San Diego Infrastructure Committee Meeting - January 24, 2018
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Diego Infrastructure Committee Meeting - January 24, 2018
The San Diego City Council Infrastructure Committee met on January 24, 2018, with a full complement of members including Vice Chair Alvarez, Council Members Zapf and Ward, as well as representatives from the City Attorney, IBA, Mayor's office, and the infrastructure committee consultant. The meeting covered approval of consent items, authorization of a contract amendment for the Marina Reservoir Outlet Tower Upgrades project, and an informational presentation on the FY19-23 Five-Year Capital Infrastructure Planning Outlook. Public comments were received on road conditions and the credibility of planning documents.
Consent Calendar
- Approved the meeting minutes from December 4, 2017, as distributed.
- Consent items included:
- Agreement related to the OTI Mesa project: acknowledged work on road and housing development with a focus on quick reimbursement processes.
- A 900-foot section of a bike path: Caltrans is taking over maintenance responsibility; concerns were raised about ensuring the Get It Done app effectively routes complaints to Caltrans. Vice Chair Alvarez clarified that the city retains maintenance responsibility for that segment.
- The consent agenda was moved by Councilmember Zapf, seconded by Vice Chair Alvarez, and approved unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Martha Welch (non-agenda public comment): Expressed frustration over persistent road disrepair, sinkholes that are growing, and accusations that the city lies to the public about fixing issues. Claimed the city lacks workers and uses contractors like Acom instead of public works, leading to delays.
- Martha Welch (during Item 4): Criticized the five-year capital plan, asserting that similar plans in the past resulted in no construction and that the city hides problems. She stated that nothing gets built.
Discussion Items
Item 3: Second Amendment to Contract with Richard Brady and Associates for Professional Services – Marina Reservoir Outlet Tower Upgrades
- Presentation: Abby Palosi (interim deputy director, Public Works) and Elif Cheton (assistant deputy director) outlined the project: constructing a new outlet tower (140 ft high), a bridge from the dam, raising the dam crest by 4 ft, upsizing pipes from 48 to 72 inches, and adding a diesel generator. The need stems from operational requirements and state Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) mandates, including drawdown capacity (10% in 10 days, full in 120 days). The project was initially selected in 2001 but put on hold; reinitiated in 2011; a 2014 amendment added hydrologic analysis leading to the new tower design. The existing tower may be deemed historic (by SHPO), requiring seismic retrofit and preservation. The second amendment for $1,000,000 extends the contract to 2020 and covers additional design and construction support. Total design fees: $1.9M; total project cost: $26.5M (construction $22M, admin/soft costs $2.6M, soft cost 26% vs. 30% state benchmark). Funding from CIP and potential state revolving loan fund.
- Committee Questions:
- Vice Chair Alvarez asked about the historic determination (DSOD's 2016 finding is a starting point; SHPO makes final decision), the purpose of the 4-ft crest raise (to prevent wave overtopping during maximum rain events per 100-year hydrology), and whether the amendment covers full design including potential seismic/historic work (yes; savings if less work needed).
- Councilmember Ward asked about additional acre-feet from the raise (not for volume; safety only), whether the reservoir ever overtopped (spillway handled flows), why a new tower instead of capping the old (existing tower cannot accommodate larger pipe; seismic risk may make demolition cheaper), and funding sources (CIP for design; state revolving loan or commercial paper for construction).
- Chair expressed hope that the project proceeds and that historic designation does not apply to old infrastructure. He requested status updates. Motion by Vice Chair Alvarez, seconded by Councilmember Ward; approved unanimously.
Item 4: City's FY19-23 Five-Year Capital Infrastructure Planning Outlook (Information Only)
- Presentation: James Nagelvoard (director of Public Works) and Kerry Purcell (assistant deputy director) presented the fourth annual report. Objective: balanced infrastructure via condition assessments, service level standards, and funding strategies. Covers FY19-23. Key data: $4.4 billion in capital needs identified; $2.8 billion in projected funding; resulting gap of $1.57 billion (increase of ~$300M from last year, attributed to conservative estimating and lower FBA projections). Major needs by asset type: stormwater ($563M needed vs. $104M funded), general fund facilities ($285M planned against $900M+ total need), bike facilities ($121M need, $5M funded), roads (fully funded). Funding from enterprise assets (water/sewer) and non-enterprise (general fund, Prop H, grants). Not included: sea-level rise adaptation, convention center expansion, IT improvements, non-capital maintenance. Public input via CPC survey.
- IBA Comments: Gillian Cassie highlighted that the gap is concentrated in non-enterprise assets; the report shows a peak in FY19-20 due to Pure Water Phase I, then decline. Council can set priorities through budget review and priority memos.
- Committee Discussion:
- Councilmember Ward: questioned revenue drop from $3.0B to $2.8B (due to missing large grants like West Mission Bay Bridge and lower FBA projections from development slowdown). Expressed concern about housing affordability implications. Asked about grant writing (not projected until secured). Noted fleet needs for CAP not included (brick and mortar only). Bicycle facilities gap of $116M – projects like downtown mobility plan are city-funded, not SANDAG; SANDAG’s $150M is not in the report. Stormwater gap is the largest; suggested exploring efficiencies, regulatory refinements, and integrated planning. Asked if fire station needs align with upcoming CityGate report (yes).
- Vice Chair Alvarez: noted that needs are not decreasing except for roads; capacity to deliver projects exists if funding is provided, but three years of Pure Water work strain capacity. Asked about EIFD funding (not yet incorporated), CDBG allocations (diminishing, but repayment from state not shown), bike facilities gap (downtown mobility plan is city-funded), gas tax repeal implications, and sidewalks (maintenance goal to replace all damaged sidewalks by 2024 capital program; new sidewalks at 33,000 linear ft/year only top 10% of needs). Also queried TransNet 30% minimum for maintenance (can be higher, reducing new asset funds).
- Councilmember Zapf: noted the stormwater mandate came suddenly; asked about alternative technologies (e.g., direct potable reuse, purple pipes – potential cost waste). Staff mentioned integrated planning, alternative compliance for on-site treatment, and using stormwater for supply. Expressed hope that not spending all money now allows better future solutions.
- Chair: highlighted large ticket items (city complex, Balboa Park, stormwater) and urged that the Infrastructure Fund (Prop H) should not be used solely for stormwater; should also fund sidewalks and backfill potential gas tax repeal. Announced intention to develop project oversight guidelines for this committee to track large projects, and to incorporate maintenance needs into future capital outlooks.
- No vote; informational item.
Key Outcomes
- Consent Calendar: Approved unanimously.
- Item 3: Motion to approve the second amendment to the contract with Richard Brady and Associates and forward to full City Council passed unanimously. Committee requested status updates.
- Item 4: Received as information; no formal action taken. Chair committed to preparing oversight guidelines and exploring inclusion of maintenance needs in future reports.
- Public comments: Both comments were acknowledged and entered into the record.
Meeting Transcript
In San Diego, today is January 24th, 2018. Let the record reflect we have a full complement of our committee here today, including Vice Chair Alvarez and Council Members Zap and Ward. We also have our City Attorney Representative Christina Ray, our IBA representative Gillian Cassie, our mayor representative Alejandra Givalden, and our infrastructure committee consultant Lee Friedman. I would like to thank the members of the public who are with us today or watching on City TV. We will, of course, start with non-agenda public comment. And we do have one member of the public, and that is Martha Welch. Please come forward. You have two minutes. Martha Welch, the turcophile so the roads in this city seems never get fixed. The Surrey won't work there because they're so bad. People are only telling next year, next year, going nine years. Lori was with him, and he shows that Oliver showed that. I know that the city doesn't have workers because the opportunity was of a for 10 city, so there's no trucks or anything, so we know we no no pity. Don't work here. We know that. First thing no we can tell that. So the lies come for the staff, to the people and public also. Because you lie to us all the time because you don't tell the truth the truth. Now there's things, there's two sink holes also on there right now. Mira and Talmud have years and years. It gets bigger and bigger. Never they tell we'll fix it, we'll fix it now. Why? Because you have the Pacific project. Now you have to do that. But you don't never do that on the I never seen it. Uh never seen. You just lied us all the time. I'll be fixing here and next year, next year, next year. You know, I've seen it, I've seen so many times. These things get bigger and bigger. That sinkhole it was very small, now it's huge. Someday it might have a house or something. Who knows what's going to happen? It's a drain and it's not been fixed for years and years. There's two of them. And might be more of them. I I I look at the roads all the time. So I walk all over the city and I can see broadways all chewed up, and I can see a lot of streets or uh patches are breaking down and all this stuff. But you don't fix them because you have the specific project. That's how it works in the city because we don't have workers. You can't call public work and say, fix this pothole. It's impossible. There's no workers. They have to call somebody else. Acom or somebody else, who knows who works on these roads someplace, has to do it, not not the city. So that's why it doesn't work. You just lie to people. I've seen people come to the city council saying they've been lied from to you guys saying this can be fixed next year or next year, but it doesn't work out that way because we don't have workers. That concludes non-agenda public comment, turning to the committee.
openpublica.com