Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutF-3e - Implementation Agreement - Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilitiesc- aaQ3 BY THE CITY COUNCIL April 9, 1984 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA APR 0 91984 ITEM NO. _ 3 /Z.) TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT --UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the subject agreement. A. BACKGROUND: At the meeting of August 22, 1983, the City Council authorized the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the San Diego Creek/Upper Newport Bay Watershed Cooperative Agreement. The purpose of that cooperative agreement was to provide a forum for the major landowner and key governmental agencies in the watershed to: (1) Evaluate and assess progress toward implementing the Sediment Control Plan. (2) Formulate project implementing agreements for the elements of the plan. (3) Evaluate and assess the effectiveness of the various elements of the plan. The parties to the agreement are: (1) The County of Orange. (2) The City of Irvine. (3) The City of Newport Beach. (4) The California Department of Fish and Game. (5) The Irvine Company Since that time draft agreements for implementation of in -bay facili- ties, in -channel facilities and a sediment monitoring program have been pro- posed and presented to the Upper Bay executive committee at its first meeting on January 26, 1984. The executive committee approved all three agreements in concept and directed staff representatives to finalize the agreements for presentation to each party's ruling board for approval. Current status of the three agreements is as follows: April 9, 1984 Subject: Implementation Agreement --Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities Page 2 (1) In -Bay Agreement --draft complete and ready for approval. (2) In -Channel Agreement --draft 90% complete. (3) Sediment Monitoring Agreement --The Sediment Monitoring Program in San Diego Creek is currently in its second year of opera- tion under a cooperative agreement between the U.S. Geological Survey, the City of Irvine, The Irvine Company, and the City of Newport Beach. The State Department of Fish and Game has agreed to be re- sponsible for sediment monitoring in the bay. The County of Orange has agreed to participate in the San Diego Creek Sediment Monitoring Program and is presently reviewing a draft agreement. The agreement presented for approval at this time is the implemen- tation agreement for the in -bay facilities. The parties to the agreement are: (1) The County of Orange. (2) The Orange County Harbor, Beaches and Parks District. (3) The State of California Department of Fish and Game. (4) The City of Irvine. (5) The City of Newport Beach. (6) The Irvine Company. B. PRINCIPAL TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT: (1) Description of in -bay facilities to be constructed (see attached exhibit "A") (2) Recommended phasing of construction (a) Unit I --Fiscal Year 1984/85. (b) Unit II --Fiscal Year 1985/86 or as funding is available. (c) Maintenance --as required and as funds are available. Project design is for maintenance dredging at five- year intervals. I I i April 9, 1984 Subject: Implementation Agreement --Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities Page 3 (3) Funding (a) Unit I, Fiscal Year 1984/85 Party Amount State Dept. of Fish & Game $2,662,000 The Irvine Co. 623,325 City of Newport Beach 1.24,310 Orange.County Harbor, Beaches & Parks District 118,990 City of Irvine 11,170 County of Orange 7,992 Total $3,547,787 (b) Unit II and Maintenance of Unit I and Unit II Party — Unit II* Est. Cost Maintenance** Est.Cost/Yr. State Dept. of Fish & Game 75.00 $2,165,625 $262,500 The Irvine Co. 17.58 507,623 62,530 City of Newport Beach 3.51 101,351 12,285 Orange County Harbor, Beaches & Parks District 3.36 97,020 11,760 City of Irvine 0.23 6,641 805 County of Orange 0.32 9,240 1,120 100% $2,887,500 $350,000 *Estimated Cost in 1984 Dollars This agreement establishes each party's % of cost; actual funding will require approval of.future boards and councils. **Estimated Cost in 1984 Dollars. This agreement establishes each party's % of cost; Figures are based on an average yearly cost. Main- tenance projects are anticipated in five-year inter- vals and actual funding will require approval of future boards and councils. (4) Upper Newport Bay Executive Committee Annual Review (a) Progress of implementing in -bay facilities. April 9, 1984 Subject: Implementation Agreement --Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities Page 4 (b) Maintenance of facilities. (c) Funding for construction and maintenance of facilities. (d) Budget recommendation for the next fiscal year. (5) Adjustment of Apportionments The percentages set for each party may be adjusted by unani- mous vote of the parties. (6).Reimbursement of Party's Advance Funds advanced by any party and approved by the executive committee will be credited to the contributing party's con- tribution for the next project. (7) Contract Administration (a) The executive committee shall designate one of the public parties to administer the project or projects approved. (b) The party administering the project or projects will enter into agreements as required to collect the con- tributions from the other parties. (c) The party administering the project will render a final accounting. (8) State Grant and Other Financial Support The State will be the lead agency. The other parties will support the lead agency's efforts. (9) Term The term of this agreement is for ten years. It may be ex- tended by written unanimous approval of the parties. (10) Termination and Amendment (a) Terminated or amended at any time by unanimous consent of the parties. (b) Failure of the executive committee to adopt a budget, unless the executive committee has determined that no funds are needed in ensuing fiscal year. April 9, 1984 Subject: Implementation Agreement --Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities Page 5 (c) The agreement may be suspended for one or more years by unanimous vote of the executive committee. (11) Additional Parties Additional entities may become parties to agreement with unan- imous consent of parties. (12) Availability of Funds The obligation of each party is subject to the availability of funds. Final approval of the agreement is being requested simultaneously by each of the parties. A fully executed agreement is anticipated in May 1984. Funding for the City's share of Unit I ($124,310) has been included in the proposed Capital Projects Budget for FY 1984-85. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director JW:jd Att. Draft 1-9-84 Exhibit "A" Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities This Exhibit identifies the Sediment Control Facilities (Table 1) to be constructed as part of the Upper Newport Bay Enhancement Program (Figure 1). These facilities are designed to localize the deposition of fine sediments delivered from San Diego Creek. At the same time they will provide benefits to the fish and wildlife resources of the :Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. The construction of the Sediment Control Facilities is phased in two units (Tables 2 and 3). Implementation of both units will be required to provide efficient sediment capture and protect the wildlife values of the Bay. Following construction of Units I and II periodic maintenance will be required to maintain the efficiency of the system. Maintenance operations will be instituted when the average invert elevation of either the saltworks basin or the "Narrows" channel reach -1.0 MLLW' (-4.0 MSL). This elevation has been selected as the trigger for initiating maintenance operations to insure the preservation of fish and wildlife values associated with lower intertidal and subtidal elevations. At this elevation, the saltworks basin will have a capacity of 150,000 cu. yds. while the "Narrows" channel will have a capacity of 130,000 cu. yds. _ Maintenance dredging may not be required more often than once every five years. This is an estimate based upon projections contained in the 208 Sediment Source and Delivery Analysis prepared by Boyle Engineering. With installation of three additional upstream facilities the Boyle report indicates that approximately 50,000 cu. yds. of sediment will be delivered to the bay on an average annual basis. If the in -bay facilities were 100% effective, maintenance would be required every five years. Boyle though has calculated that the saltworks basin is only 30% effective indicating that maintenance would not be required more frequently than once every 7 to 10 years. Periodic maintenance based upon the criteria outlined above may require the removal of approximately 250,000 cu. yds. of material. Based upon 1984 cost estimated for hydraulic dredging and ocean disposal ($7.50/cu. yd.), this would require the expenditure.of approximately $1,875,000. . Figure 3 provides a phased implementation schedule for construction and maintenance of the Sediment Control Facilities. R Table 1 UNBER Sediment Management/Enhancement Project; Quantity and Cost Estimates* *Costs based on 1984 estimates +Yardage estimate may change following survey Element Cubic Yards Rate Cost A. Saltworks Improvements A-1 Island Removal A-2 Deepen basin to -4.0 MLLW 41,000 330,000 $3.50 $5.00 $ 143,000 $1,650,000 A-3 35+ acre expansion 290,000 $4.00 $1,162,000 661,000 2,955,000 B. Channel widening saltworks - main dike; 500 feet wide to -0.0 MLLW 100,000 $5.00 $ 500,000 C. Subtidal Channel Main Dike - Narrows: 500 feet wide to -4.0 MLLW+ 330,000 $7.50 $2,475,000 D. Remove 1,000 foot section of main dike 26,000 $5.00 $ 130,000- E. Down -bay dredging to provide dredge access+. 50,000 $7.50 $ 375,000 Project Totals 1,167,000 $6,435,000 *Costs based on 1984 estimates +Yardage estimate may change following survey 0 r r f m > v> -H C-4 ° 9 O 0 42 tV f, 3 V $.4 CirW{ co it 43 .w .D E O U W -.j - 0 •= N 4-) 0 O ¢ q m N rr -1 • W3 > W fr U) US = W a f°r A i-' CH O -r4 W O 3 O � -kg 43 *% m O f. in W b d, H CL �� co 'a 4) cc w O U �w D O E d > `"� U > .0 in cfu m H rl r O 47 U O 5 r m U W •.i .p � = O y< �0 C*] O U � A W 4 � • . U q W 0 r r m 43 w 0 42 tV m w U it 43 .0 O U W q q • M fr fr G1 Op a f°r o a ri m f. 0.: ,•4 W w Rate Cost $3.50 $ 143,000 $5.00 $1,650,000 $4.00 $1,162,000 $2,955,000 $ 592,787 $3,547,787 - Table 2 Unit I Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities* Element Cubic Yards A. Saltworks Improvements A-1 Island Removal 41,000 A-2 Deepen basin to -4.0 MLLW 330,000 A-3 35+ acre expansion 290,000 661,000 C. Subtidal Channel - main dike .. to the Narrows and down bay .dredging required for equipment access 79,000 Total 740,000 *Costs based on 1984 estimates. - , Rate Cost $3.50 $ 143,000 $5.00 $1,650,000 $4.00 $1,162,000 $2,955,000 $ 592,787 $3,547,787 A 02 '�' •' k ca w x 0 o a 4-4 43 -r4 � ul N 0a m totic m-� .ti m o x •rte w o ti v rr `\. a o +J o 03 --1 e 14 +� S-- a),�,. a.° m CU 4-3 m a� m +) a > I0- r Table 3 Unit II Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities* Element Cubic Yards Cost B. Widen channel between salt works 100,000 $ 500,000 and main dike C. Complete subtidal cannel main dike - Narrows 251,000 $1,882,500 D. Main dike removal 26,000 $ 130,000 E. Down bay dredging to provide dredge access as necessary 50,000 $ 375,000 Total 427,000 $2,887,50 *Costs based on 1984 estimates lCost and yardage estimate depends upon amount of material removed in Unit I 2Cost and yardage may vary depending upon hydrographic survey and material removed as part of Unit I r- O \ O N Cl O O N O� O� O� \ co 0` co O� n O� f� %0 _. 0% O� \ LM 0% 00 an O 0% ,a_ o� ao en a+ 0% m M ani C% Pel • 1 N m Q� M I O N O\ 0 F z H iw �$14 0 co co co V c w m co co W A 1 c O �D 00 W Ln co tn O O ,y-1 rl G G TI O O L +1 •-1 C! R1 �+ uH u c W H CO 7 F{ CO 7 b 00 1! Gl G t+ G 1-/ C G H .�+ 4-1 " u 4J H u W -A O, ,y-1 rl