San Diego Infrastructure Committee Meeting - April 26, 2017
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Infrastructure Committee Meeting - April 26, 2017
The Infrastructure Committee of the San Diego City Council met on April 26, 2017, with Chair Kirsey absent; Councilmember Ward led the meeting, joined by Councilmembers Zapf and Gomez. The committee approved minutes from March 22, 2017, and passed the consent agenda (items 1 and 2) unanimously. Two discussion items were considered: a multiple award construction contract for building retrofit projects and the fiscal year 2016 development impact fees annual report.
Consent Calendar
- Approved the minutes of the March 22, 2017 meeting.
- Approved consent agenda items 1 and 2 (details not specified in the transcript) unanimously via voice vote (motion by Councilmember Gomez, second by Councilmember Zapf).
- Item 4 (Multiple Award Design-Build Construction Contract for Intelligent Cities Outdoor Lighting Project) was returned by staff and not considered.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No non-agenda public comment was received.
- No public speakers came forward for either discussion item.
Discussion Items
- Item 3: Multiple Award Design-Build Construction Contract for Energy Conservation Measures and Building Retrofit Projects
- Staff report presented by Darren (last name not given) from the Environmental Services Department.
- The contract would select four design-build teams to perform tenant improvements and energy upgrades in existing city buildings, with a contract limit of $30 million.
- The initial scope includes 33 high-energy-use buildings; four proposed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects totaling $1.7 million were identified as first tasks, with a potential fifth project at the Ridgehaven building pending budget approval.
- Funding sources include CDBG funds, on-bill financing with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) at 0% interest paid back through energy savings, grants, and utility rebates.
- The four recommended contractors: Baker Electric, Barnhart Reese, Construction Performance Automation Solution, and West Coast Air Conditioning; each would receive a $5,000 contract to participate, returnable if awarded task orders.
- Councilmember Gomez asked about the selection process; staff explained the firms passed qualifications-based selection, including a minimum $15 million bonding capacity.
- Councilmember Zapf raised questions about the equal opportunity contracting (EOC) program; three of the four firms had underrepresentations in certain categories, but they are on monitored plans. Staff clarified that EOC goals are evaluated at each task order level, with a 20% weight in evaluations.
- Councilmember Gomez also asked about project examples (e.g., Allied Gardens Recreation Center, Carmel Valley Recreation Center and Pool, Central Operations Yard, College Rolando Library, Fire Stations 29, 31, 37) and the contract's alignment with the Climate Action Plan (CAP) greenhouse gas reduction goals.
- The committee voted unanimously to approve the item.
- Item 5: Development Impact Fees Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2016
- Presentation by Marco Camacho (Financial and Administrative Services Manager, Planning Department), Scott Mercer (Supervising Project Manager, Facilities Financing Section), and Tom Tomlinson (Assistant Director, Planning Department).
- The report covers FY16 DIF activities: about 60 funds across the city, $96 million collected, $395 million ending fund balance, with $93.1 million held for five years or longer (97% of which is appropriated to capital improvement projects).
- Staff highlighted that DIF funded about 1,000 projects (half in the last six years), contributed roughly $100 million in CIP appropriations in FY16 (about 20% of non-water/sewer CIP), administered $35 million in impact fee deferral agreements, and managed about $400 million in developer reimbursement agreements.
- Five DIF plans were updated in FY16; seven more are planned in FY17. A new interactive CIP web map was previewed.
- Councilmember Zapf asked about the Peninsula community’s DIF plan update; staff noted Peninsula is not currently in the work program but is being reevaluated and could be prioritized due to its age (last updated around 2001).
- Councilmember Gomez asked about the frequency of DIF plan updates (staff said about every two to five years depending on the community), the public input process, and possible changes to fee calculations (e.g., scaling fees to unit size). Staff announced a consultant review underway, with proposals expected by early 2018.
- Councilmember Ward asked about the reason for the report refiling; staff explained a change in how funds collected before 1989 are handled, showing net vs. gross columns this year (difference ~$25 million), and that the exemption will no longer be used in future reports.
- The committee voted unanimously to accept the report.
Key Outcomes
- Approved consent agenda items 1 and 2 unanimously.
- Approved the multiple award design-build construction contract for energy retrofit projects (item 3) unanimously (motion by Councilmember Gomez, second by Councilmember Zapf).
- Approved the development impact fees annual report for FY16 (item 5) unanimously.
- Next scheduled Infrastructure Committee meeting: May 24, 2017.
Meeting Transcript
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Want to thank you all for joining us for the special meeting of the infrastructure committee today. It is April 26th, 2017, and Chair Kirsey is unable to make it this morning, so I will be re I will be leading the meeting in his stead. I'll let the record reflect that we are joined by Councilmember Zap and Councilmember Gomez. So we have a quorum. We are also joined by our City Attorney Representative Mark Mercer, our IBA representative Gillian Kissy, our mayoral representative Alejandra Gavadon, and our committee consultant Lee Friedman. I'd also like to walk welcome the members of the public for taking the time to join us today, or for those that are watching us on City TV. So our first item is always I want to get started with non-agenda public comment. Do we have any? No non-agenda public comment. Thank you. Uh for committee comment. Would any members of the committee like to make a comment at this time? Seeing none, with that, are there any city attorney, IBA, or mayoral staff comments? Wonderful. Moving right along. Uh we have to approve the minutes of the March 22nd, 2017. The meeting minutes stand approved as distributed unless there are any objections. Hearing none, they are approved. We'll go immediately to our consent agenda, items number one and two. Motion by Councilmember Gomez, second by Councilmember Zapf. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries unanimously. Staff has requested the item number four be returned. The five multiple award design build construction contract, MAC for intelligence cities outdoor lighting project. So that leaves us with two items on the discussion agenda today. First up will be a report from the environmental services department regarding a multiple award construction contract for building retrofit projects. We'll uh close out today with an annual report from the planning department regarding the fiscal year two thousand sixteen development impact fees. So let's get started and bring up item number three. A review report to review the report from the environmental services department regarding four multiple award construction contracts for energy conservation measures and building retrofit projects. So we are here today to uh talk about award of a multiple award design build contract, uh, formerly known as the MAC. Uh for projects related to energy production. The design build contracts have been with a tool that we've used for implementing capital projects since the early 2000s. In 2012, we amended the municipal code to allow for multiple award design build contracts. A design build project is a project where we define what the scope of work is. It can be written minimally done, or we can often come up with 30% designs, and we turn that preliminary plan over to a contractor and a designer, and then they're responsible for implementing the completion of the design, all the permitting and construction of the project for the budget that they bid or their bid on getting that done. So it's been a very useful tool. It tends to expedite the speed with which we deliver projects and so we use it a number of times. Uh allows us to select four contractors, design build teams. Those, in this case, it's four, but we we can select multiples, and then those teams will bid on a number of tasks as we come up with RFPs for tasks. In this case, we've defined 30 million dollars as the most we would possibly need. So there's a limit on this contract of 30 million. And then task orders are allowed to be awarded by the mayor up to 30 million dollars as long as the project is identified in the capital improvement program. So as long as it's predefined in the capital improvement program, the mayor awards the contracts as they come forward. So with this contract, uh we are specifically looking at tenant improvements, which include energy upgrades. Uh so not the construction of a brand new building. This would go into an existing building and retrofit various components of it. We've assessed and looked at a number of different reading glasses. So initially we've looked at uh 33 per 33 different buildings, the high energy users that the city has.
openpublica.com