for: 1) accommodating BECA staff in suite B of the LOB, 2)
utilizing the remaining space in suite B to accommodate the
transfer of additional staff members in the Community Development
Department to help alleviate the overcrowded condition, 3)
improving the conditions and utilization of the existing
departmental work space, 4) improving conference room space to meet
with the public and the development community, and 5) funding such
a plan with little impact on the budget.
With the above identified general goals in mind, staff came up with
the recommended plan that includes accommodating BECA staff plus
the transfer of another 5 housing-related Community Development
employees to LOB suite B. Housing staff was determined to be the
best candidates for transfer because of the need to accommodate the
public (and the projected long-term increased demand due to
creation of the Housing Authority), and the ability to use housing
funds for the modifications in both the LOB and the existing
Community Development building.
Attached are copies of the internally generated proposed layouts
for the modifications to LOB suite B (Attachment 2) and to the
Community Development Department (Attachment 3). The major
modifications and predominate share of the cost is related to the
LOB. This is based upon the need to: 1) bring conduit to the LOB
and run wiring for the city's telephone system and micro computer
local area network system, 2) remove unnecessary internal bathrooms
that utilize valuable space, and 3) create 2 smaller enclosed
offices from the existing "large" office previously occupied by
Senator Peace. Additionally, the plan for the Community
Development building calls for the creation of 2 enclosed offices
(now currently used as partitioned office space), plus the
- expansion of a currently inadequate enclosed office in the
Community Development Department.
The estimates for each part of the plan are as follows:
suite B - LOB: $25,200*
Communi ty Dev.: 7.800
Total: $33,000
* The $25,200 amount does not include $8.,000 for ADA
compliance in the LOB that has already been budgeted.
The Community Development Department is seriously in need of
adequate conference room space. Currently, the department's only
conference room is the lunch/break room, which is inadequate for
meetings that involve more than 6 people. The proposed plan
therefore also calls for the utilization of Assemblywoman Ducheny's
former office within Suite C as the Community Development
Department Conference Room.
..3-7
Honorable Mayor and city Council
Legislative Office Building Modifications
June 6, 1995
Page 4
Since the BECA staff will be hired before the proposed LOB
modifications to Suite B can be completed, it is planned to house
them temporarily in Suite C until the work on Suite B is completed.
suite C and Council Offices
There are several potential uses staff has identified for Suite C
in the Legislative Office Building. As discussed in the previous
section, at least a portion of Suite C would be very beneficial as
a conference room, particularly for BECA and Community Development
staff. The office (formerly occupied by Assemblywoman Ducheny)
between the vault and the current bathroom in Suite C (See
Attachments 1 and 2) would be the most likely area for such a
conference room, because it has about 235 square feet, has an
exterior door, and can be easily accessed directly from Suite B if
the recommended modifications to Suite B are approved.
When the issue of Assemblywoman Ducheny moving out of the LOB and
Senator Peace moving into a smaller suite in the LOB was previously
discussed by the city Council, staff was asked to review whether
the vacated office areas provided an opportunity to provide private
offices for the four Councilmembers who currently share one office
area.
Individual offices for the four Councilmembers who currently share
one office could certainly be created in suite C of the LOB, but
the logistics of having such offices in a separate building from
the rest of the Office of the Mayor and City Council would likely
be a problem. Particularly given the limited staff in the Mayor
and Council Office, the workability of such a separation into two
buildings is a real concern.
.If individual offices are to be created for the four
Councilmembers, staff would therefore suggest instead that such
offices be created in the existing Council Office area. An example
of such a potential layout is provided in Attachment 4.
Such a layout would use a significant portion of what is normally
the public seating area of the existing Council Conference Room.
The remaining Conference Room area could be large enough for
Council meetings with limited public attendance if the public were
seated along the wall that separates the Conference Room from the
Mayor's Office.
The estimated cost of remodeling the Council Offices as indicated
in Attachment 4 is approximately $25,000 - $35,000, depending on
such issues as whether some of the walls would continue to be
glass, whether the carpeting would be replaced, and the degree of
modification that would be needed in the ~eating/ventilation/air
conditioning system and in the ceiling and lighting fixtures.
Staff has not fully evaluated the appropriateness of using Civic
Center Development Impact Fees for this potential project, but it
J-?
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Legislative Office Building Modifications
June 6, 1995
Page 5
is likely that at least a portion of the cost could be paid from
the DlF.
Some of the City offices currently located in the El Dorado
Building, such as Purchasing, Open Space Coordinator, and/or
Conservation Coordinator, could be moved to LOB Suite C.
Relocating offices such as these to Suite C would be of some
benefit by simply being located closer to other City offices, but
more importantly the office space they vacated in the El Dorado
Building hopefully could be leased out to generate revenue for the
General Fund. Such revenue would be in the range of $5,000 -
$10,000 per year.
As indicated above, there are several possibilities regarding the
potential uses of suite C in the LOB, so staff is requesting
further direction from Council.regarding the issue of individual
offices for the four Councilmembers before staff further evaluates
the alternatives. Council may want to consider appointing a
Council Subcommittee to further review this issue.
FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended $33,000 for ClP Project GG-154 (Modifications to
LOB Suite B and Community Development) is proposed to be funded by
a combination of Low and Moderate Income Housing funds and HOME
funds. As previously indicated, the city was required to provide
a 20% "matching grant" in order to receive the federal EDA grant.
As part of that matching grant, the City pledged to house the three
employees, and therefore, there was no provision in the BECA budget
to help pay these costs.
Staff has determined that LoW/Mod funds can be used to fund
modifications that will be used to house employees that will be
. working on housing related projects, and also fund any
modifications to the existing building vacated by housing related
employees in order to make it "useable" for other staff. HOME
funds cannot be used for any modifications or rehabilitation
activities, however they can be used for physical capital (chairs,
desks etc.,). Therefore, the cabling necessary for the telephone
system and computer network has been determined to be eligible for
HOME funding. Therefore, the proposed breakdown is as follows:
HOME Funds: 7,000
LoW/Mod Funds: 26.000
Total $33,000
.J - 9
Honorable Mayor and city council
Legislative Office Building Modifications
June 6, 1995
Page 6
As outlined in the Agency's proposed budget for 1995-96, the
Low/Mod Fund will be replenished due to the reimbursement of
$620,000 from HOME funds for the purchase of the property for the
Trolley Terrace project. The 1995-96 projected ending fund balance
for the Low/Mod Fund is $920,575.
There may also be a fiscal impact in regard to potential changes
discussed in this report concerning LOB Suite C and the Council
Offices, but those fiscal impacts will be addressed in a subsequent
report after Council has provided direction regarding which
alternatives to further evaluate.
Attachments:
1. Existing Layout of Legislative Office Building (LOB)
2. Proposed Modifications to LOB Suite B
3. Proposed Modifications to Community Development building
4. Potential Modifications to Council Offices
m:\shared\admin\lobspace.mem
~
..3 -Ið
Existin La out of LOB V ..
t..
,<a:.
. tT
~ Q. .
L L ~ .. -
".. u . - >..,.
~ Æ ~ . ~~ ~";R
W Q. .
t.. ~
6 ~ ~"
0- ~ fíJ
en Jí...
c
~ ~ ~
~.~ i
... ...
5 :s
f 02:
~ ..
U t..
¡;: ro i
Is ~ 0
~ ~ ~
J) ~
.. c
: f
In
~
..J
.' .J;
~ ~
... .
Is ~
. ~
"
c-
UI7'
.
~ ~ro ~
~ ~~ ~
~ 111" ... ~
- ~ ~
(
..
"
~
.3 -II
ATTACHMENT 2
Proposed Modifications to
Suite B
¡¡
, .
; ~
: ~ S ~~
V\~
lI.J - to,
¿ ~ ~ ~~
' ç :z:: ~
, ~ ~ /'7 .
V) J
\.b N '-b
~ ~ -JI, ~
... J ~ i ~
,tr¡ VI ~
<.!!' ¿.e-;:;:; ><
~ ~ ~..P ¡", J .....
-.. ,..s; a-
tQ' . tJ J
~ ~
~ t'Q
~ ~
"-.:
Q ~
I a.
€ 'BEt.\- AI,t\Oo.
-.J - 1 Ass;s-b...\- . G,.
~ '" -\1 ,
~ ~ ~
:J i ¿?:f ~
s: CG<f # t
~
. :'.'. AI::
kt
~ j
r;:¡
~ v
~ 6
~ ~ ~
.. a " "
--.,.6/.! C. 'to c.S ;;
>;:~ :¡~~-.: =--==:- ~ d
~r¡ q
'~I <...b
1-' V) II ë::: w
--.I 'I ¡:: ~
::J I ~u
~ I >< L...
.:::> I '""<::I
3-/2.
/',-
, ~
\::, -,' "', .- -::::-
,V.. - . , ~ ArT"""" 3 .~
~~'- u', Propos d '
" '" ' e ""Hk '
"3"~/ '" t, C,~". ,,"'
.~ nl Dev.
L B1d
" "3 ó _. 9.
"J~ . 2, ':
l-..~ '. )
.. . I<
I I<
" I
"
E .-a-, ,
~ 1.
w 1/
2: "
&
...J
W
Gj
C r
DL
ç >
~ ~ ~~ ..,a-::
L W !!
~ I.
V I
. .
- { 1
.1<
"
~
~.. I 1
.:::;4 110<
"
-;;
.,
¿ ';. ~
~ ,D
" ;£ j '"5
" i
J £
,,'1 :;!
I< -ž i
f ,..~.,.-.~",
p/1'
..3 -/3 ~ tX1'I.,".'"
~ ~",
--- ~ W .
. --_::~ ',',
".i
/1
- -'~ ~, -, ATTACHMENT 4 . " t"ons
Potential M?dlflCa 1
- ~~dl Mh~
l "',
' , tJ, ,
i1\ ~ . ~ ;£..
! G
Co II : :
", I /L: "
N , /, ::
.-i I, "
! ! I I I
'i'- ----' / I ibdI ' C
i I '. \ Ji', I, g, .
\ L-J ttJ
¡ '.. : "- E .
' , "
"\ "
. "
lD "
~
(\J
~ . I
~ :U
I "
"
. ::
, I
? ~ :,:
' .
. L
l ~
'" 0 "
'I' U"
' "
' "
' : ::
~ ; I 0 I
I ,I "--"::::
I . ----
. I
~ "
K 1.4/6" ) {3-/'1-
REDEVElOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION 1477
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 18133
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDING THAT THE CITY'S FORMAL BIDDING PROCESS
IS NOT REQUIRED, AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF AN ADDITIONAL
$10,487 FOR CIP PROJECT GG-154; AND AWARDING THREE CONTRACTS TO THE
SELECTED LOW-BIDDERS FOR EACH OF THE THREE COMPONENTS OF THE
PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City Council previously committed to housing the Border Environmental
Commerce Alliance staff in the Civic Center complex as part of the City's matching funds for
the Federal Economic Development Administration grant, and
WHEREAS, staff presented the recommendation to house the three Border
Environmental Commerce Alliance staff in the Legislative Office Building and to also move five
Housing-related employees to alleviate overcrowding in the Community Development
Department Building, and
WHEREAS, certain modifications to both the Legislative Office Building, Suite B, and
the Community Development Department Building are required to adequately provide office
space for staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency approved CIP Project #GG-
154 and appropriated $41,000 to cover estimated remodeling and ADA compliance costs for
Suite B of the Legislative Office Building and the Community Development Department during
the FY 1995-96 budget approval process, and
WHEREAS, staff ascertained project cost was significantly less than $50,000,
therefore the formal bidding process pursuant to Section 1009 of the City Charter was not
required, and
WHEREAS, after Council budget approval, Public Works and Community Development
staff had building modification plans prepared and did then competitively bid the project
pursuant to Section 1009 "Contracts on Public Works" of the City Charter, in three distinct
components; and
WHEREAS, the project was approved utilizing three sources of "restricted funds"
which do not have a material effect on the General Fund, said funds being the Low and
Moderate Income Housing Fund and the ADA Building Compliance Fund (GG-144) which will
be utilized for construction modification, and the HOME Fund, which cannot be utilized for
modifications but can be used for physical capital and therefore is recommended to be used
for the communications component, and
WHEREAS, staff selected the low bidders for each component of the project:
[a] Walter Kirkwood Construction for Suite B of the Legislative Office Building (including ADA
compliance); [b] Golden Pacific Construction for the Community Development Department;
and [c) Com-Aid for the installation of communications cabling for both buildings; and
3-/5
Resolution 1477
Page 2
WHEREAS, the project requires additional funding totalling Ten Thousand Four
Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars ($10,487) and there are funds available from each of these
sources to complete CIP Project #GG-154.
NOW THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows:
1. That the formal bidding process pursuant to Section 1009 of the City Charter was
not required as the estimated project cost is below $50,000 limit.
2. Authorizes the appropriation of an additional $10,487 for the CIP Project #GG-154
from the following sources: [a] Three Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen Dollars ($3,517)
from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund; [bl Four Thousand Three Hundred Eighty
Seven Dollars ($4,387) from Account #GG-144, ADA building compliance funds; and [c] Two
Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Three Dollars ($2,583) from HOME funds.
3. Authorizes the Mayor to execute three standard two-party public works contracts
with the selected project low-bidders: [a] Walter Kirkwood Construction for Suite B of the
Legislative Office Building (including ADA compliance) for a total contract not-to-exceed
amount of Thirty-One Thousand One Hundred Twenty Five Dollars ($31,125) including
Contingency; [bl Golden Pacific Construction for the Community Development Department
for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Dollars
($10,780), including Contingency; and [cl Com-Aid for the installation of communications
cabling for both buildings for a total contract amount not-to-exceed Nine Thousand Five
Hundred Eighty Three Dollars ($9,583), including Contingency.
PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
[BBIC:IWP51IAGENCYIRESOSIREMODEL 1.RES]
.3 -/~
MEMORANDUM
December 6, 1995
TO: The Honorable Shirley Horton, Chairman ~development Agency
VIA: John D. Goss, Executive Direct°!jQ ~ rv\
FROM: Chris Salomone, Community Developme:;:ector C-~ /
SUBJECT: Request to Call a Special Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City
Council
Staff has need to request a Special Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council
on Tuesday, December 12, 1995 after the regular City Council meeting. The following item(s)
requires consideration, deliberation, and action by the Agency:
. Finding that the City's formal bidding process is not required, authorizing the
appropriation of an additional $10,487 for CIP Project GG-154; and awarding
three contracts to the selected low bidders for each of the three components
of the project. (The project being the renovations to the Community
Development Building and the Legislative Office Building, Suite B, housing the
BECA staff.)'
. Closed Session Item: Disposition of the Shangri-La Property to the Port District
I hereby call a Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency
for Tuesday, December 12, 1995:
ÆÆAh(~
Shirley Hort , Chairman
[BB\C;\WP51 \AGENCV\MEMOS\INFO9518.MEMJ