City Council Meeting
Agenda
September 17, 2024
7:00 PM – Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.
Council Members will meet in-person in the Council
Chambers. The meeting will also be lived streamed on the City’s website: http://livestream.hanford.city/
6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER CLOSED SESSION:
ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:
CLOSED SESSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FOLLOWING:
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION (GC 54956.9 (d)(1)):
1 Workers' Compensation Claim
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:
ROLL CALL:
INVOCATION:
Sherri Winteround
FLAG SALUTE:
RECOGNITION:
A. Staff will be presented with the Proclamation for National IT Professionals Day.
B. Emily Carpenter from Golden Positivity will be presented with the Proclamation for Childhood Cancer Awareness Month.
C. Recognition of the Hanford All Stars 12U Baseball Team Coaches and Players for their World Series appearance.
Manager Jess Moran, Coaches Eric Maciel, Shane Hooper, and Joe Martinez. Players #22 Jo Jo Martinez, #3 Jonah Moran, #4 Ryan Mulanax, #6 Miles Maciel, #7 Urban Rodriguez, #8 Cannon Muir, #10 Noah Squire, #15 Trystan Hooper, #16 Bradley Fossett, #18 Jody Hernandez, #23 Braden Curtis, #27 Mason Gonzalez, #28 Andrew Ibarra, and #30 Chase Gogan.
CLOSED SESSION ACTION REPORT:
COUNCIL REPORTS/GENERAL REPORTS:
Brief information-only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expenses (AB1234).
PUBLIC COMMENT:
This is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code sec. 54954.2). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.
A. Procedural Waiver: Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading title the only.
B. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the July 2, 2024, Meeting C. City Clerk: Approval of the Minutes of the July 16, 2024, Meeting D. City Attorney: Adoption of Resolution No. 24-36-R, declaring 1074 S. Jordan to be exempt surplus property under the Government Code.
E. Administration: Adoption of Resolution 24-38-R, Conflict of Interest Code, designating the filing obligations for designated employees.
F. Administration: Approval of Resolution No. 24-33-R, authorizing staff to submit an application for the California Department of Transportation Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Matching Grant to fund a Pavement Management Maintenance Plan for the Hanford Municipal Airport.
G. Community Development: Approval of an appropriation of $650,000 in the General Fund for the Kings-Tulare High-Speed Rail Station Transit-Oriented Development and Connectivity Plan, and Cross Valley Corridor Rail Service Planning project, funded by Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant award.
H. Utilities and Engineering: Approve a reimbursement to Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC in the amount of $1,354,311.27 for the water main and street improvements on Houston Avenue and Alpine Street related to Tract No. 865, Unit No. 1; AND approve an appropriation of $1,408,862.39 to fulfill the reimbursement.
I. Utilities and Engineering: Authorization to award a contract to Akel Engineering to update the City’s Utility Master Plans for Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain for a total
amount not to exceed $705,925 and authorize an appropriation of $811,814 from various impact fee funds as described herein in this report.
J. Utilities and Engineering: Approval to enter into a professional services agreement with David Taussig and Associates (DTA) to provide a Comprehensive Update to the City’s Development Impact Fees and approval to appropriate $92,400 from various Impact Fee Funds.
PUBLIC HEARING:
A. Community Development: A public hearing to accept comments related to the Draft Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element for 2024-2032 and direction to staff to submit the document to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for review.
GENERAL BUSINESS:
A. Finance: Presentation of Downtown Traffic and Pedestrian Improvement Project Status and Discussion of Project and Funding Alternatives, and Impacts B. Utilities and Engineering: Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract amendment with Interwest Consulting Group for the Downtown Improvement Project additional scope of work.
C. Utilities and Engineering: Council reconsideraton of the Approval of a contract with 4Creeks Inc., to provide Construction Management and Inspection Services for the Downtown Traffic and Pedestrian Improvement Project in an amount not exceed $506,853.
D. City Attorney: Introduction of Ordinance No. 24-08, Amending Hanford Municipal Code Chapter 12.24 to severely restrict sitting, lying down, and sleeping on public and private properties and the addition of provisions to address camping on private property and prohibiting trespassing on business premises.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS:
At this time, any Council Member may ask a question for clarification or may request a matter, which is not otherwise scheduled on a City Council agenda, to be placed on a future agenda. The Council Member referring the item shall provide sufficient information as to the nature of the item. The City Council, by concurrence of a majority, may direct the City Manager to put the item on a future agenda. (GOV. CODE SEC. 54954.2) A. Council Future Agenda Items
B. Upcoming Events and Important Dates:
September 18: 3rd Quarter City/County Coordinating Meeting 6:00pm, Corcoran October 1: Regular City Council Meeting
October 1: Hanford Police Department's National Night Out, Civic Park 6:00pm-8:00pm October 5 & 6: 45th Annual Renaissance Faire, Civic Park More Info.
October 15: Regular City Council Meeting
October 16-18: League of Cal Cities 2024 Annual Conference and Expo in Long Beach ADJOURNMENT:
Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available to public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, during normal business hours. Such agendas are also available at the city’s website, www.cityofhanfordca.com subject to staff’s
ability to post the agenda before the meeting. If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office, 559-585-2515, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, at least 2 days prior to the meeting {28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II}
12.B.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of the Minutes of the July 2, 2024, Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That the Council, by motion, approve the minutes from the July 16, 2024, meeting.
BACKGROUND:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. July 2, 2024
12.C.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of the Minutes of the July 16, 2024, Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That the Council, by motion, approve the minutes from the July 16, 2024, meeting.
BACKGROUND:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. July 16, 2024
12.D.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution No. 24-36-R, declaring 1074 S. Jordan to be exempt surplus property under the Government Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 24-36-R, which will declare 1074 S. Jordan to be exempt surplus property under the Government Code.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve Resolution No. 24-36-R.
BACKGROUND:
At its July 16, 2024, meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution 24-25-R, which declared 1074 S.
Jordan Way to be surplus property. A single-family residence is located at the property, and the property is zoned for that use.
Following the Council’s July 16 action, information was submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in accordance with the Surplus Land Act. In response, HCD informed the City that the property may be eligible for exempt surplus land treatment, in which case the City may sell the property without first offering it to other government agencies and housing sponsors.
Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(B) indicates that a property may be treated as “exempt surplus” if it is less than one-half (1/2) acre in area and is not contiguous to land owned by the state or a local jurisdiction that is used for open-space or low- and moderate-income housing purposes.
The Jordan Way property satisfies such requirements.
With the adoption of Resolution No. 24-36-R, the Council will declare the 1074 S. Jordan Way property to be “exempt surplus” for purposes of the Surplus Land Act. Following its adoption, a copy of the Resolution will be submitted to HCD for final confirmation that the property is “exempt surplus.” Following HCD’s confirmation, the City may sell the property to any interested purchaser of its choice.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 24-36-R
RESOLUTION NO. 24-36-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD,
CALIFORNIA, DECLARING PROPERTY TO BE EXEMPT SURPLUS PROPERTY At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford, duly called and held on September 17, 2024, at 7:00 p.m., it was moved by Council Member ________ , and seconded by Council Member _________ , and duly carried that the following resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, the City of Hanford ("City") owns in fee one (1) parcel of real property ("Property") zoned for single family residential use located at 1074 S. Jordan Way, Hanford, California (APN: 011-450-011); and
WHEREAS, the Property is approximately six thousand, seventy-two (6,072) square feet in area; and
WHEREAS, the Property's legal description is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," which is incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, there is one ( 1) single family residence, which is approximately one thousand, one hundred (1,100) square feet in area, located on the Property; and WHEREAS, the Property is not contiguous to land owned by the state or the City that is used for open-space or low- and moderate-income housing purposes; and WHEREAS, for purposes of Government Code Section 5422l(f)(2), the Property is not:
(i) within a coastal zone; (ii) adjacent to a historical unit of the State Parks System; (iii) listed on, or determined by the State Office of Historic Preservation to be eligible for, the National Register of Historical Places; or (iv) within the Lake Tahoe region as defined by Government Code Section 66905.5; and
WHEREAS, the City has no use for, and it is the City's intent to dispose of, the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Hanford finds that, for purposes of Government Code Section 54221(f)(l)(B), the Property is: (a) less than one half(l/2) acre in area; and (b) not contiguous to land owned by the state or the City for open-space or low- and moderate-income housing purposes; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby declares the Property to be exempt surplus property for purposes of the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Section 54220, et seq.).
1
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of September, 2024 by the following vote:
AYES: ------------------------------
NOES: ------------------------------
ABSTAIN: ----------------------------
ABSENT: -----------------------------
Attest:
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
ST A TE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
Approved
TRAVIS PADEN
Mayor
I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the 17th day of September, 2024.
Date: _______ _
City Clerk
2
Exhibit '~ "
LOT 9 OF KINGS TERRACE ADDITION, COUNTY TRACT NO. 256, IN THE CITY OF
HANFORD, COUNTY OF KINGS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7 AT PAGE 99 OF LICENSED SURVEYOR PLATS, KINGS COUNTY RECORDS.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND MINERAL RIGHTS BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM ALFRED KRONFELD, ET UX, TO F. L. HODGES, ET UX, RECORDED JANUARY 28, 1948 IN BOOK 396 AT PAGE 166 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AS DOCUMENT NO. 816 AND AS AMENDED BY QUITCLAIM DEED DATED APRIL 16, 1961 AND RECORDED JUNE 19, 1961 IN BOOK 784 AT PAGE 956 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AS DOCUMENT NO. 9170 APN No.: 011-450-011-000
3
12.E.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution 24-38-R, Conflict of Interest Code, designating the filing obligations for designated employees.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution 24-38-R, thereby amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for designated employees.
BACKGROUND:
Government Code, Title 9, Chapter 7, Article 3 requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially to determine if it is accurate or if the code must be amended. The City's Conflict of Interest Code was last updated in 2022, and it must be updated in 2024 to satisfy the Government Code.
Staff reviewed the City's Conflict of Interest Code and is recommending modifications to Appendix A:
Designated Employees due to the reclassification of job titles, new positions, and job descriptions.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Appendix A
2. Appendix B
3. Resolution 24-38-R
APPENDIX A
CITY OF HANFORD
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
Designated Positions Disclosure Categories
Accountant All
Administrative Analyst I/II All
Building Inspector I/II All
Building Official All
Building Superintendent All
City Clerk All
City Engineer All
City Manager All
Code Compliance Supervisor All
Community Development Director All
Community Relations Manager All
Construction Coordinator/Inspector All
Deputy City Manager All
Deputy Public Works Director All
Engineering Manager All
Environmental & Compliance Supervisor All
Finance Director All
Finance Manager All
Financial Analyst All
Fire Battalion Chief All
Fire Chief All
Fire Marshal All
Fleet Superintendent All
Fleet Supervisor All
Housing Analyst All
Human Resources Analyst I/II All
Human Resources Manager All
Information Systems Analyst All
Information Technology Manager All
Parks & Community Services Director All
Parks Manager All
Parks Supervisor All
Police Chief All
Police Captain All
Police Support Services Administrator All
Principal Planner All
Project Manager All
Public Works Director All
Purchasing Agent All
Recreation Supervisor All
Recycling Coordinator All
Regulatory Compliance Analyst All
Refuse Manager All
Refuse Supervisor All
Risk Management Analyst All
Sanitary Sewer Collections Supervisor All
Senior Administrative Analyst All
Senior Civil Engineer All
Senior Planner All
Streets Manager All
Streets Supervisor All
Utilities & Engineering Director All
Utilities Manager All
Utilities Supervisor All
Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager All
Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor All
Consultants All
The City Clerk may determine in writing that a particular consultant, although a “designated position”, is hired to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The City Clerk’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code.
Updated: ______________, 2024
APPENDIX B
CITY OF HANFORD
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
General Provisions
When a designated employee is required to disclose investments and sources of income, he or she need only disclose investments in business entities and sources of income which do business in the jurisdiction, plan to do business in the jurisdiction, or have done business in the jurisdiction within the past two years. In addition to other activities, a business entity is doing business within the jurisdiction if it owns real property within the jurisdiction. When a designated employee is required to disclose interest in real property, he or she need only disclose real property which is located in whole or in part within or not more than two miles outside the boundaries of the jurisdiction or within two miles of any land owned or used by the local government agency.
Designated employees shall disclose their financial interests pursuant to the appropriate disclosure category as indicated in Appendix A.
Disclosure Categories
Category 1: All interest in real property in the City of Hanford, or the city’s sphere of influence, including property located within a two-mile radius of any property owned or used by the City of Hanford or any of its departments; as well as investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments.
Category 2: All investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments.
Category 3: All investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments from sources that provide leased facilities, goods, equipment, vehicles, machinery or services, including training or consulting services, of the type utilized by the employee’s department.
Category 4: All investments, business positions and sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments from sources that provide leased facilities, goods, equipment, vehicles, machinery or services, including training or consulting services, of the type utilized by the City of Hanford.
RESOLUTION NO. 24-38-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD
AMENDING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY
FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF HANFORD
At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford, held on the 17th day of September 2024, it was moved by Council Member ________________, seconded by Council Member ______________, and duly carried, that the following Resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 87300 requires every local government agency to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code; and WHEREAS, in 1990, Government Code Section 87306.5 was added to the Political Reform Act requiring every local agency who has adopted a Conflict of Interest Code to review and update its Conflict of Interest biennially, in even-numbered years; and
WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal. Code of Regulations, Section 18730, which contains the terms of a standard model Conflict of Interest Code, which can be incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, the City of Hanford has determined that it is appropriate to incorporate by reference Fair Political Practices Commission’s Regulation 18730; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the list of positions and disclosure categories contained in Appendix A and B to this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Resolution No. 24-38-R supersedes all previous resolutions pertaining to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the model Conflict of Interest Code prepared by the Fair Political Practices Commission is hereby adopted as the City of Hanford’s Conflict of Interest Code; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the designated positions as amended, and disclosure categories listed in Appendix A and B to this resolution are hereby incorporated into the City of Hanford’s Conflict of Interest Code.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this _____ day of ______________, 2024 by the following vote:
AYES: _____________________________________________________________ NOES: _____________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: _____________________________________________________________ ABSENT: _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________
Travis Paden
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
Attest:
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the 17th day of September 2024.
City Clerk
Date:
12.F.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of Resolution No. 24-33-R, authorizing staff to submit an application for the California Department of Transportation Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Matching Grant to fund a Pavement Management Maintenance Plan for the Hanford Municipal Airport.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 24-33-R, authorizing city staff to apply for an AIP matching grant with the California Department of Transportation and authorize the Airport Manager and City Manager to sign any documents required to apply for and accept funding on behalf of the City.
BACKGROUND:
On July 2, 2024, the City Council authorized the acceptance of a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Grant to fund a Pavement Maintenance Management Plan (PMMP) for the Hanford Airport.
The federal grant was executed on September 6, 2024 and provides $148,000.00 in funding for the PMMP. Because the Hanford Airport is a General Aviation airport, the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, provides grants in the amount of 5% of the Federal Aviation grant cost to offset a portion of the required local match share of improvement costs. In our case, Hanford is eligible for approximately $18,536.00 in state aviation grant funds to reduce our required local match share of FAA grant funds from 10% to 5%. Once adopted, the resolution will be sent to CalTrans and a grant offer will be approved for the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Council has previously approved the acceptance of the FAA grant and appropriated $170,000 for the project. The proposed State AIP matching grant in the amount of $8,250.00, when recieved, will reduce the City's required local match share of the federal grant to approximately $8,750.00.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Reso No 24-33-R AIP Matching Grant
2. HJO-WPG-3-06-0098-031-2024-Grant Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 2 4 -33-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HANFORD CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING
THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION, ACCEPTANCE OF AN ALLOCATION OF
FUNDS, AND EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR AN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AIP) MATCHING GRANT.
WHEREAS, the City of Hanford and the Federal Aviation Administration are parties to federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant 3-06-0098-031-2024 for the preparation of a Pavement Maintenance Management Plan for the Hanford Municipal Airport (HJO); and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation, pursuant to the Public Utilities Code section 21683.1, provides grants of 5% of Federal Aviation Administration grants to airports; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation requires the City Council to adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of an application for an AIP Matching grant; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford, State of California:
l. Authorizes filing an application for a state AIP Matching grant for this project.
2. Authorizes accepting the allocation of state AIP Matching funds for the project.
3. Authorizes execution of an AIP Matching Grant Agreement for this project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford does hereby authorize City Manager and Finance Director to sign any documents required to apply for and accept these subject funds on behalf of the City of Hanford.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this _____ day of ______________, 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
TRAVIS PADEN
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
Attest:
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the _____ day of ___________________, 2024.
Date:
City Clerk
3-06-0098-031-2024
1 U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Airports Division
Western-Pacific Region
California
San Francisco Airports District
Office:
2999 Oak Road, Suite 200
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
{{DateTime_es_:signer1:calc(now()):format(date," mmmm d, yyyy")}} Mr. Robert Loogman
Airport Manager
City of Hanford
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Dear Mr. Loogman:
The Grant Offer for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Project No. 3-06-0098-031-2024 at Hanford Municipal Airport is attached for execution. This letter outlines the steps you must take to properly enter into this agreement and provides other useful information. Please read the conditions, special conditions, and assurances that comprise the grant offer carefully.
You may not make any modification to the text, terms or conditions of the grant offer.
Steps You Must Take to Enter Into Agreement.
To properly enter into this agreement, you must do the following:
1. The governing body must give authority to execute the grant to the individual(s) signing the grant, i.e., the person signing the document must be the sponsor’s authorized representative(s) (hereinafter “authorized representative”).
2. The authorized representative must execute the grant by adding their electronic signature to the appropriate certificate at the end of the agreement.
3. Once the authorized representative has electronically signed the grant, the sponsor’s attorney(s) will automatically receive an email notification.
4. On the same day or after the authorized representative has signed the grant, the sponsor’s attorney(s) will add their electronic signature to the appropriate certificate at the end of the agreement.
5. I
f there are co -sponsors, the authorized representative(s) and sponsor’s attorney(s) must follow the above procedures to fully execute the grant and finalize the process. Signatures must be obtained and finalized no later than September 12, 2024.
6. The fully executed grant will then be automatically sent to all parties as an email attachment.
Payment. Subject to the requirements in 2 CFR § 200.305 (Federal Payment), each payment request for reimbursement under this grant must be made electronically via the Delphi eInvoicing System. Please see the attached Grant Agreement for more information regarding the use of this System.
Project Timing. The terms and conditions of this agreement require you to complete the project without undue delay and no later than the Period of Performance end date (1,460 days from the grant execution date). We will be monitoring your progress to ensure proper stewardship of these Federal funds. We expect you to submit payment requests for reimbursement of allowable incurred project expenses September 5, 2024
3-06-0098-031-2024
2 consistent with project progress. Your grant may be placed in “inactive” status if you do not make draws on a regular basis, which will affect your ability to receive future grant offers. Costs incurred after the Period of Performance ends are generally not allowable and will be rejected unless authorized by the FAA in advance.
Reporting. Until the grant is completed and closed, you are responsible for submitting formal reports as follows:
For all grants, you must submit by December 31st of each year this grant is open:
1. A signed/dated SF-270 (Request for Advance or Reimbursement for non-construction projects) or SF-271 or equivalent (Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs), and
2. An SF-425 (Federal Financial Report).
For non-construction projects, you must submit FAA Form 5100-140, Performance Report within 30 days of the end of the Federal fiscal year.
For construction projects, you must submit FAA Form 5370-1, Construction Progress and Inspection Report, within 30 days of the end of each Federal fiscal quarter.
Audit Requirements. As a condition of receiving Federal assistance under this award, you must comply with audit requirements as established under 2 CFR Part 200. Subpart F requires non-Federal entities that expend $750,000 or more in Federal awards to conduct a single or program specific audit for that year. Note that this includes Federal expenditures made under other Federal-assistance programs.
Please take appropriate and necessary action to ensure your organization will comply with applicable audit requirements and standards.
Closeout. Once the project(s) is completed and all costs are determined, we ask that you work with your FAA contact indicated below to close the project without delay and submit the necessary final closeout documentation as required by your Region/Airports District Office.
FAA Contact Information. Lemuel del Castillo, (925) 546-6440, [email protected] is the assigned program manager for this grant and is readily available to assist you and your designated representative with the requirements stated herein.
We sincerely value your cooperation in these efforts and look forward to working with you to complete this important project.
Sincerely,
{{Sig_es_:signer1: signature}}
Amy L. Choi
Manager
Amy Choi (Sep 5, 2024 19:30 PDT)
Amy Choi
3-06-0098-031-2024
3 U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AIP) FY 2024 AIP
GRANT AGREEMENT
Part I - Offer
Federal Award Offer Date {{DateTime_es_:signer1:calc(now()):format(date," mmmm d, yyyy")}}
Airport/Planning Area Hanford Municipal Airport
Airport Infrastructure Grant
Number 3-06-0098-031-2024
Unique Entity Identifier DJUXR18MN678
TO: City of Hanford
(herein called the "Sponsor") (For Co-Sponsors, list all Co-Sponsor names. The word "Sponsor" in this Grant Agreement also applies to a Co-Sponsor.)
FROM: The United States of America (acting through the Federal Aviation Administration, herein called the "FAA")
WHEREAS, the Sponsor has submitted to the FAA a Project Application dated March 22, 2024, for a grant of Federal funds for a project at or associated with the Hanford Municipal Airport, which is included as part of this Grant Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the FAA has approved a project for the Hanford Municipal Airport (herein called the “Project”) consisting of the following:
Pavement Maintenance Management Plan
which is more fully described in the Project Application.
NOW THEREFORE, Pursuant to and for the purpose of carrying out the Title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapters 471 and 475; 49 U.S.C. §§ 40101 et seq., and 48103; FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 September 5, 2024
3-06-0098-031-2024
4 (Public Law Number (P.L.) 115-254); the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2021 ( P.L. 116-260, Division L); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 ( P.L. 117-103); Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 ( P.L. 117-328); Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (P.L. 118-42); FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-63); and the representations contained in the Project Application; and in consideration of: (a) the Sponsor’s adoption and ratification of the Grant Assurances dated May 2022, interpreted and applied consistent with the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 per Reauthorization Grant Condition 30 below; (b) the Sponsor’s acceptance of this Offer; and (c) the benefits to accrue to the United States and the public from the accomplishment of the Project and compliance with the Grant Assurance and conditions as herein provided;
THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES, HEREBY OFFERS AND AGREES to pay (90) % of the allowable costs incurred accomplishing the Project as the United States share of the Project.
Assistance Listings Number (Formerly CFDA Number): 20.106 This Offer is made on and SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
CONDITIONS
1. Maximum Obligation. The maximum obligation of the United States payable under this Offer is $148,000.
The following amounts represent a breakdown of the maximum obligation for the purpose of establishing allowable amounts for any future grant amendment, which may increase the foregoing maximum obligation of the United States under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 47108(b):
$0 for planning
$148,000 for airport development or noise program implementation; and, $0 for land acquisition.
2. Grant Performance. This Grant Agreement is subject to the following Federal award requirements:
a. Period of Performance:
1. Shall start on the date the Sponsor formally accepts this Agreement and is the date signed by the last Sponsor signatory to the Agreement. The end date of the Period of Performance is 4 years (1,460 calendar days) from the date of acceptance. The Period of Performance end date shall not affect, relieve, or reduce Sponsor obligations and assurances that extend beyond the closeout of this Grant Agreement.
2. Means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions or budget periods (2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.1).
b. Budget Period:
1. For this Grant is 4 years (1,460 calendar days) and follows the same start and end date as the Period of Performance provided in paragraph 2(a)(1). Pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.403(h), the Sponsor may charge to the Grant only allowable costs incurred during the Budget Period.
2. Means the time interval from the start date of a funded portion of an award to the end date of that funded portion during which the Sponsor is authorized to expend the funds awarded, including any funds carried forward or other revisions pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.308. c. Close Out and Termination
3-06-0098-031-2024
5 1. Unless the FAA authorizes a written extension, the Sponsor must submit all Grant closeout documentation and liquidate (pay-off) all obligations incurred under this award no later than 120 calendar days after the end date of the Period of Performance. If the Sponsor does not submit all required closeout documentation within this time period, the FAA will proceed to close out the grant within one year of the Period of Performance end date with the information available at the end of 120 days (2 CFR § 200.344).
2. The FAA may terminate this Grant, in whole or in part, in accordance with the conditions set forth in 2 CFR § 200.340, or other Federal regulatory or statutory authorities as applicable.
3. Ineligible or Unallowable Costs. The Sponsor must not include any costs in the project that the FAA has determined to be ineligible or unallowable.
4. I ndirect Costs - Sponsor. The Sponsor may charge indirect costs under this award by applying the indirect cost rate identified in the project application as accepted by the FAA, to allowable costs for Sponsor direct salaries and wages.
5. D
etermining the Final Federal Share of Costs . The United States’ share of allowable project costs will be made in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 47109, the regulations, policies, and procedures of the Secretary of Transportation (“Secretary”), and any superseding legislation. Final determination of the United States’ share will be based upon the final audit of the total amount of allowable project costs and settlement will be made for any upward or downward adjustments to the Federal share of costs.
6. C
ompleting the Project Without Delay and in Conformance with Requirements . The Sponsor must carry out and complete the project without undue delays and in accordance with this Agreement, 49 U.S.C. Chapters 471 and 475, the regulations, policies, and procedures of the Secretary. Per 2 CFR § 200.308, the Sponsor agrees to report and request prior FAA approval for any disengagement from performing the project that exceeds three months or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project. The report must include a reason for the project stoppage. The Sponsor also agrees to comply with the grant assurances, which are part of this Agreement.
7. A
mendments or Withdrawals before Grant Acceptance . The FAA reserves the right to amend or withdraw this offer at any time prior to its acceptance by the Sponsor.
8. O ffer Expiration Date . This offer will expire and the United States will not be obligated to pay any part of the costs of the project unless this offer has been accepted by the Sponsor on or before September 12, 2024, or such subsequent date as may be prescribed in writing by the FAA.
9. I mproper Use of Federal Funds . The Sponsor must take all steps, including litigation if necessary, to recover Federal funds spent fraudulently, wastefully, or in violation of Federal antitrust statutes, or misused in any other manner for any project upon which Federal funds have been expended. For the purposes of this Grant Agreement, the term “Federal funds” means funds however used or dispersed by the Sponsor, that were originally paid pursuant to this or any other Federal grant agreement. The Sponsor must obtain the approval of the Secretary as to any determination of the amount of the Federal share of such funds. The Sponsor must return the recovered Federal share, including funds recovered by settlement, order, or judgment, to the Secretary. The Sponsor must furnish to the Secretary, upon request, all documents and records pertaining to the determination of the amount of the Federal share or to any settlement, litigation, negotiation, or other efforts taken to recover such funds. All settlements or other final positions of the Sponsor, in court or otherwise, involving the recovery of such Federal share require advance approval by the Secretary.
3-06-0098-031-2024
6 10. United States Not Liable for Damage or Injury. The United States is not responsible or liable for damage to property or injury to persons which may arise from, or be incident to, compliance with this Grant Agreement.
11. S ystem for Award Management (SAM) Registration and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) . a. Requirement for System for Award Management (SAM): Unless the Sponsor is exempted from this requirement under 2 CFR § 25.110, the Sponsor must maintain the currency of its information in the SAM until the Sponsor submits the final financial report required under this Grant, or receives the final payment, whichever is later. This requires that the Sponsor review and update the information at least annually after the initial registration and more frequently if required by changes in information or another award term. Additional information about registration procedures may be found at the SAM website (currently at http://www.sam.gov ).
b. Unique entity identifier (UEI) means a 12-character alpha-numeric value used to identify a specific commercial, nonprofit or governmental entity. A UEI may be obtained from SAM.gov at https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration
.
12. Electronic Grant Payment(s). Unless otherwise directed by the FAA, the Sponsor must make each payment request under this Agreement electronically via the Delphi eInvoicing System for Department of Transportation (DOT) Financial Assistance Awardees.
13. I
nformal Letter Amendment of AIP Projects. If, during the life of the project, the FAA determines that the maximum grant obligation of the United States exceeds the expected needs of the Sponsor by $25,000 or five percent (5%), whichever is greater, the FAA can issue a letter amendment to the Sponsor unilaterally reducing the maximum obligation.
The FAA can also issue a letter to the Sponsor increasing the maximum obligation if there is an overrun in the total actual eligible and allowable project costs to cover the amount of the overrun provided it will not exceed the statutory limitations for grant amendments. The FAA’s authority to increase the maximum obligation does not apply to the “planning” component of Condition No. 1, Maximum Obligation.
The FAA can also issue an informal letter amendment that modifies the grant description to correct administrative errors or to delete work items if the FAA finds it advantageous and in the best interests of the United States.
An informal letter amendment has the same force and effect as a formal grant amendment.
14. Environmental Standards. The Sponsor is required to comply with all applicable environmental standards, as further defined in the Grant Assurances, for all projects in this grant. If the Sponsor fails to comply with this requirement, the FAA may suspend, cancel, or terminate this Grant Agreement.
15. F
inancial Reporting and Payment Requirements . The Sponsor will comply with all Federal financial reporting requirements and payment requirements, including submittal of timely and accurate reports.
16. B
uy American . Unless otherwise approved in advance by the FAA, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 50101, the Sponsor will not acquire or permit any contractor or subcontractor to acquire any steel or manufactured goods produced outside the United States to be used for any project for which funds are provided under this Grant. The Sponsor will include a provision implementing Buy American in every contract and subcontract awarded under this Grant.
3-06-0098-031-2024
7 17. Build America, Buy America. The Sponsor must comply with the requirements under the Build America, Buy America Act (P.L. 117-58).
18. Ma ximum Obligation Increase. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 47108(b)(3), as amended, the maximum obligation of the United States, as stated in Condition No. 1, Maximum Obligation, of this Grant:
a. May not be increased for a planning project;
b. May be increased by not more than 15 percent for development projects, if funds are available; c. May be increased by not more than the greater of the following for a land project, if funds are available:
1. 15 percent; or
2. 25 percent of the total increase in allowable project costs attributable to acquiring an interest in the land.
If the Sponsor requests an increase, any eligible increase in funding will be subject to the United States Government share as provided in 49 U.S.C. § 47110, or other superseding legislation if applicable, for the fiscal year appropriation with which the increase is funded. The FAA is not responsible for the same Federal share provided herein for any amount increased over the initial grant amount. The FAA may adjust the Federal share as applicable through an informal letter of amendment.
19. Audits for Sponsors.
PUBLIC SPONSORS. The Sponsor must provide for a Single Audit or program-specific audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200. The Sponsor must submit the audit reporting package to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse on the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s Internet Data Entry System at http://harvester.census.gov/facweb/
. Upon request of the FAA, the Sponsor shall provide one copy of the completed audit to the FAA. Sponsors that expend less than $750,000 in Federal awards and are exempt from Federal audit requirements must make records available for review or audit by the appropriate Federal agency officials, State, and Government Accountability Office. The FAA and other appropriate Federal agencies may request additional information to meet all Federal audit requirements.
20. S
uspension or Debarment . When entering into a “covered transaction” as defined by 2 CFR § 180.200, the Sponsor must:
a. Verify the non-Federal entity is eligible to participate in this Federal program by:
1. Checking the System for Award Management Exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM) to determine if the non-Federal entity is excluded or disqualified; or
2. Collecting a certification statement from the non-Federal entity attesting they are not excluded or disqualified from participating; or
3. Adding a clause or condition to covered transactions attesting the individual or firm are not excluded or disqualified from participating.
b. Require prime contractors to comply with 2 CFR § 180.330 when entering into lower-tier transactions with their contractors and sub-contractors.
3-06-0098-031-2024
8 c. Immediately disclose in writing to the FAA whenever (1) the Sponsor learns they have entered into a covered transaction with an ineligible entity or (2) the Public Sponsor suspends or debars a contractor, person, or entity.
21. Ban on Texting While Driving.
a. In accordance with Executive Order 13513, Federal Leadership on Reducing Text Messaging While Driving, October 1, 2009, and DOT Order 3902.10, Text Messaging While Driving, December 30, 2009, the Sponsor is encouraged to:
1. Adopt and enforce workplace safety policies to decrease crashes caused by distracted drivers including policies to ban text messaging while driving when performing any work for, or on behalf of, the Federal government, including work relating to a grant or subgrant.
2. Conduct workplace safety initiatives in a manner commensurate with the size of the business, such as:
i. Establishment of new rules and programs or re-evaluation of existing programs to prohibit text messaging while driving; and
ii. Education, awareness, and other outreach to employees about the safety risks associated with texting while driving.
b. The Sponsor must insert the substance of this clause on banning texting while driving in all subgrants, contracts, and subcontracts funded with this Grant.
22. Trafficking in Persons.
a. Posting of contact information.
1. The Sponsor must post the contact information of the national human trafficking hotline (including options to reach out to the hotline such as through phone, text, or TTY) in all public airport restrooms.
b. Provisions applicable to a recipient that is a private entity.
1. You as the recipient, your employees, subrecipients under this Grant, and subrecipients’ employees may not:
i. Engage in severe forms of trafficking in persons during the period of time that the Grant and applicable conditions are in effect;
ii. Procure a commercial sex act during the period of time that the Grant and applicable conditions are in effect; or
iii. Use forced labor in the performance of the Grant or any subgrants under this Grant.
2. We as the Federal awarding agency, may unilaterally terminate this Grant, without penalty, if you or a subrecipient that is a private entity –
i. Is determined to have violated a prohibition in paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition; or ii. Has an employee who is determined by the agency official authorized to terminate the Grant to have violated a prohibition in paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition through conduct that is either –
a) Associated with performance under this Grant; or
3-06-0098-031-2024
9 b) Imputed to you or the subrecipient using the standards and due process for imputing the conduct of an individual to an organization that are provided in 2 CFR Part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement),” as implemented by our agency at 2 CFR Part 1200. c. Provision applicable to a recipient other than a private entity. We as the Federal awarding agency may unilaterally terminate this Grant, without penalty, if a subrecipient that is a private entity –
1. Is determined to have violated an applicable prohibition in paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition; or
2. Has an employee who is determined by the agency official authorized to terminate the Grant to have violated an applicable prohibition in paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition through conduct that is either –
i. Associated with performance under this Grant; or
ii. Imputed to the subrecipient using the standards and due process for imputing the conduct of an individual to an organization that are provided in 2 CFR Part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement),” as implemented by our agency at 2 CFR Part 1200. d. Provisions applicable to any recipient.
1. You must inform us immediately of any information you receive from any source alleging a violation of a prohibition in paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition.
2. Our right to terminate unilaterally that is described in paragraph (b) or (c) of this Grant Condition:
i. Implements section 106(g) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), as amended [22 U.S.C. § 7104(g)], and
ii. Is in addition to all other remedies for noncompliance that are available to us under this Grant.
3. You must include the requirements of paragraph (b) of this Grant Condition in any subgrant you make to a private entity.
e. Definitions. For purposes of this Grant Condition:
1. “Employee” means either:
i. An individual employed by you or a subrecipient who is engaged in the performance of the project or program under this Grant; or
ii. Another person engaged in the performance of the project or program under this Grant and not compensated by you including, but not limited to, a volunteer or individual whose services are contributed by a third party as an in-kind contribution toward cost sharing or matching requirements.
2. “Forced labor” means labor obtained by any of the following methods: the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.
3. “Private entity”:
3-06-0098-031-2024
10 i. Means any entity other than a State, local government, Indian tribe, or foreign public entity, as those terms are defined in 2 CFR § 175.25.
ii. Includes:
a) A nonprofit organization, including any nonprofit institute of higher education, hospital, or tribal organization other than one included in the definition of Indian tribe at 2 CFR § 175.25(b).
b) A for-profit organization.
4. “Severe forms of trafficking in persons,” “commercial sex act,” and “coercion” have the meanings given at section 103 of the TVPA, as amended (22 U.S.C. § 7102).
23. AIP Funded Work Included in a PFC Application. Within 120 days of acceptance of this Grant Agreement, the Sponsor must submit to the FAA an amendment to any approved Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) application that contains an approved PFC project also covered under this Grant Agreement as described in the project application. The airport sponsor may not make any expenditure under this Grant Agreement until project work addressed under this Grant Agreement is removed from an approved PFC application by amendment.
24. E
xhibit “A” Property Map. The Exhibit “A” Property Map dated January 25, 2017, is incorporated herein by reference or is submitted with the project application and made part of this Grant Agreement.
25. E
mployee Protection from Reprisal .
a. Prohibition of Reprisals.
1. In accordance with 41 U.S.C. § 4712, an employee of a Sponsor, grantee, subgrantee, contractor, or subcontractor may not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing to a person or body described in sub-paragraph (a)(2) below, information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of:
i. Gross mismanagement of a Federal grant;
ii. Gross waste of Federal funds;
iii. An abuse of authority relating to implementation or use of Federal funds; iv. A substantial and specific danger to public health or safety; or v. A violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a Federal grant.
2. Persons and bodies covered. The persons and bodies to which a disclosure by an employee is covered are as follows:
i. A member of Congress or a representative of a committee of Congress; ii. An Inspector General;
iii. The Government Accountability Office;
iv. A Federal employee responsible for contract or grant oversight or management at the relevant agency;
v. A court or grand jury;
3-06-0098-031-2024
11 vi. A management official or other employee of the Sponsor, contractor, or subcontractor who has the responsibility to investigate, discover, or address misconduct; or vii. An authorized official of the Department of Justice or other law enforcement agency. b. Investigation of Complaints.
1. Submission of Complaint. A person who believes that they have been subjected to a reprisal prohibited by paragraph (a) of this Condition may submit a complaint regarding the reprisal to the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of Transportation.
2. Time Limitation for Submittal of a Complaint. A complaint may not be brought under this subsection more than three years after the date on which the alleged reprisal took place.
3. Required Actions of the Inspector General. Actions, limitations, and exceptions of the Inspector General’s office are established under 41 U.S.C. § 4712(b). c. Remedy and Enforcement Authority.
1. Assumption of Rights to Civil Remedy. Upon receipt of an explanation of a decision not to conduct or continue an investigation by the OIG, the person submitting a complaint assumes the right to a civil remedy under 41 U.S.C. § 4712(c)(2).
26. Prohibited Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services and Equipment. The Sponsor agrees to comply with mandatory standards and policies relating to use and procurement of certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment in compliance with the National Defense Authorization Act [P.L. 115-232 § 889(f)(1)] and 2 CFR § 200.216.
27. C
ritical Infrastructure Security and Resilience . The Sponsor acknowledges that it has considered and addressed physical and cybersecurity and resilience in their project planning, design, and oversight, as determined by the DOT and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). For airports that do not have specific DOT or DHS cybersecurity requirements, the FAA encourages the voluntary adoption of the cybersecurity requirements from the Transportation Security Administration and Federal Security Director identified for security risk Category X airports.
28. T
itle VI of the Civil Rights Act. As a condition of a grant award, the Sponsor shall demonstrate that it complies with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq) and implementing regulations (49 CFR part 21), the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 (49 U.S.C. § 47123), the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq.), U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Assurances, and other relevant civil rights statutes, regulations, or authorities. This may include, as applicable, providing a current Title VI Program Plan and a Community Participation Plan (alternatively may be called a Public Participation Plan) to the FAA for approval, in the format and according to the timeline required by the FAA, and other information about the communities that will be benefited and impacted by the project. A completed FAA Title VI Pre-Grant Award Checklist is also required for every grant application, unless excused by the FAA. The Sponsor shall affirmatively ensure that when carrying out any project supported by this grant that it complies with all federal nondiscrimination and civil rights laws based on race, color, national origin (including limited English proficiency), sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), creed, age, disability, genetic information, or environmental justice in consideration for federal financial assistance. The Sponsor, who has not sufficiently demonstrated the conditions of compliance with civil rights requirements will be required to do so before receiving funds. The Department’s and FAA’s Office of Civil Rights
3-06-0098-031-2024
12 may provide resources and technical assistance to recipients to ensure full and sustainable compliance with Federal civil rights requirements. Failure to comply with civil rights requirements will be considered a violation of the agreement or contract and be subject to any enforcement action as authorized by law.
29. FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. This grant agreement is subject to the terms and conditions contained herein including the terms known as the Grant Assurances as they were published in the Federal Register on May 2022. On May 16, 2024, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 made certain amendments to 49 U.S.C. chapter 471. The Reauthorization Act will require FAA to make certain amendments to the assurances in order to best achieve consistency with the statute. Federal law requires that FAA publish any amendments to the assurances in the Federal Register along with an opportunity to comment. In order not to delay the offer of this grant, the existing assurances are attached herein; however, FAA shall interpret and apply these assurances consistent with the Reauthorization Act. To the extent there is a conflict between the assurances and Federal statutes, the statutes shall apply. The full text of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 is at https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/3935/text.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
30. Pavement Maintenance Management Program. The Sponsor agrees that it will implement an effective airport pavement maintenance management program as required by Airport Sponsor Grant Assurance 11, Pavement Preventive Maintenance-Management, which is codified at 49 U.S.C. § 47105(e). The Sponsor agrees that it will use the program for the useful life of any pavement constructed, reconstructed, rehabilitated, or repaired with Federal financial assistance at the airport. The Sponsor further agrees that the program will:
a. Follow the current version of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5380-6, “Guidelines and Procedures for Maintenance of Airport Pavements,” for specific guidelines and procedures for maintaining airport pavements, establishing an effective maintenance program, specific types of distress and its probable cause, inspection guidelines, and recommended methods of repair;
b. Detail the procedures to be followed to assure that proper pavement maintenance, both preventive and repair, is performed;
c. Include a Pavement Inventory, Inspection Schedule, Record Keeping, Information Retrieval, and Reference, meeting the following requirements:
1. Pavement Inventory. The following must be depicted in an appropriate form and level of detail:
i. Location of all runways, taxiways, and aprons;
ii. Dimensions;
iii. Type of pavement; and,
iv. Year of construction or most recent major reconstruction, rehabilitation, or repair.
2. Inspection Schedule.
i. Detailed Inspection. A detailed inspection must be performed at least once a year. If a history of recorded pavement deterioration is available, i.e., Pavement Condition
3-06-0098-031-2024
13 Index (PCI) survey as set forth in the current version of Advisory Circular 150/5380- 6, the frequency of inspections may be extended to three years. ii. Drive-By Inspection. A drive-by inspection must be performed a minimum of once per month to detect unexpected changes in the pavement condition. For drive-by inspections, the date of inspection and any maintenance performed must be recorded.
3. Record Keeping. Complete information on the findings of all detailed inspections and on the maintenance performed must be recorded and kept on file for a minimum of five years. The type of distress, location, and remedial action, scheduled or performed, must be documented. The minimum information is:
i. Inspection date;
ii. Location;
iii. Distress types; and
iv. Maintenance scheduled or performed.
4. Information Retrieval System. The Sponsor must be able to retrieve the information and records produced by the pavement survey to provide a report to the FAA as may be required.
31. Buy American Executive Orders. The Sponsor agrees to abide by applicable Executive Orders in effect at the time this Grant Agreement is executed, including Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers.
32. Le
aded Fuel. FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-63) Section 770 “Grant Assurances” requires airports that made 100-octane low lead aviation gasoline (100LL) available, any time during calendar year 2022, to not prohibit or restrict the sale, or self-fueling, of such aviation gasoline. This requirement remains until the earlier of 2030, or the date on which the airport or any retail fuel seller at the airport makes available an FAA-authorized unleaded aviation gasoline replacement for 100LL meeting either an industry consensus standard or other standard that facilitates the safe use, production, and distribution of such unleaded aviation gasoline as deemed appropriate by the Administrator. The Sponsor understands and agrees, that any violations are subject to civil penalties.
3-06-0098-031-2024
14 The Sponsor’s acceptance of this Offer and ratification and adoption of the Project Application incorporated herein shall be evidenced by execution of this instrument by the Sponsor, as hereinafter provided, and this Offer and Acceptance shall comprise a Grant Agreement, constituting the contractual obligations and rights of the United States and the Sponsor with respect to the accomplishment of the Project and compliance with the Grant Assurances, terms, and conditions as provided herein. Such Grant Agreement shall become effective upon the Sponsor’s acceptance of this Offer.
Please read the following information: By signing this document, you are agreeing that you have reviewed the following consumer disclosure information and consent to transact business using electronic communications, to receive notices and disclosures electronically, and to utilize electronic signatures in lieu of using paper documents. You are not required to receive notices and disclosures or sign documents electronically. If you prefer not to do so, you may request to receive paper copies and withdraw your consent at any time.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
{{Sig_es_:signer1:signature:dimension(height=12mm, width=70mm}} (Signature)
{{N_es_:signer1:fullname }}
(Typed Name)
{{N_es_:signer1:title }}
(Title of FAA Official)
1 Knowingly and willfully providing false information to the Federal government is a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements) and could subject you to fines, imprisonment, or both.
Amy Choi (Sep 5, 2024 19:30 PDT)
Amy Choi
Amy Choi
Manager, SFO ADO
3-06-0098-031-2024
15 Part II - Acceptance
The Sponsor does hereby ratify and adopt all assurances, statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the Project Application and incorporated materials referred to in the foregoing Offer, and does hereby accept this Offer and by such acceptance agrees to comply with all of the Grant Assurances, terms, and conditions in this Offer and in the Project Application.
Please read the following information: By signing this document, you are agreeing that you have reviewed the following consumer disclosure information and consent to transact business using electronic communications, to receive notices and disclosures electronically, and to utilize electronic signatures in lieu of using paper documents. You are not required to receive notices and disclosures or sign documents electronically. If you prefer not to do so, you may request to receive paper copies and withdraw your consent at any time.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 2 Dated {{DateTime_es_:signer2:calc(now()):format(date," mmmm d, yyyy")}}
City of Hanford
(Name of Sponsor)
{{Sig_es_:signer2:signature:dimension(height=12mm, width=70mm}} (Signature of Sponsor’s Authorized Official)
By: {{N_es_:signer2:fullname }} (Typed Name of Sponsor’s Authorized Official)
Title: {{*Ttl_es_:signer2:title }} (Title of Sponsor’s Authorized Official)
2 Knowingly and willfully providing false information to the Federal government is a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements) and could subject you to fines, imprisonment, or both.
Mario Cifuentez II (Sep 6, 2024 15:14 PDT)
Mario Cifuentez II
September 6, 2024
Mario Cifuentez II
City Manager
3-06-0098-031-2024
16 CERTIFICATE OF SPONSOR’S ATTORNEY
I, {{N_es_:signer3: fullname}}, acting as Attorney for the Sponsor do hereby certify:
That in my opinion the Sponsor is empowered to enter into the foregoing Grant Agreement under the laws of the State of __California__. Further, I have examined the foregoing Grant Agreement and the actions taken by said Sponsor and Sponsor’s official representative, who has been duly authorized to execute this Grant Agreement, which is in all respects due and proper and in accordance with the laws of the said State; and Title 49, United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapters 471 and 475; 49 U.S.C. §§ 40101 et seq., and 48103; FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254); the Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260, Division L); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 ( P.L. 117-103); Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 ( P.L. 117-328); Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (P.L. 118-42); FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-63); and the representations contained in the Project Application. In addition, for grants involving projects to be carried out on property not owned by the Sponsor, there are no legal impediments that will prevent full performance by the Sponsor. Further, it is my opinion that the said Grant Agreement constitutes a legal and binding obligation of the Sponsor in accordance with the terms thereof.
Please read the following information: By signing this document, you are agreeing that you have reviewed the following consumer disclosure information and consent to transact business using electronic communications, to receive notices and disclosures electronically, and to utilize electronic signatures in lieu of using paper documents. You are not required to receive notices and disclosures or sign documents electronically. If you prefer not to do so, you may request to receive paper copies and withdraw your consent at any time.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 3 Dated at {{DateTime_es_:signer3:calc(now()):format(date," mmmm d, yyyy")}} By: {{Sig_es_:signer3:signature:dimension(height=12mm, width=70mm}} (Signature of Sponsor’s Attorney)
3 Knowingly and willfully providing false information to the Federal government is a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements) and could subject you to fines, imprisonment, or both.
Ty N. Mizote
September 6, 2024
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 1 of 18
ASSURANCES
AIRPORT SPONSORS
A. General.
1. These assurances shall be complied with in the performance of grant agreements for airport development, airport planning, and noise compatibility program grants for airport sponsors.
2. These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the project application by sponsors requesting funds under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. As used herein, the term "public agency sponsor" means a public agency with control of a public-use airport; the term "private sponsor" means a private owner of a public-use airport; and the term "sponsor" includes both public agency sponsors and private sponsors.
3. Upon acceptance of this grant offer by the sponsor, these assurances are incorporated in and become part of this Grant Agreement.
B. Duration and Applicability.
1. Airport development or Noise Compatibility Program Projects Undertaken by a Public Agency Sponsor.
The terms, conditions and assurances of this Grant Agreement shall remain in full force and effect throughout the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired for an airport development or noise compatibility program project, or throughout the useful life of the project items installed within a facility under a noise compatibility program project, but in any event not to exceed twenty (20) years from the date of acceptance of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project. However, there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport. There shall be no limit on the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances with respect to real property acquired with federal funds. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil Rights assurance shall be specified in the assurances.
2. Airport Development or Noise Compatibility Projects Undertaken by a Private Sponsor.
The preceding paragraph (1) also applies to a private sponsor except that the useful life of project items installed within a facility or the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired under an airport development or noise compatibility program project shall be no less than ten (10) years from the date of acceptance of Federal aid for the project.
3. Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor.
Unless otherwise specified in this Grant Agreement, only Assurances 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 18, 23, 25, 30, 32, 33, 34, and 37 in Section C apply to planning projects. The terms, conditions, and assurances of this Grant Agreement shall remain in full force and effect during the life of the project; there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 2 of 18 C. Sponsor Certification.
The sponsor hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this grant that:
1. General Federal Requirements
It will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the application, acceptance, and use of Federal funds for this Grant including but not limited to the following:
FEDERAL LEGISLATION
a. 49 U.S.C. subtitle VII, as amended.
b. Davis-Bacon Act, as amended — 40 U.S.C. §§ 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147, et seq.1 c. Federal Fair Labor Standards Act – 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. d. Hatch Act – 5 U.S.C. § 1501, et seq.2
e. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 42 U.S.C. § 4601, et seq.
1, 2
f. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 – Section 106 – 54 U.S.C. § 306108.1 g. Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 – 54 U.S.C. § 312501, et seq.1 h. Native Americans Grave Repatriation Act – 25 U.S.C. § 3001, et seq. i. Clean Air Act, P.L. 90-148, as amended – 42 U.S.C. § 7401, et seq. j. Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 92-583, as amended – 16 U.S.C. § 1451, et seq. k. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 – Section 102(a) - 42 U.S.C. § 4012a.1 l. 49 U.S.C. § 303, (formerly known as Section 4(f)).
m. Rehabilitation Act of 1973 – 29 U.S.C. § 794.
n. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252) (prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin). o. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.) (prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability).
p. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 – 42 U.S.C. § 6101, et seq. q. American Indian Religious Freedom Act, P.L. 95-341, as amended. r. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended – 42 U.S.C. § 4151, et seq.1 s. Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 – Section 403 – 42 U.S.C. § 8373.1 t. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act – 40 U.S.C. § 3701, et seq.1 u. Copeland Anti-kickback Act – 18 U.S.C. § 874.1
v. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 – 42 U.S.C. § 4321, et seq.1 w. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P.L. 90-542, as amended – 16 U.S.C. § 1271, et seq. x. Single Audit Act of 1984 – 31 U.S.C. § 7501, et seq.2
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 3 of 18 y. Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 – 41 U.S.C. §§ 8101 through 8105. z. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, as amended (P.L. 109-282, as amended by section 6202 of P.L. 110-252).
aa. Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, P.L. 100-259. bb. Build America, Buy America Act, P.L. 117-58, Title IX.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS
a. Executive Order 11246 – Equal Employment Opportunity1 b. Executive Order 11990 – Protection of Wetlands
c. Executive Order 11998 – Flood Plain Management
d. Executive Order 12372 – Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs e. Executive Order 12699 – Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted New Building Construction1
f. Executive Order 12898 – Environmental Justice
g. Executive Order 13166 – Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency
h. Executive Order 13985 – Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government
i. Executive Order 13988 - Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation
j. Executive Order 14005 – Ensuring the Future is Made in all of America by All of America’s Workers
k. Executive Order 14008 – Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad
FEDERAL REGULATIONS
a. 2 CFR Part 180 – OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement).
b. 2 CFR Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 4, 5
c. 2 CFR Part 1200 – Nonprocurement Suspension and Debarment. d. 14 CFR Part 13 – Investigative and Enforcement Procedures. e. 14 CFR Part 16 – Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings. f. 14 CFR Part 150 – Airport Noise Compatibility Planning. g. 28 CFR Part 35 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services.
h. 28 CFR § 50.3 – U.S. Department of Justice Guidelines for the Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
i. 29 CFR Part 1 – Procedures for Predetermination of Wage Rates.1
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 4 of 18 j. 29 CFR Part 3 – Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States.1 k. 29 CFR Part 5 – Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (Also Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Nonconstruction Contracts Subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act).1 l. 41 CFR Part 60 – Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor (Federal and Federally-assisted contracting requirements).1 m. 49 CFR Part 20 – New Restrictions on Lobbying.
n. 49 CFR Part 21 – Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation - Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. o. 49 CFR Part 23 – Participation by Disadvantage Business Enterprise in Airport Concessions. p. 49 CFR Part 24 – Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally-Assisted Programs.1, 2
q. 49 CFR Part 26 – Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs.
r. 49 CFR Part 27 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.1
s. 49 CFR Part 28 – Enforcement of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities Conducted by the Department of Transportation. t. 49 CFR Part 30 – Denial of Public Works Contracts to Suppliers of Goods and Services of Countries That Deny Procurement Market Access to U.S. Contractors. u. 49 CFR Part 32 – Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance).
v. 49 CFR Part 37 – Transportation Services for Individuals with Disabilities (ADA). w. 49 CFR Part 38 – Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Specifications for Transportation Vehicles.
x. 49 CFR Part 41 – Seismic Safety.
FOOTNOTES TO ASSURANCE (C)(1)
1 These laws do not apply to airport planning sponsors. 2 These laws do not apply to private sponsors.
3 2 CFR Part 200 contains requirements for State and Local Governments receiving Federal assistance. Any requirement levied upon State and Local Governments by this regulation shall apply where applicable to private sponsors receiving Federal assistance under Title 49, United States Code.
4 Cost principles established in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E must be used as guidelines for determining the eligibility of specific types of expenses. 5 Audit requirements established in 2 CFR part 200 subpart F are the guidelines for audits.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 5 of 18
SPECIFIC ASSURANCES
Specific assurances required to be included in grant agreements by any of the above laws, regulations or circulars are incorporated by reference in this Grant Agreement.
2. Responsibility and Authority of the Sponsor.
a. Public Agency Sponsor:
It has legal authority to apply for this Grant, and to finance and carry out the proposed project; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide such additional information as may be required. b. Private Sponsor:
It has legal authority to apply for this Grant and to finance and carry out the proposed project and comply with all terms, conditions, and assurances of this Grant Agreement. It shall designate an official representative and shall in writing direct and authorize that person to file this application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein; to act in connection with this application; and to provide such additional information as may be required.
3. Sponsor Fund Availability.
It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which are not to be paid by the United States. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and maintenance of items funded under this Grant Agreement which it will own or control.
4. Good Title.
a. It, a public agency or the Federal government, holds good title, satisfactory to the Secretary, to the landing area of the airport or site thereof, or will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that good title will be acquired.
b. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds good title satisfactory to the Secretary to that portion of the property upon which Federal funds will be expended or will give assurance to the Secretary that good title will be obtained.
5. Preserving Rights and Powers.
a. It will not take or permit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this Grant Agreement without the written approval of the Secretary, and will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such performance by the sponsor. This shall be done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary.
b. Subject to the FAA Act of 2018, Public Law 115-254, Section 163, it will not sell, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on Exhibit A to this application or, for a noise compatibility program project, that portion of the property upon which Federal funds have been expended, for the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this Grant Agreement without approval by the
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 6 of 18 Secretary. If the transferee is found by the Secretary to be eligible under Title 49, United States Code, to assume the obligations of this Grant Agreement and to have the power, authority, and financial resources to carry out all such obligations, the sponsor shall insert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponsor's interest, and make binding upon the transferee all of the terms, conditions, and assurances contained in this Grant Agreement. c. For all noise compatibility program projects which are to be carried out by another unit of local government or are on property owned by a unit of local government other than the sponsor, it will enter into an agreement with that government. Except as otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall obligate that government to the same terms, conditions, and assurances that would be applicable to it if it applied directly to the FAA for a grant to undertake the noise compatibility program project. That agreement and changes thereto must be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the local government if there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. d. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on privately owned property, it will enter into an agreement with the owner of that property which includes provisions specified by the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the property owner whenever there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. e. If the sponsor is a private sponsor, it will take steps satisfactory to the Secretary to ensure that the airport will continue to function as a public-use airport in accordance with these assurances for the duration of these assurances.
f. If an arrangement is made for management and operation of the airport by any agency or person other than the sponsor or an employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to ensure that the airport will be operated and maintained in accordance with Title 49, United States Code, the regulations and the terms, conditions and assurances in this Grant Agreement and shall ensure that such arrangement also requires compliance therewith.
g. Sponsors of commercial service airports will not permit or enter into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner or tenant of a property used as a residence, or zoned for residential use, to taxi an aircraft between that property and any location on airport. Sponsors of general aviation airports entering into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner of residential real property adjacent to or near the airport must comply with the requirements of Sec. 136 of Public Law 112-95 and the sponsor assurances.
6. Consistency with Local Plans.
The project is reasonably consistent with plans (existing at the time of submission of this application) of public agencies that are authorized by the State in which the project is located to plan for the development of the area surrounding the airport.
7. Consideration of Local Interest.
It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near where the project may be located.
8. Consultation with Users.
In making a decision to undertake any airport development project under Title 49, United States Code, it has undertaken reasonable consultations with affected parties using the airport at which project is proposed.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 7 of 18
9. Public Hearings.
In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major runway extension, it has afforded the opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the economic, social, and environmental effects of the airport or runway location and its consistency with goals and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community and it shall, when requested by the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to the Secretary.
Further, for such projects, it has on its management board either voting representation from the communities where the project is located or has advised the communities that they have the right to petition the Secretary concerning a proposed project.
10. Metropolitan Planning Organization.
In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major runway extension at a medium or large hub airport, the sponsor has made available to and has provided upon request to the metropolitan planning organization in the area in which the airport is located, if any, a copy of the proposed amendment to the airport layout plan to depict the project and a copy of any airport master plan in which the project is described or depicted.
11. Pavement Preventive Maintenance-Management.
With respect to a project approved after January 1, 1995, for the replacement or reconstruction of pavement at the airport, it assures or certifies that it has implemented an effective airport pavement maintenance-management program and it assures that it will use such program for the useful life of any pavement constructed, reconstructed or repaired with Federal financial assistance at the airport. It will provide such reports on pavement condition and pavement management programs as the Secretary determines may be useful.
12. Terminal Development Prerequisites.
For projects which include terminal development at a public use airport, as defined in Title 49, it has, on the date of submittal of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required for certification of such airport under 49 U.S.C. § 44706, and all the security equipment required by rule or regulation, and has provided for access to the passenger enplaning and deplaning area of such airport to passengers enplaning and deplaning from aircraft other than air carrier aircraft.
13. Accounting System, Audit, and Record Keeping Requirements. a. It shall keep all project accounts and records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds of this Grant, the total cost of the project in connection with which this Grant is given or used, and the amount or nature of that portion of the cost of the project supplied by other sources, and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The accounts and records shall be kept in accordance with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984. b. It shall make available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, for the purpose of audit and examination, any books, documents, papers, and records of the recipient that are pertinent to this Grant. The Secretary may require that an appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient. In any case in which an independent audit is made of the accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the project in connection with which this Grant was given or used, it shall file a certified copy of such audit with the Comptroller General of the United
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 8 of 18 States not later than six (6) months following the close of the fiscal year for which the audit was made.
14. Minimum Wage Rates.
It shall include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects funded under this Grant Agreement which involve labor, provisions establishing minimum rates of wages, to be predetermined by the Secretary of Labor under 40 U.S.C. §§ 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147, Public Building, Property, and Works), which contractors shall pay to skilled and unskilled labor, and such minimum rates shall be stated in the invitation for bids and shall be included in proposals or bids for the work.
15. Veteran's Preference.
It shall include in all contracts for work on any project funded under this Grant Agreement which involve labor, such provisions as are necessary to insure that, in the employment of labor (except in executive, administrative, and supervisory positions), preference shall be given to Vietnam era veterans, Persian Gulf veterans, Afghanistan-Iraq war veterans, disabled veterans, and small business concerns owned and controlled by disabled veterans as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 47112.
However, this preference shall apply only where the individuals are available and qualified to perform the work to which the employment relates.
16. Conformity to Plans and Specifications.
It will execute the project subject to plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary.
Such plans, specifications, and schedules shall be submitted to the Secretary prior to commencement of site preparation, construction, or other performance under this Grant Agreement, and, upon approval of the Secretary, shall be incorporated into this Grant Agreement.
Any modification to the approved plans, specifications, and schedules shall also be subject to approval of the Secretary, and incorporated into this Grant Agreement.
17. Construction Inspection and Approval.
It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at the construction site throughout the project to assure that the work conforms to the plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary for the project. It shall subject the construction work on any project contained in an approved project application to inspection and approval by the Secretary and such work shall be in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Such regulations and procedures shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsors of such project as the Secretary shall deem necessary.
18. Planning Projects.
In carrying out planning projects:
a. It will execute the project in accordance with the approved program narrative contained in the project application or with the modifications similarly approved. b. It will furnish the Secretary with such periodic reports as required pertaining to the planning project and planning work activities.
c. It will include in all published material prepared in connection with the planning project a notice that the material was prepared under a grant provided by the United States.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 9 of 18 d. It will make such material available for examination by the public, and agrees that no material prepared with funds under this project shall be subject to copyright in the United States or any other country.
e. It will give the Secretary unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use any of the material prepared in connection with this grant. f. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the sponsor's employment of specific consultants and their subcontractors to do all or any part of this project as well as the right to disapprove the proposed scope and cost of professional services. g. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the use of the sponsor's employees to do all or any part of the project.
h. It understands and agrees that the Secretary's approval of this project grant or the Secretary's approval of any planning material developed as part of this grant does not constitute or imply any assurance or commitment on the part of the Secretary to approve any pending or future application for a Federal airport grant.
19. Operation and Maintenance.
a. The airport and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport, other than facilities owned or controlled by the United States, shall be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with the minimum standards as may be required or prescribed by applicable Federal, state, and local agencies for maintenance and operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes. It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected therewith, with due regard to climatic and flood conditions. Any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non-aeronautical purposes must first be approved by the Secretary. In furtherance of this assurance, the sponsor will have in effect arrangements for:
1. Operating the airport's aeronautical facilities whenever required;
2. Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport conditions, including temporary conditions; and
3. Promptly notifying pilots of any condition affecting aeronautical use of the airport. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the airport be operated for aeronautical use during temporary periods when snow, flood, or other climatic conditions interfere with such operation and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the maintenance, repair, restoration, or replacement of any structure or facility which is substantially damaged or destroyed due to an act of God or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor. b. It will suitably operate and maintain noise compatibility program items that it owns or controls upon which Federal funds have been expended.
20. Hazard Removal and Mitigation.
It will take appropriate action to assure that such terminal airspace as is required to protect instrument and visual operations to the airport (including established minimum flight altitudes) will be adequately cleared and protected by removing, lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of future airport hazards.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 10 of 18
21. Compatible Land Use.
It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft. In addition, if the project is for noise compatibility program implementation, it will not cause or permit any change in land use, within its jurisdiction, that will reduce its compatibility, with respect to the airport, of the noise compatibility program measures upon which Federal funds have been expended.
22. Economic Nondiscrimination.
a. It will make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the airport. b. In any agreement, contract, lease, or other arrangement under which a right or privilege at the airport is granted to any person, firm, or corporation to conduct or to engage in any aeronautical activity for furnishing services to the public at the airport, the sponsor will insert and enforce provisions requiring the contractor to:
1. Furnish said services on a reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, basis to all users thereof, and
2. Charge reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, prices for each unit or service, provided that the contractor may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers. c. Each fixed-based operator at the airport shall be subject to the same rates, fees, rentals, and other charges as are uniformly applicable to all other fixed-based operators making the same or similar uses of such airport and utilizing the same or similar facilities. d. Each air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based operator that is authorized or permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport. e. Each air carrier using such airport (whether as a tenant, non-tenant, or subtenant of another air carrier tenant) shall be subject to such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rules, regulations, conditions, rates, fees, rentals, and other charges with respect to facilities directly and substantially related to providing air transportation as are applicable to all such air carriers which make similar use of such airport and utilize similar facilities, subject to reasonable classifications such as tenants or non-tenants and signatory carriers and non-signatory carriers.
Classification or status as tenant or signatory shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations substantially similar to those already imposed on air carriers in such classification or status.
f. It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or corporation operating aircraft on the airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own employees (including, but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling) that it may choose to perform.
g. In the event the sponsor itself exercises any of the rights and privileges referred to in this assurance, the services involved will be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of such services by commercial aeronautical service providers authorized by the sponsor under these provisions.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 11 of 18 h. The sponsor may establish such reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, conditions to be met by all users of the airport as may be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the airport.
i. The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public.
23. Exclusive Rights.
It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any person providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public. For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the following apply:
a. It would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services, and
b. If allowing more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to an existing agreement between such single fixed-based operator and such airport. It further agrees that it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct any aeronautical activities, including, but not limited to charter flights, pilot training, aircraft rental and sightseeing, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying, air carrier operations, aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in conjunction with other aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft, sale of aircraft parts, and any other activities which because of their direct relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity, and that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an aeronautical activity now existing at such an airport before the grant of any assistance under Title 49, United States Code.
24. Fee and Rental Structure.
It will maintain a fee and rental structure for the facilities and services at the airport which will make the airport as self-sustaining as possible under the circumstances existing at the particular airport, taking into account such factors as the volume of traffic and economy of collection. No part of the Federal share of an airport development, airport planning or noise compatibility project for which a Grant is made under Title 49, United States Code, the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, the Federal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 shall be included in the rate basis in establishing fees, rates, and charges for users of that airport.
25. Airport Revenues.
a. All revenues generated by the airport and any local taxes on aviation fuel established after December 30, 1987, will be expended by it for the capital or operating costs of the airport; the local airport system; or other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the airport and which are directly and substantially related to the actual air transportation of passengers or property; or for noise mitigation purposes on or off the airport.
The following exceptions apply to this paragraph:
1. If covenants or assurances in debt obligations issued before September 3, 1982, by the owner or operator of the airport, or provisions enacted before September 3, 1982, in governing statutes controlling the owner or operator's financing, provide for the use of the
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 12 of 18 revenues from any of the airport owner or operator's facilities, including the airport, to support not only the airport but also the airport owner or operator's general debt obligations or other facilities, then this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the airport (and, in the case of a public airport, local taxes on aviation fuel) shall not apply.
2. If the Secretary approves the sale of a privately owned airport to a public sponsor and provides funding for any portion of the public sponsor’s acquisition of land, this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the sale shall not apply to certain proceeds from the sale. This is conditioned on repayment to the Secretary by the private owner of an amount equal to the remaining unamortized portion (amortized over a 20-year period) of any airport improvement grant made to the private owner for any purpose other than land acquisition on or after October 1, 1996, plus an amount equal to the federal share of the current fair market value of any land acquired with an airport improvement grant made to that airport on or after October 1, 1996.
3. Certain revenue derived from or generated by mineral extraction, production, lease, or other means at a general aviation airport (as defined at 49 U.S.C. § 47102), if the FAA determines the airport sponsor meets the requirements set forth in Section 813 of Public Law 112-95.
b. As part of the annual audit required under the Single Audit Act of 1984, the sponsor will direct that the audit will review, and the resulting audit report will provide an opinion concerning, the use of airport revenue and taxes in paragraph (a), and indicating whether funds paid or transferred to the owner or operator are paid or transferred in a manner consistent with Title 49, United States Code and any other applicable provision of law, including any regulation promulgated by the Secretary or Administrator.
c. Any civil penalties or other sanctions will be imposed for violation of this assurance in accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 47107.
26. Reports and Inspections.
It will:
a. submit to the Secretary such annual or special financial and operations reports as the Secretary may reasonably request and make such reports available to the public; make available to the public at reasonable times and places a report of the airport budget in a format prescribed by the Secretary;
b. for airport development projects, make the airport and all airport records and documents affecting the airport, including deeds, leases, operation and use agreements, regulations and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request;
c. for noise compatibility program projects, make records and documents relating to the project and continued compliance with the terms, conditions, and assurances of this Grant Agreement including deeds, leases, agreements, regulations, and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; and d. in a format and time prescribed by the Secretary, provide to the Secretary and make available to the public following each of its fiscal years, an annual report listing in detail:
1. all amounts paid by the airport to any other unit of government and the purposes for which each such payment was made; and
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 13 of 18
2. all services and property provided by the airport to other units of government and the amount of compensation received for provision of each such service and property.
27. Use by Government Aircraft.
It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at all times without charge, except, if the use by Government aircraft is substantial, charge may be made for a reasonable share, proportional to such use, for the cost of operating and maintaining the facilities used. Unless otherwise determined by the Secretary, or otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and the using agency, substantial use of an airport by Government aircraft will be considered to exist when operations of such aircraft are in excess of those which, in the opinion of the Secretary, would unduly interfere with use of the landing areas by other authorized aircraft, or during any calendar month that:
a. Five (5) or more Government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on land adjacent thereto; or
b. The total number of movements (counting each landing as a movement) of Government aircraft is 300 or more, or the gross accumulative weight of Government aircraft using the airport (the total movement of Government aircraft multiplied by gross weights of such aircraft) is in excess of five million pounds.
28. Land for Federal Facilities.
It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in connection with any air traffic control or air navigation activities, or weather-reporting and communication activities related to air traffic control, any areas of land or water, or estate therein as the Secretary considers necessary or desirable for construction, operation, and maintenance at Federal expense of space or facilities for such purposes. Such areas or any portion thereof will be made available as provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary.
29. Airport Layout Plan.
a. Subject to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, Public Law 115-254, Section 163, it will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the airport showing:
1. boundaries of the airport and all proposed additions thereto, together with the boundaries of all offsite areas owned or controlled by the sponsor for airport purposes and proposed additions thereto;
2. the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport facilities and structures (such as runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal buildings, hangars and roads), including all proposed extensions and reductions of existing airport facilities;
3. the location of all existing and proposed non-aviation areas and of all existing improvements thereon; and
4. all proposed and existing access points used to taxi aircraft across the airport’s property boundary.
Such airport layout plans and each amendment, revision, or modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary on the face of the airport layout plan. The sponsor will not make or permit any changes or alterations in the airport or any of its facilities
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 14 of 18 which are not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary and which might, in the opinion of the Secretary, adversely affect the safety, utility or efficiency of the airport.
b. Subject to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, Public Law 115-254, Section 163, if a change or alteration in the airport or the facilities is made which the Secretary determines adversely affects the safety, utility, or efficiency of any federally owned, leased, or funded property on or off the airport and which is not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary, the owner or operator will, if requested, by the Secretary:
1. eliminate such adverse effect in a manner approved by the Secretary; or
2. bear all costs of relocating such property (or replacement thereof) to a site acceptable to the Secretary and all costs of restoring such property (or replacement thereof) to the level of safety, utility, efficiency, and cost of operation existing before the unapproved change in the airport or its facilities except in the case of a relocation or replacement of an existing airport facility due to a change in the Secretary’s design standards beyond the control of the airport sponsor.
30. Civil Rights.
It will promptly take any measures necessary to ensure that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, and national origin (including limited English proficiency) in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4); creed and sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity) per 49 U.S.C. § 47123 and related requirements; age per the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and related requirements; or disability per the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and related requirements, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in any program and activity conducted with, or benefiting from, funds received from this Grant. a. Using the definitions of activity, facility, and program as found and defined in 49 CFR §§ 21.23(b) and 21.23(e), the sponsor will facilitate all programs, operate all facilities, or conduct all programs in compliance with all non-discrimination requirements imposed by or pursuant to these assurances.
b. Applicability
1. Programs and Activities. If the sponsor has received a grant (or other federal assistance) for any of the sponsor’s program or activities, these requirements extend to all of the sponsor’s programs and activities.
2. Facilities. Where it receives a grant or other federal financial assistance to construct, expand, renovate, remodel, alter, or acquire a facility, or part of a facility, the assurance extends to the entire facility and facilities operated in connection therewith.
3. Real Property. Where the sponsor receives a grant or other Federal financial assistance in the form of, or for the acquisition of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance will extend to rights to space on, over, or under such property. c. Duration.
The sponsor agrees that it is obligated to this assurance for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to the program, except where the Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the form of, personal property, or real property, or interest therein, or
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 15 of 18 structures or improvements thereon, in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor, or any transferee for the longer of the following periods:
1. So long as the airport is used as an airport, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits; or
2. So long as the sponsor retains ownership or possession of the property. d. Required Solicitation Language. It will include the following notification in all solicitations for bids, Requests For Proposals for work, or material under this Grant Agreement and in all proposals for agreements, including airport concessions, regardless of funding source:
“The (City of Hanford), in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders or offerors that it will affirmatively ensure that for any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, [select businesses, or disadvantaged business enterprises or airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises] will be afforded full and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and no businesses will be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, national origin (including limited English proficiency), creed, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), age, or disability in consideration for an award.” e. Required Contract Provisions.
1. It will insert the non-discrimination contract clauses requiring compliance with the acts and regulations relative to non-discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation (DOT), and incorporating the acts and regulations into the contracts by reference in every contract or agreement subject to the non-discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the DOT acts and regulations.
2. It will include a list of the pertinent non-discrimination authorities in every contract that is subject to the non-discrimination acts and regulations.
3. It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses as a covenant running with the land, in any deed from the United States effecting or recording a transfer of real property, structures, use, or improvements thereon or interest therein to a sponsor.
4. It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin (including limited English proficiency), creed, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), age, or disability as a covenant running with the land, in any future deeds, leases, license, permits, or similar instruments entered into by the sponsor with other parties:
a. For the subsequent transfer of real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program; and
b. For the construction or use of, or access to, space on, over, or under real property acquired or improved under the applicable activity, project, or program. f. It will provide for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the Secretary to give reasonable guarantee that it, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, transferees, successors in interest, and other participants of Federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to the acts, the regulations, and this assurance.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 16 of 18 g. It agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial enforcement with regard to any matter arising under the acts, the regulations, and this assurance.
31. Disposal of Land.
a. For land purchased under a grant for airport noise compatibility purposes, including land serving as a noise buffer, it will dispose of the land, when the land is no longer needed for such purposes, at fair market value, at the earliest practicable time. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of acquisition of such land will be, at the discretion of the Secretary, (1) reinvested in another project at the airport, or (2) transferred to another eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order:
1. Reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project;
2. Reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under 49 U.S.C. § 47117(e);
3. Reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under 49 U.S.C. §§ 47114, 47115, or 47117;
4. Transfer to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport; or
5. Payment to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
If land acquired under a grant for noise compatibility purposes is leased at fair market value and consistent with noise buffering purposes, the lease will not be considered a disposal of the land. Revenues derived from such a lease may be used for an approved airport development project that would otherwise be eligible for grant funding or any permitted use of airport revenue.
b. For land purchased under a grant for airport development purposes (other than noise compatibility), it will, when the land is no longer needed for airport purposes, dispose of such land at fair market value or make available to the Secretary an amount equal to the United States' proportionate share of the fair market value of the land. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of the cost of acquisition of such land will, upon application to the Secretary, be reinvested or transferred to another eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order:
1. Reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project;
2. Reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under 49 U.S.C. § 47117(e);
3. Reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under 49 U.S.C. §§ 47114, 47115, or 47117;
4. Transfer to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport.
c. Land shall be considered to be needed for airport purposes under this assurance if (1) it may be needed for aeronautical purposes (including runway protection zones) or serve as noise buffer land, and (2) the revenue from interim uses of such land contributes to the financial self-
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 17 of 18 sufficiency of the airport. Further, land purchased with a grant received by an airport operator or owner before December 31, 1987, will be considered to be needed for airport purposes if the Secretary or Federal agency making such grant before December 31, 1987, was notified by the operator or owner of the uses of such land, did not object to such use, and the land continues to be used for that purpose, such use having commenced no later than December 15, 1989.
d. Disposition of such land under (a), (b), or (c) will be subject to the retention or reservation of any interest or right therein necessary to ensure that such land will only be used for purposes which are compatible with noise levels associated with operation of the airport.
32. Engineering and Design Services.
If any phase of such project has received Federal funds under Chapter 471 subchapter 1 of Title 49 U.S.C., it will award each contract, or sub-contract for program management, construction management, planning studies, feasibility studies, architectural services, preliminary engineering, design, engineering, surveying, mapping or related services in the same manner as a contract for architectural and engineering services is negotiated under Chapter 11 of Title 40 U S.C., or an equivalent qualifications-based requirement prescribed for or by the sponsor of the airport.
33. Foreign Market Restrictions.
It will not allow funds provided under this Grant to be used to fund any project which uses any product or service of a foreign country during the period in which such foreign country is listed by the United States Trade Representative as denying fair and equitable market opportunities for products and suppliers of the United States in procurement and construction.
34. Policies, Standards, and Specifications.
It will carry out any project funded under an Airport Improvement Program Grant in accordance with policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary including, but not limited to, current FAA Advisory Circulars (https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/media/aip-pfc-checklist.pdf) for AIP projects as of March 22, 2024.
35. Relocation and Real Property Acquisition.
a. It will be guided in acquiring real property, to the greatest extent practicable under State law, by the land acquisition policies in Subpart B of 49 CFR Part 24 and will pay or reimburse property owners for necessary expenses as specified in Subpart B. b. It will provide a relocation assistance program offering the services described in Subpart C of 49 CFR Part 24 and fair and reasonable relocation payments and assistance to displaced persons as required in Subpart D and E of 49 CFR Part 24.
c. It will make available within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, comparable replacement dwellings to displaced persons in accordance with Subpart E of 49 CFR Part 24.
36. Access By Intercity Buses.
The airport owner or operator will permit, to the maximum extent practicable, intercity buses or other modes of transportation to have access to the airport; however, it has no obligation to fund special facilities for intercity buses or for other modes of transportation.
3-06-0098-031-2024
Airport Sponsors Assurances 5/2022 Page 18 of 18
37. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises.
The sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex, in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract covered by 49 CFR Part 26, or in the award and performance of any concession activity contract covered by 49 CFR Part 23. In addition, the sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the administration of its Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and Airport Concessions Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (ACDBE) programs or the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26. The sponsor shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Parts 23 and 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts, and/or concession contracts. The sponsor’s DBE and ACDBE programs, as required by 49 CFR Parts 26 and 23, and as approved by DOT, are incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of these programs is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the sponsor of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Parts 26 and 23 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. §§ 3801-3809, 3812).
38. Hangar Construction.
If the airport owner or operator and a person who owns an aircraft agree that a hangar is to be constructed at the airport for the aircraft at the aircraft owner’s expense, the airport owner or operator will grant to the aircraft owner for the hangar a long term lease that is subject to such terms and conditions on the hangar as the airport owner or operator may impose.
39. Competitive Access.
a. If the airport owner or operator of a medium or large hub airport (as defined in 49 U.S.C. § 47102) has been unable to accommodate one or more requests by an air carrier for access to gates or other facilities at that airport in order to allow the air carrier to provide service to the airport or to expand service at the airport, the airport owner or operator shall transmit a report to the Secretary that:
1. Describes the requests;
2. Provides an explanation as to why the requests could not be accommodated; and
3. Provides a time frame within which, if any, the airport will be able to accommodate the requests.
b. Such report shall be due on either February 1 or August 1 of each year if the airport has been unable to accommodate the request(s) in the six month period prior to the applicable due date.
12.G.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of an appropriation of $650,000 in the General Fund for the Kings-Tulare High-Speed Rail Station Transit-Oriented Development and Connectivity Plan, and Cross Valley Corridor Rail Service Planning project, funded by Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant award.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommended Motion: That City Council, by motion, approve an appropriation of $650,000 in the General Fund for Kings-Tulare High-Speed Rail Station Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and Connectivity Plan, and Cross Valley Corridor (CVC) Rail Service Planning project. The project is funded by the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant award.
BACKGROUND:
In February 2023, Council authorized staff to apply for the 2023-24 Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant. In August 2023, staff received notification from California Department of Transportation that a grant had been awarded to City of Hanford in the amount of $650,000. With Council approval, a Request for Proposal was circulated and Perkins & Will was selected as the consulting firm. The authorization to execute the agreement with consulting firm was granted by Council in July 2024. The appropriated amount will cover the agreement with Perkins & Will, which is not to exceed $649,528.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project is a new zero impact to the General Fund. The Project is funded by California Department of Transportation Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant award.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
12.H.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approve a reimbursement to Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC in the amount of $1,354,311.27 for the water main and street improvements on Houston Avenue and Alpine Street related to Tract No. 865, Unit No. 1; AND approve an appropriation of $1,408,862.39 to fulfill the reimbursement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That the City Council, by motion,
1. Authorize a reimbursement to Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC in the amount of $1,354,311.27 for water main oversizing and Houston Avenue street improvements located within Tract No. 865, Unit No. 1, including a credit for final map review and transportation impact fees for future 13th Avenue at SH198 improvements.
2. Approve an appropriation of $1,161,568.19 from the Water Impact Fees and $247,294.20 from the Transportation Impact Fees budget to fulfill the reimbursement and credit fees for Surveyor review and future 13th at SH198 improvements.
Recommended Motion:
I motion to:
1. A reimbursement to Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC in the amount of $1,354,311.27 for the city water main oversizing and Houston Avenue street improvements located within Tract No. 865, Unit No. 1, including a credit for final map review and transportation impact fee contributions to the 13th at SH198 improvements.
2. Approve an appropriation of $1,161,568.19 from the Water Impact Fees and $247,294.20 from the Transportation Impact Fees budget to fulfill the reimbursement and credit the fees for Surveyor review fees and future 13th at SH198 improvements.
BACKGROUND:
Tract No. 865, Unit No. 1 is a 100 lots single family development that is located at the northeast corner of Houston Avenue and Alpine Street, as shown on the attached Final Map. (Attachment 1) This phase is part of the larger Live Oak East Master Planned Development, which will contain 567 single family residential lots at completion. (Attachment 2)
On December 1, 2020, the City Council approved the attached Resolution 20-33-R for Vesting Tentative Tract 865 for Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC. (Attachment 3).
The resolution states Conditions of Approval (COA) for the development which includes the construction of an 18” water main in Houston Avenue from 12th Avenue to the property boundary (2541 lf) and across the development frontage (1320 lf). Additionally, the developer was required to install an oversized 12” water main on Alpine Street between Houston Avenue and Hume Avenue (2480 lf), with reimbursements coming from the Water Impact Fee Fund. These improvements were installed, and the cost summary is further discussed below. The total reimbursable amount for construction of water mains is $1,161,568.19
The COA provides the developer a reimbursement for the required street construction of Houston Avenue “for permanent street widening improvements across their frontage consisting of curb and gutter, street paving from gutter lip to edge of pavement, and street striping, signing”, to be reimbursed to the developer through the Transportation Impact Fee Fund. The total reimbursement for Houston Avenue street improvements is $247,294.20.
The COA state that the developer shall construct a minimum 36” storm drain pipeline to connect the Sand Slough basin to the existing slough basin located south of Houston and east of the development. The design and approval of the slough interconnect has taken longer than expected, and the requirement for construction has been moved to the next phase, Tract 881, Unit 1. The Houston Avenue Sand Slough Interconnect is a programmed Capital Improvement Project for the current fiscal year. The developer shall construct and be fully reimbursed for the interconnect with Tract 881, Unit 1.
The COA state that, per the approved Traffic Impact Study, (Attachment 4) the development is required to contribute their proportional share costs of the future improvements to the 13th Avenue at SH198 interchange. The cost per lot is determined as $523.48 per lot. This fee has not been collected with building permits, so the fee is assessed with these reimbursement calculations. The total payment due to the city for the 13th Avenue at SH198 interchange is $52,348.37 (credit).
The 2019 Impact Fees Study provides for payment to the city for the Surveyor Plan Review of the final map. The developer shall pay the city the Actual Cost plus 10% for administrative costs for Final Map review. (Attachment 8). The total cost for Surveyor Plan Review is $2,202.75 (credit).
On April 4, 2023, the Notice of Completion for Tract 865, Live Oak East, Unit 1 was approved by City Council. (Attachment 5)
The developer is requesting reimbursement for the water main installation and street improvements on Houston Avenue. Based on the 2019 Impact Fee Study and the COA, the total reimbursement for Tract 865, Unit 1 offsite water main oversizing installation, Houston Avenue street improvements, and a credit for Final Map review and fees for the 13th at SH198 future interchange improvements is $1,354,311.27. A copy of the reimbursement calculations are shown below, and city reimbursement rates are shown in Attachment 6 for review.
1. Houston Avenue reimbursable street improvements through Transportation Impact Fees Fund in the amount of $247,294.20 (Acct. # 21810000-825600)
2. The credit for unpaid 13th Avenue at SH198 interchange improvements per Traffic Impact Study mitigation is $523.48 per lot with 100 lots x $523.48 = $52,348.37 credit (Acct. #
21810000-825600)
3. Houston Avenue Sand Slough Interconnect cost to be determined at a later date, and the conditional requirement has been moved to Tract 881-1. Tract 881-1 is expected to be completed in late summer of 2024.
4. Offsite 18” water main installation on Houston Avenue ($431,156.88), and Oversize 8” to 12” water main installation on Alpine Street ($313,546.40), and 8” to 18” water main on Houston Avenue ($223,977.60) through the Water Impact Fees per Muni. Code 13.04.140. (Attachment 7). The total reimbursement amount is $1,161,568.19. (Acct # 21850000-825601)
5. The credit payment due to the city for Surveyor Final Map plan review per the City Master Fee Schedule is $2,202.75 (Acct. # 20100000-540300)
The TOTAL reimbursement to Presidio JJR Sterling Oaks 104, LLC for Tract 865 Unit 1 is $1,354,311.27
Additional Information:
Tract 865 Unit 1 has been paying the Traffic Impact Fee ($535.78 per lot) and Water Impact Fee ($2,434.02 per lot) with each building permit at the assessed rates per lot.
The total impact fees collected with Units 1:
• Transportation and Water impact fees collected for Unit 1 (100 lots) is $53,578.00. • The total Water impact fees collected for Unit 1 (100 lots) is $243,402.00.
The developer has three other developments in Live Oak East that are being completed and paying additional impact fees.
If approved by Council, reimbursements to the developer for the costs incurred for the improvements will be provided immediately as the Final Map for Unit 1 has been recorded and Notice of Completions has been approved and accepted by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The FY 23/24 Water Impact Fees reimbursement fund has a current balance of $3,355,945.00. The FY 23/24 Transportation Impact )Fees reimbursement fund has a current balance of $8,528,303.00.
An appropriation of $1,161,568.19 is needed from the Water Capital Impact Fees fund for the cost of the city trunk water mains in Houston Avenue and Alpine Street (offsite and frontage oversize reimbursement), AND an appropriation of $247,294.20 is needed from the Transportation Impact Fees fund for street improvements on Houston Avenue, all to reimburse the developer the $1,354,311.27 for water main and street improvement requirements, including a credit fee for the final map review by the City Surveyor ($2,202.75) and for 13th Avenue at SH198 future improvements traffic impact mitigation fee to be collected ($52,348.37).
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 1-Final Map-865-1
2. 2-Live Oak East Masterplan
3. 3-Resolution 20-33-R - Council-highlights
4. 4-Live Oak fiinal TIS-Mitigations
5. 5-NOC Tract No. 865 RECORDED
6. 6-QK Impact Fee Study - September 2019
7. 7-Mun Code 13.04.140
8. 8-TR865-1 Surveyor Fees
9. 9-Reimbursement Calculation
567 lots
3
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
FOR
LIVE OAK MASTER PLAN
Hanford, CA
Prepared For:
RRM DESIGN GROUP
210 East F Street
Oakdale, CA 95361
Prepared By:
kdANDERSON Transportation Engineers
3853 Taylor Road, Suite G
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 660-1555
March 20, 2006
6250-07
4
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 17 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact P.1 Development of the Live Oak proj ect alone will increase the volume of traffic on study area streets. However with constr uction of the improvements included in the project description, resulting volumes will not result in peak hour Level of Service in excess of the City of Hanford’s LOS C sta ndard at most locations. The 12 th Avenue / Hume
Avenue intersection will be impacted by project development. The section of 12 th Avenue between SR 198 and Hanford Armona Road will be impacted
With the addition of trips generated by Live Oak the 12 th Avenue / Hume Avenue intersection
will operate at LOS F. Projected traffic volum es will satisfy peak hour warrants for a traffic signal.
Mitigation: Install typical ½ section improvem ents plus one travel lane along the project’s frontage and contribute to the cost of a traffic signal at the 12 th Avenue / Hume Avenue
intersection through the City’s existing traffic mitigation fee program.
With the addition of project trips the segment of 12 th Avenue between SR 198 and Hanford Armona Road is projected to operate at LOS E. Projected volumes would require a four lane section.
Mitigation: Contribute to the cost of citywi de improvements through the existing City of Hanford traffic mitigation fee program.
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 26 Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Live Oak Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact EPAP.1 Development of other A pproved Projects and Live Oak will increase traffic through the 12
th Avenue / Lacey Blvd intersection, and p.m. peak hour Levels of Service will reach LOS D without Live Oak and LOS E with the project.
The City of Hanford has long contemplated the possibility of expanding this intersection in order to develop additional capacity to accommodate future growth. Development of dual left turn lanes and three through lanes in each direction on 12
th Avenue have been discussed. Under EPAP plus Live
Oak conditions this level of improvement would yield LOS C conditions.
Mitigation: The City of Hanford implements regional circulation system improvements through the City’s adopted traffic mitigation fee program. The project will contribute its fair share to the cost of improvements to 12
th Avenue / Lacy Blvd through the fee program.
Impact EPAP.2 Development of other A pproved Projects and Live Oak will increase traffic through the 12
th Avenue / Centennial Blvd intersection, and p.m. peak hour Levels of Service will reach LOS D with and without Live Oak.
When the Hanford Station project was being consid ered the City of Hanf ord identified long term improvements to this intersection. Development of northbound and westbound right turn lanes was identified, and these improvements were assumed to be installed when the southeastern corner of the intersection is developed. In addition, improvements to be installed with the Hanford Station and target projects will widen 12
th Avenue to eventually accommodate a third southbound through lane.
Under the EPAP plus Live Oak scenario this level of improvement would yield LOS C conditions.
Mitigation: The City of Hanford implements regional circulation system improvements through the City’s adopted traffic mitigation fee program. The project will contribute its fair share to the cost of improvements to 12
th Avenue / Centennial Blvd through the fee program.
Impact EPAP.3 Development of other A pproved Projects and Live Oak will increase traffic on the SR 198 / 12
th Avenue interchange and without improvements will result in conditions in excess of the City of Hanford’s LOS C standard.
With the addition of traffic generated by other approved projects the existing configuration of the EB and WB ramps EB SR 198 / 12
th Avenue intersection would deliver LOS D conditions during the p.m. peak hour, while the addition of project traffic could result in LOS E - F. The City of Hanford and Caltrans are pursuing major improvements to the interchange, and minor modifications have already been installed in conjunction with the target Shopping Center project.
The next “interim” modification would involve widening the eastbound off ramp to provide a second eastbound left turn lane. This work may be possible without additional modifications to the interchange itself, and may be possible along the current alignment of the existing ramp. However, because the design of ultimate interchange improvements will not be determined until the pending interchange PSR is completed, the exact nature of a ramp improvement project that may be “phased”
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 27 is not known. Additionally, a second southbound through lane would be needed to deliver LOS C conditions under the EPAP plus Live Oak scenario.
Mitigation: The project should contribute its fair share to the cost of modifying this interchange via the adopted fee program.
Impact EPAP.4 Development of other A pproved Projects and Live Oak will increase traffic on the SR 198 / 13
th Avenue interchange and without improvements will result in conditions in excess of LOS C at the WB ramp intersection.
Signalization is required to improve operating conditions at this intersection outside of the City of Hanford City limits. Installing a traffic signal without widening the intersection would yield LOS C conditions.
Mitigation: As signalization is not in the City’s traffic mitigation fee program, the project should contribute its fair share to the cost of this improvement. Based on its percentage of net new traffic under the EPAP plus Live Oak condition, the project should be responsible for 36% of the cost.
This issue is discussed in additional detail under Year 2030 conditions.
Impact EPAP.5 Development of other A pproved Projects and Live Oak will increase traffic at the 12
th Avenue / Hume Avenue intersection and without improvements will result in conditions in excess of LOS C.
Signalization is required to improve operating conditions at this intersection. Standard frontage improvements will be made at this intersection as Live Oak develops, and left turn lanes will be possible on all four approaches. Installing a tra ffic signal with the standard improvements would yield LOS C conditions,
Mitigation: As signalization is in the City’s traffic mitigation fee program, the project should contribute its fair share to the cost of this through the fee program. However, it would be appropriate for underground hardware to be inst alled when the intersection is improved by the project proponents.
Year 2030 Conditions
The impacts of developing the Hanford Station project have also been evaluated within the context of long term traffic conditions occurring in the year 2030. This horizon year is consistent with the City of Hanford General Plan.
Daily Traffic Volumes. Year 2030 traffic volume forecasts were developed using the Kings County Area Governments (KCAG) regional travel demand forecasting model. Table 10 compares current and year 2030 daily traffic volumes assuming full build out of the Live Oak site and KCAG land use assumptions for the balance of the Hanford area.
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 33 Impact 4. Cumulative development, including the Live Oak project, will result in peak hour Levels of Service in excess of the City of Hanford’s LOS C standard at the 12th Avenue / Lacey Blvd intersection. LOS D may be accepte d by the City if no option for additional mitigation is available.
According to City staff, several options exist fo r providing additional capacity to the intersection, including widening both 12
th Avenue and Lacey Blvd. The base analysis assumes the development of dual NB/SB left turn lanes and the addition of a third NB/SB through lane would deliver LOS C conditions. However, this is not the only alternative for delivering additional capacity. Widening of Lacey Blvd would be needed to deliver LOS C.
Mitigations: Pay Adopted Traffic Mitigation Fees. Within the City of Hanford long term circulation system improvements are funded through the City’s traffic mitigation fee program. Cumulatively needed improvements are constructed by the City and financed via the fee program. In this case, the 12 th Avenue / Lacey Blvd improvement that is ultimately installed will need to be determined by the City, and Live Oak will contribute its fair share to the cost of this improvement by paying adopted fees.
Impact 5. Cumulative development, includi ng the Live Oak project, will increase the overall traffic volume on 12
th Avenue and result in the need for a six lane section from SR 198 north through Lacey Blvd. This is a significant impact that can be mitigated.
The individual mitigation requirements for the study intersection along 12 th Avenue indicate the
need to provide three through lanes in each direction at most locations. Due to the spacing between intersections, it would be impractical to limit these improvements to the immediate environs of each intersection, and the section should be continuous from SR 198 through Lacey Blvd. This work will also require widening the existing four lane San Joaquin Valley railroad crossing north of SR 198.
As with other long range projects in Hanford, the City will ultimately be responsible for the implementation of these improvements, and local development will contribute its fair share via the City’s traffic mitigation fee program.
Mitigation. Pay Traffic Mitigation Fees or Fair Share Based on Traffic Demand. The City of Hanford is currently collecting traffic mitigation fees for City-wide projects. Live Oak shall contribute its fair share to the cost of these improvements via the Traffic Mitigation Fee program.
Impact 6. Cumulative development, including the Live Oak project, will result in peak hour Levels of Service in excess of the City of Hanford’s LOS C standard at the SR 198 / 12 th
Avenue interchange’s ramp intersections. This is a significant but mitigable impact.
Long term improvements to the SR 198 / 12
th Avenue interchange will be required whether the Live Oak project proceeds or not. While alternative designs may be considered during the Caltrans Project Study Report process, to provide LOS C conditions on the interchange it could be necessary to widen both interchange structure and the ramps, as noted in Table 12 below.
TABLE 12
LONG TERM SR 198 / 12TH AVENUE INTERCHANGE GEOMETRY
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 34
WESTBOUND RAMP INTERSECTION
Approach Total Lanes Description
Northbound 3 1 left turn lane (1), two through lanes (2) Southbound 3 Through (2), right turn lane (1)
Westbound 2 Left turn + through lanes(1), right turn (1)
EASTBOUND RAMP INTERSECTION
Approach Total Lanes Description
Northbound 3 Two through lanes (2), and right turn lane (1) Southbound 4 Left turns (2) or loop on-ramp, through (2) Eastbound 3 Dual Left turns (2), through + right turn lane (1)
Mitigation. Pay Traffic Mitigation Fees or Fair Share Based on Traffic Demand. The City of Hanford is currently collecting traffic mitigation fees for citywide projects, including a portion of the cost of improving the SR 198 / 12th Avenue interchange.
Impact 7. Cumulative development, including the Hanford Station project will result in peak hour Levels of Service in excess of LOS C at the 13 th Avenue / SR 198 interchange.
In the year 2030 the signalized 13
th Avenue / WB SR 198 ramp intersection is projected to is projected to operate with average delays that are indicative of LOS F. At that point it would be necessary to widen the intersection to provide auxiliary turn lanes. However, the interchange’s non- standard configuration suggests that additional local changes may be superseded by an overall interchange modification. Because the interchange is outside of the City limits, work at this location is not included in the City’s adopted fee program.
Mitigation. Pay “Fair Share” towards interchange modifications. Live Oak should contribute its fair share to the cost of this improvement ba sed on its traffic volume by paying adopted traffic impact fees. Table 13 identifies the fair share percentage.
TABLE 13
POTENTIAL “FAIR SHARE” CONTRIBUTION TO
SR 198 / 13th AVENUE INTERCHANGE MODIFICATIONS
Location
Total Future
PM Peak Hour
Traffic
Existing +
Approved Traffic
Live Oak Trips
Only
Live Oak “Fair Share %
of Future minus Existing
Plus Approved
SR 198 / 13th Avenue 1,690 1,190 181 36%
The issue of potential improvements to the SR 198 / Avenue 13 interchange was discussed with Caltrans District 6 representatives. The range of improvement options that might be considered
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 35 at this location was discussed. While complete reconstruction to provide a more conventional design was discussed, it was determined that enhancements under the existing alignment could represent a suitable “interim” solution that woul d provide mitigation for the year 2030 scenario.
The extent of improvements that would be requi red to meet Caltrans’ minimum LOS C standard at the study intersections is discussed in the text which follows:
1. Hanford Armona Road / Avenue 13 / Westbound SR 198 on ramp:
• Widen Hanford Armona Road to provide northbound and southbound left turn lanes; • Widen the Avenue 13 connection to provide a separate right turn lane approaching the intersection;
• Install a traffic signal.
2. Hanford Armona Road / Eastbound SR 198 ramps:
• Widen Hanford Armona Road to provide a left turn lane onto the eastbound on ramp; • Widen the eastbound SR 198 off ramp to provide a separate right turn lane; • Install a traffic signal
Resulting year 2030 peak hour Levels of Service are presented in Table 14 which follows.
TABLE 14
YEAR 2030 PLUS LIVE OAK
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE - MITIGATED
A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Location Control
Average
Delay (sec) LOS
Average
Delay (sec) LOS
WB Stop (338.5 sec)
>999 sec
(F)
F
(295.8 sec)
909.8 sec
(F)
F
Hanford Armona Road /
WB SR 198 on ramp
Signal (mitigated) 27.9 sec C 28.1 sec C
EB Stop
(3.5 sec)
20.9 sec
(A)
C
(5.4 sec)
26.6 sec
(A)
D
Hanford Armona Road / EB SR 198 ramps
(overall)
EB left + thru + right turn
Signal (mitigated) 17.4 sec B 20.9 sec C
While not needed to address Level of Service impacts identified by the traffic study, it was determined that two other improvements could be needed as part of the “interim” interchange improvement project in order to ensure that the overall system operates safely. These include:
3. Hanford Armona Road / Avenue 13 / Westbound SR 198 off ramp:
Traffic Impact Analysis for the Live Oak Master Plan (March 20, 2006) Page 36
• Widen the westbound off ramp to provide separate through and right turn lanes; • Install a traffic signal
4. Westbound SR 198 off ramp to Avenue 13:
• Lengthen the off ramp to meet current minimum design standards
Cost Estimate and Fair Share Participation. The estimated cost of implementing the identified “interim” improvements is noted in Table 15. These rough cost estimates reflect the costs associated with typical installations elsewhere but are not based on exact unit quantities. The development within Live Oak would be expected to contribute 36% of the $1,870,000 cost, or $673,200.
TABLE 15
ESTIMATED COST OF “INTERIM” SR 198 / AVENUE 13 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS
Ite
m
Location Cost
1 Hanford Armona Road / Avenue 13 / Westbound SR 198 on ramp $550,000 2 Hanford Armona Road / Eastbound SR 198 ramps $440,000 3 Hanford Armona Road / Avenue 13 / Westbound SR 198 off ramp $440,000 4 Westbound SR 198 off ramp to Avenue 13 $440,000
Total $1,870,000
Impact x.8 Cumulative development, including the Live Oak project will result in peak hour Levels of Service in excess of the City of Hanford’s LOS C standard or meeting traffic signal warrants at key intersections on Houston Avenue.
Under long term conditions the overall average de lays projected at the Houston Avenue / 13 th
Avenue, Houston Avenue / 12 th Avenue and Houston Avenue / 11 th Avenue intersections are indicative of LOS D or worse conditions and / or satisfy peak hour traffic signal warrants.
Mitigation. Contribute to the cost of signalization through the City’s adopted traffic mitigation fee program.
Live Oak Access / Internal Circulation Evaluation
The access to Live Oak is via new intersections on Hume Avenue, 12 th Avenue and Houston
Avenue. The adequacy of these access points has b een considered from two perspectives: traffic control and left turn lane length.
Left Turn Lanes. Left turns will be permitted into Live Oak at all access locations. Because the $673,200/1286 lots = $523.48 per lot
5
FINAL DRAFT
CITY OF HANFORD
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
SEPTEMBER 2019
6
FINAL DRAFT
CITY OF HANFORD
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
Prepared for:
City of Hanford
900 South 10th Avenue
Hanford, CA 93230
Contact Person: Lou Camara, Public Works Director
Phone: (559) 585-2567
Consultant:
901 East Main Street
Visalia, CA 93292
Contact: Steve Brandt
Phone: (559) 733-0440
September 2019
© Copyright by Quad Knopf, Inc.
Unauthorized use prohibited.
Project #130118
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page i
Table of Contents
SECTION 1 - Executive Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 1 SECTION 2 - Report Purpose and Organization ................................ ................................ ................................ . 5
2.1 - Report Purpose ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 5
2.2 - Report Organization ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 6
2.3 - Basics of an Impact Fee Calculation ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 7 SECTION 3 - Population, Growth Estimates, and Assumptions ................................ ................................ ..... 8
3.1 - Undeveloped Land Acreage Projections ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 8
3.2 - Residential Dwelling Unit Projections ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 12
3.3 - Non-Residential Square Footage Projections ................................ ................................ ............................... 12
3.4 - Assumption of Land Acquisitions Costs ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 13
3.5 - Adjustment for Downtown Uses, Educational Facilities, and Open Space ................................ ........ 14 SECTION 4 - Fire Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 15
4.1 - Methodology for Calculating Fire Facilities Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ........... 15
4.2 - Fire Facilities Impact, Need and Cost ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 16
4.3 - Determination of Fire Facilities Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ . 17 SECTION 5 - Police Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 20
5.1 - Methodology for Calculating Police Facilities Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ....... 20
5.2 - Police Facilities Impact Need and Cost ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 21
5.3 - Determination of Police Facilities Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ............................. 22 SECTION 6 - Water Supply, Treatment and Storage Facilities ................................ ................................ ..... 26
6.1 - Methodology for Calculating Water Impact Fee ................................ ................................ .......................... 26
6.2 - Water Infrastructure Impact, Need and Cost ................................ ................................ ............................... 26
6.3 - Determination of Water Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 27 SECTION 7 - Wastewater Collection and Treatment/Disposal Facilities ................................ ................. 31
7.1 - Methodology for Calculating Wastewater Impact Fee ................................ ................................ .............. 31
7.2 - Wastewater Infrastructure Impact Need and Cost ................................ ................................ .................... 31
7.3 - Determination of Wastewater Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 32 SECTION 8 - Storm Drainage Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 35
8.1 - Methodology for Calculating Storm Drainage Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ...... 35
8.2 - Storm Drainage Infrastructure Impact Need and Cost ................................ ................................ ............. 35
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page ii
8.3 - Determination of Storm Drainage Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ............................. 36 SECTION 9 - Parks and Recreation Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 39
9.1 - Methodology for Calculating Parks and Recreation Impact Fees ................................ ......................... 39
9.2 - Parks and Recreation Impact, Need and Cost ................................ ................................ .............................. 39
9.3 - Determination of Park Development Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ....................... 41 SECTION 10 - Refuse/Recycling Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 42
10.1 - Methodology for Calculating Refuse/Recycling Collection Impact Fee ................................ ........... 42
10.2 - Refuse/Recycling Collection Impact Need and Cost ................................ ................................ ............... 42
10.3 - Determination of Calculating Refuse/Recycling Impact Fee ................................ ............................... 43 SECTION 11 - Circulation Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 44
11.1 - Methodology for Calculating Circulation Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ............. 44
11.2 - Circulation Infrastructure Impact Need and Cost ................................ ................................ .................... 44
11.3 - Determination of Circulation Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 47 SECTION 12 - Comparison of Proposed Fees to Previous Fees and Fees of Nearby Cities ................. 53
12.1 - Comparison to Current Impact Fee Schedule ................................ ................................ ............................ 53
12.2 - Comparison to Other Cities’ Impact Fees ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 57 SECTION 13 - Implementation................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 58
13.1 - Accounting ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 58
13.2 - Collection of Fees ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 58
13.3 - Non-conforming Buildings ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 58
13.4 - Increase in Fees for Inflation................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 58
13.5 - Credits and Reimbursements ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 59
List of Figures
Figure 3-1 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 9 Figure 3-2 Developed and Vacant Lands ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 10 Figure 11-1 Future Streets, Intersections, and Signals Included ................................ ................................ ... 46
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page iii
List of Tables
Table 1-1 Proposed Impact Fees for Fire, Police, Water, Wastewater, and Parks* ................................ .. 2 Table 1-2 Proposed Impact Fees for Storm Drainage ................................ ................................ .......................... 3 Table 1-3 Proposed Impact Fees for Refuse ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4 Table 1-4 Proposed Impact Fees for Circulation ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 4 Table 3-1 Land Available for Development ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 11 Table 3-2 Projected Population ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 12 Table 3-3 Estimated Potential Residential Acreage and Units ................................ ................................ ...... 12 Table 3-4 Estimated Potential of Non-Residential Building Square Footage ................................ .......... 13 Table 3-5 Estimated Land Acquisition Costs ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 14 Table 4-1 Fire Incidence Response by Occupancy Type (2012-2017) ................................ ...................... 16 Table 4-2 Fire Facilities Costs ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 17 Table 4-3 Distribution of Fire Facilities Impact ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 18 Table 4-4 Fire Facilities Impact Fees ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 19 Table 5-1 Future Police Vehicle and Building Space Estimates ................................ ................................ .... 21 Table 5-2 Police Facilities Costs ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 21 Table 5-3 Police Incidents per Acre ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 23 Table 5-4 Distribution of Police Impact ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 24 Table 5-5 Police Facilities Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 24 Table 6-1 Water System Improvements for Future Users ................................ ................................ .............. 27 Table 6-2 Distribution of Water Impact ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 28 Table 6-3 Redistribution of Open Space Water Impact to Residential Uses ................................ ............ 29 Table 6-4 Water Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 30 Table 7-1 Wastewater System Improvements for Future Users ................................ ................................ .. 32 Table 7-2 Distribution of Wastewater Impact ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 33 Table 7-3 Wastewater Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 34 Table 8-1 Storm Drainage System Improvements for Future Users ................................ ........................... 35 Table 8-2 Distribution of Storm Drainage Impact ................................ ................................ .............................. 37 Table 8-3 Storm Drainage Impact Fee ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 38 Table 9-1 Development Costs for Hypothetical 10-acre Park ................................ ................................ ....... 40 Table 9-2 Park Improvements for Future Users ................................ ................................ ................................ . 40 Table 9-3 Park Cost Distribution and Impact Fee ................................ ................................ .............................. 41 Table 10-1 Estimated Refuse/Recycling Unit Costs ................................ ................................ .......................... 42 Table 10-2 Distribution of Refuse/Recycling Impact ................................ ................................ ....................... 43 Table 10-3 Commercial Refuse Impact Fee Formula ................................ ................................ ........................ 43 Table 11-1 Traffic Circulation Costs ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 45 Table 11-2 Land Use Category and Corresponding ITE Category ................................ ................................ 47 Table 11-3 Land Use Category Adjustment Factor ................................ ................................ ............................ 48 Table 11-4 Trip Demand Factor by Land Use Category with Adjustment Factor ................................ .. 49 Table 11-5 Estimated Total Trips from New Growth ................................ ................................ ....................... 50 Table 11-6 Cost per Trip Estimate ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 51 Table 11-7 Circulation Facilities Cost Allocation and Fee (except within Downtown Mixed Use) . 51 Table 11-8 Circulation Facilities Cost Allocation and Fee (Downtown Mixed Use) ............................. 52
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page iv
Table 12-1 Comparison of Proposed and Current Development Impact Fees for Fire, Police, Water, Wastewater and Parks ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 53 Table 12-2 Comparison of Proposed and Current Development Impact Fees for Storm Drainage 55 Table 12-3 Comparison of Proposed and Current Development Impact Fees for Circulation ......... 56 Table 12 -4 Comparison of Proposed and Current Development Impact Fees for a Single -family Residence ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 57 Table 12 -5 Comparison of Proposed Development Impact Fees for a Single Family Residential Dwelling Unit with Nearby Cities’ Estimate Fees (rounded to nearest dollar) ................................ ....... 57 Table 13-1 Available Impact Fee Credits from Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage Impact Fee Accounts ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 60 Table 13-2 Available Impact Fee Credits from Circulation and Parks Impact Fee Accounts .............. 61
MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
19 | P a g e
PLANNING DIVISION
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT
Tentative Parcel Map $5,075.00
Final Parcel Map $950.00
Tentative Subdivision Map $7,500.00
Certificate of Compliance $1,125.00
Lot Line Adjustment $1,675.00
Minor Amendment to Previously Approved Map $1,675.00
National Environmental Policy Act (Categorical Exclusion, EA, EIS) Actual Cost + 10% California Environmental Quality Act*:
Notice of Exemption $125.00
Draft & Final Environmental Impact Report/Study Processing (Consultant prepared- City reviewed) $5,000.00 + Actual Cost + 10%
Initial Study/Negative Declaration (City Prepared) $5,000.00 Deposit + Actual Cost + 10% Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration (Consultant Prepared- City Reviewed) $2,500.00 Deposit + Actual Cost +10% General Plan Text $60.00
Zoning Text $60.00
Copies (each):
Black and White 8 1/2 x 11 $0.25
Color (Letter and Legal Size) $1.00
Black and White 11 x 17 $0.35
Color 11 x 17 $2.00
Large Format Black and White Cost
Large Format Color Cost
Radius Map and Up to 50 Labels $100.00
CD of documents $10.00
Requests for Environmental Notices/ Public Hearing Notices Mailed (Must be Renewed Annually) $125.00
Special Service Fees/Inspections Actual Cost + 10%
Surveyor Plan Review Actual Cost + 10%
City Annexation/Reorganization $12,300.00 Deposit + Actual Cost + 10% County Fee (LAFCo) Contact Kings County
State Board of Equalization Contact State Board of Equalization Parking In Lieu Fee $4,475.00 per space
Shared Parking Agreement $1,100.00
MISCELLANEOUS
ANNEXATION/REORGANIZATION
PARKING
*Additional fees as required, payable to Kings County (See Kings County Fees below)
SUBDIVISION OF LANDS
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page 46
Figure 11-1
Future Streets, Intersections, and Signals Included
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page 58
SECTION 13 - IMPLEMENTATION
The new impact fees will be effectiv e 60 days after they are adopted by resolution by the City Council. In order to effectively implement the impact fee program, several practices and procedures must be established. This section discusses accounting, collection, and reimbursement.
13.1 - Accounting
Proceeds from the development impact fees must be collecte d and segregated into separate accounts to ensure that fees are used for the purposes and projects for which the fees are collected.
The City need not provide separate accounts for different projects or improvements that are part of a specific impact fee a nd can utilize these monies for any project included in the original fee justification based on present day priorities . For example, traffic impact fees may be used for the highest priority traffic project that was included in the fee justification, as det ermined by the City Council. Annual reporting to the City Council of the status of each impact fee fund is required by law.
13.2 - Collection of Fees
Government Code Section 66007, adopted in 2007, state s that the agency shall not require the collection of impact fees for residential development projects until either the final inspection has been made or the certificate of occupancy has been issued, whichever comes first. Most cities meet this requirement by identifying the amount of the fees when the building permit is issued, and then flagging the project so that final inspection is not given until the fees are paid. This code section does not apply to non-residential development projects.
13.3 - Non-conforming Buildings
There can be uncertainty abou t whether to collect impact fees when it is found that a building or dwelling has been constructed without proper building permits. When an unpermitted building or dwelling is discovered by the City and made to obtai n a building code conformance permit, impact fees should also be paid.
13.4 - Increase in Fees for Inflation
Impact fees and the standard reimbursement amounts should be adjusted at least once per year to account for inflation. These adjustments are usually base d upon Engineering News Record Construction Costs Index (ENRCCI) , which estimates a general percentage change in construction costs over the previous year.
It is strongly recommended that, as part of the initial adoption of impact fees, the Council direct City staff to automatically increase fees once a year based on ENRCCI, as opposed to having the Council vote for increases every year. Voting once to authorize automatic yearly increases allows the City
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page 59
to collect the full and current amount of impact fe es on vesting tentative map subdivisions when new homes are constructed on those maps.
13.5 - Credits and Reimbursements
From time to time there will be instances where a developer may construct an infrastructure improvement for which fees are being collected . In these cases, the City can provide a f ee credit in exchange for the actual infrastructure improvement that is constructed. Many cities provide a credit based on actual costs of construction. However, if actual unit costs are higher than are estimated in this study due to special circumstance, inflation, or otherwise, then those cities will be paying out more than they would have collected. An alternative approach that better protects the City from the risk of cost fluctuation is to only provide a credit based on the unit costs in this report and the master plans it relied upon for costs . This puts the risk of cost fluctuation on the developer . If costs are higher, the developer must cover that cost. Conversely, if the developer can build the infrastructure improvements for less, then the developer gets to keep that cost savings.
It is recommended that the amount of any fee credits be specifically identified in writing and approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of a final map for a residential proje ct or issuance of a building permit for a non-residential project. If the amount to be credited is greater than amount of the impact fee, a cash reimbursement can be identified in writing and approved by the City Engineer and the Finance Director. The cash reimbursement for residential projects should be paid at final occupancy (the same time the fees are paid). All credits must be paid from their respective impact fee account. One account cannot pay a credit for another account.
Figures 13 -1 and 13 -2 lis t the types of credits and credit amount s that can be provided if the developer constructs improvements. Improvements that are not specifically listed in their respective master plans would only be creditable at the discretion of the Public Works Director. The amount of the credit should be automatically adjusted each year at the same rate that the impact fees are adjusted.
For water, wastewater, and storm drain pipelines the reimbursement credit will be the difference between the credit amount of an 8” water line and the credit amount of the required size, the credit amount of an 8” wastewater line and the credit amount of the required size, and the credit amount of a 12” storm drain line and the credit amount of the required size. There will be no credi ts given for 8” water and wastewater line installation or 12” storm drain line installation.
For wastewater lift stations, the reimbursement credit will be the difference between the ultimate design size being required in gallons per minute (gpm) and the size in gpm that would be required to serve the individual development.
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page 60
Table 13-1
Available Impact Fee Credits from Water, Wastewater, and Storm Drainage Impact Fee Accounts Item Credit per Unit Unit
Water
8" Pipeline $65.00 lineal foot
12" Pipeline $173.25 lineal foot
18" Pipeline $210.28 lineal foot
Groundwater Well (1,500 gpm) $1,200,259.00 each
Pump Station (3 @ 3,100 gpm) $4,002,999.00 each
Pump Station (4 @ 1,400 gpm) $2,738,421.00 each
Storage Tank (1.5 MG) $3,419,975.00 each
Land for Storage Tank or Well $40,000.00 acre
Wastewater
8" Gravity Main $178.00 lineal foot
12" Gravity Main $301.53 lineal foot
15" Gravity Main $316.08 lineal foot
18" Gravity Main $341.21 lineal foot
21" Gravity Main $370.30 lineal foot
24" Gravity Main $384.85 lineal foot
27" Gravity Main $444.36 lineal foot
30" Gravity Main $522.39 lineal foot
36" Gravity Main $649.35 lineal foot
18" Force Main $304.39 lineal foot
Lift Station $1,382.80 gpm
Storm Drain
12" Pipeline $96.00 lineal foot
21" Pipeline $219.54 lineal foot
24" Pipeline $259.21 lineal foot
30" Pipeline $318.72 lineal foot
36" Pipeline $378.24 lineal foot
42" Pipeline $437.75 lineal foot
48" Pipeline $517.10 lineal foot
60" Pipeline $596.45 lineal foot
96" Pipeline $1,014.36 lineal foot
Retention Basin (0 to 5 acre feet) $33,040.08 acre foot Retention Basin (Over 5 to 10 acre feet) $19,725.46 acre foot Retention Basin (Over 10 to 20 acre feet) $11,224.84 acre foot Retention Basin (Over 20 acre feet) $6,816.16 acre foot
Development Impact Fee Study September 2019
City of Hanford Page 61
The available fee credits for circulation and park improvements made by developers are listed in Table 13-2. These are set fees that coincide with the unit cos ts used to calculate the impact fees.
Actual costs will not be used to determine fee credits. The Public Works Department will evaluate improvement plans when they are submitted to determine t he type of fee credits that apply and their amount.
The right o f way fee credit only applies to credit for right of way for General Plan designated arterials and limited arterials. The amount of square feet dedicated beyond a 42 -foot wide half street will be eligible for fee credit. This fee credit would not apply t o outlot parcels used for landscaping or other purposes.
Table 13-2
Available Impact Fee Credits from Circulation and Parks Impact Fee Accounts Item
Credit per
Unit Unit
Circulation - Arterial and Major Arterial Street
Median Curb (both sides) $20.00 lineal foot
Median Concrete (16' wide) $160.00 lineal foot
Pavement (one side - 22' wide) $79.59 lineal foot
Right of Way in exceeding 42’ wide half street $2.066 square foot
Circulation - Collector Street
Pavement (one side - 18' wide) $56.76 lineal foot
Circulation - Street Intersections
Traffic Signal $400,000.00 each
Intersection Improvements (full) $400,000.00 each
Parks - Must be Identified in General Plan
Park Improvements $184,255.15 acre
Land for Park $90,000.00 acre
Engineering News Record Construction Costs Index (ENRCCI) Item Credit per Unit Unit 2019 to 2023 = 16.79% increase 8" Pipeline $65.00 LF $75.91
12" Pipeline $173.25 LF $202.34
18" Pipeline $210.28 LF $245.59
Groundwater Well (1,500 gpm) $1,200,259.00 EA $1,401,782.49 Pump Station (3 @ 3,100 gpm) $4,002,999.00 EA $4,675,102.53 Pump Station (4 @ 1,400 gpm) $2,738,421.00 EA $3,198,201.89 Storage Tank (1.5 MG) $3,419,975.00 EA $3,994,188.80
Land for Storage Tank or Well $40,000.00 AC $46,716.00
8" Gravity Main $178.00 LF $207.89
12" Gravity Main $301.53 LF $352.16
15" Gravity Main $316.08 LF $369.15
18" Gravity Main $341.21 LF $398.50
21" Gravity Main $370.30 LF $432.47
24" Gravity Main $384.85 LF $449.47
27" Gravity Main $444.36 LF $518.97
30" Gravity Main $522.39 LF $610.10
36" Gravity Main $649.35 LF $758.38
18" Force Main $304.39 LF $355.50
Lift Station $1,382.80 GPM $1,614.97
12" Pipeline $96.00 LF $112.12
21" Pipeline $219.54 LF $256.40
24" Pipeline $259.21 LF $302.73
30" Pipeline $318.72 LF $372.23
36" Pipeline $378.24 LF $441.75
42" Pipeline $437.75 LF $511.25
48" Pipeline $517.10 LF $603.92
60" Pipeline $596.45 LF $696.59
96" Pipeline $1,014.36 LF $1,184.67
Retention Basin (0 to 5 acre feet) $33,040.08 AC-FT $38,587.51 Retention Basin (Over 5 to 10 acre feet) $19,725.46 AC-FT $23,037.36 Retention Basin (Over 10 to 20 acre feet) $11,224.84 AC-FT $13,109.49 Retention Basin (Over 20 acre feet) $6,816.16 AC-FT $7,960.59 Median Curb (both sides) $20.00 LF $23.36
Median Concrete (16' wide) $160.00 LF $186.86
Pavement (one side - 22' wide) $79.59 LF $92.95
Right of Way in exceeding 42’ wide half street $2.07 LF $2.41 Pavement (one side - 18' wide) $56.76 LF $66.29
Traffic Signal $400,000.00 EA $467,160.00
Intersection Improvements (full) $400,000.00 EA $467,160.00 Park Improvements $184,255.15 AC $215,191.59
Land for Park $90,000.00 AC $105,111.00
Water
Wastewater
Storm Drain
Circulation - Arterial and Major Arterial Street
Circulation - Collector Street
Circulation - Street Intersections
Parks - Must be Identified in General Plan
§ 13.04.140. Oversized water mains.
The city shall have the right to require a customer to construct an oversized water main pipeline. If the city requires a customer to construct an oversized water main pipeline, the city shall reimburse the customer the actual cost paid by the customer for the oversizing in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 15.49 of the Hanford Municipal Code. Only water main pipelines larger than eight inches in internal diameter shall be considered oversized; however, if a customer requires a water main pipeline larger than eight inches for its own purposes, the oversized water main pipeline constructed and installed by the customer will be considered the size required to serve that customer. The city engineer is hereby empowered to make the determination as to how much, if any, oversizing is required and is also empowered to determine the difference in cost between the actual construction and installation cost and the average cost of pipeline. The decisions made by the city engineer shall be binding and conclusive on the customer. (Prior code § 6-6.14; Ord. 99-01, 1999)
City of Hanford, CA
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/HA4933 on 2024-04-29 7
$2,002.50 + $200.25 (10%) = $2,202.75
36.82 total acres; Park = 3.79 acres
Tract 865, unit 1
Reimbursements
Unit 1=100 lots, Unit 2=116 lots,Tentative Map approved 12/1/2020 Quantitiy Unit Unit Cost Cost
Streets
Houston Curb and Gutter (CVC) 1224 LF $16.75 $20,502.00 ADA Ramps (CVC) 30' ramps 2 EA $2,025.00 $4,050.00
Street striping Houston 1 LS $2,599.00 $2,599.00
Signing Houston 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Paving from gutter lip to existing EP
6" AC 34980 SF $2.50 $87,450.00
8" AB 34980 SF $2.50 $87,450.00
Major Arterial Increased Houston pavement section from standard TI=8 (4.5"AC / 6"AB) to TI=10 (6"AC / 8"AB)
1.5" AC 34320 SF $0.63 $21,621.60
2" AB 34320 SF $0.63 $21,621.60
$247,294.20
Transporation Impact Fees Paid with Building Permit 100 Units $535.78 $53,578.00 13th at SR198
Developer to contribute 36% of the cost for the for interchange as noted in TIS (fee not yet paid) 0.36 LS $1,870,000.00 $673,200.00 % share of cost of signal.
Cost per lot for ALL of Live Oak East & West 1286 Lots $673,200.00 $523.48 Fee per lot for 13th at SR198 Unit 1 fees to be collected 100 Lots $523.48 $52,348.37 ‐$52,348.37 Unit 2 fees to be collected 116 Lots $523.48 $60,723.68 12th at SH198
Park Impact Fees paid with Building Permit 100 Unit 1 Lots $2,687.08 $268,708.00 $580,409.28 116 Unit 2 Lots $2,687.08 $311,701.28
Quantitiy Unit Cost
Water Reimburse to Council 9/17/24
Construct 18" water main on Houston off site (245.59) 2541 LF $245.59 $624,044.19 $247,294.20 Houston 18" W oversize along frontage (8" to 18" = 245.59‐75.91) 1320 LF $169.68 $223,977.60 ‐$52,348.37 13th @ 198 Oversize 12" water main in Alpine (8" to 12" = 202.34‐75.91) 2480 LF $126.43 $313,546.40 $624,044.19 18" WM $1,161,568.19 $223,977.60 Oversize Houston
$313,546.40 Oversize Alpine
Water Impact fee paid with Building Permit 100 Lots $2,434.02 $243,402.00 ‐$2,202.75 Surveyor Fees (+10%) $1,354,311.27
Storm
1. Developer shall be entitled to a credit towards their storm water development impact fee for capacity enhancement
improvements constructed within Sand Slough (Lot “A”) that satisfy all (full credit) or a portion (partial credit) of their storm water storage requirements. =
$1,161,568.19
Oversize of basin quantification not provided or requested for reimbursement $0.00 ‐$192,743.08
12.I.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Authorization to award a contract to Akel Engineering to update the City’s Utility Master Plans for Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain for a total amount not to exceed $705,925 and authorize an appropriation of $811,814 from various impact fee funds as described herein in this report.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with AKEL Engineering Group Inc., of Fresno, CA, to provide engineering services to update the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain Master Plans in the not to exceed amounts of $187,850 (Water), $215,032 (Sanitary Sewer), and $303,043 (Storm Drain) for a total contract amount of $705,925; and
2. Authorize the appropriation of funds in the amounts and corresponding fund source as follows:
a. $ 216,028 from the Water Impact Fees (Fund 0185);
b. $ 247,287 from Wastewater Impact Fees (Fund 0186); and c. $ 348,499 from Storm Drain Impact Fees (Fund 0184).
Recommended Motion:
I move to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with AKEL Engineering Group Inc, of Fresno, CA to provide engineering services to update the Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain Master Plans in the not to exceed amount of
$ 705,925 and authorize the appropriation of said funds and amounts as identified herein in this report.
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The City's Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain facility master plans were last updated and adopted in November 2017; referenced hereinafter as the 2017 Master Plans.
The 2017 Master Plans were prepared to be consistent with the current 2035 General Plan and
provided a detailed analysis of infrastructure needs to support the future growth of the City. The Master Plans are regularly updated (about every five-years) to validate infrastructure needs, to quantify, and prioritize system capacity improvements for existing users and new development.
This update will; 1) reflect new infrastructure added and alterations to drainage patterns to the network because of new development, 2) reflect development trends, 3) incorporate regulatory requirements, and 4) to identify network deficiencies. The Plans will also be updated to reflect up- to-date capital costs, to develop and run a hydraulic model for each utility to determine capacity capabilities, and develop a short and long term CIP (Capital Improvement Program) project list. The CIP project list will serve as the basis for establishing Development Impact Fees being recommended for award under a separate contract at the September 17, 2024 City Council Meeting.
City staff issued RFP 2025-21 in July 2024 to hire a consultant to perform master planning level design, to update the City’s utility master plans for water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain. The general scope of work includes hydrology, hydraulic modeling and analysis, cost estimating, stakeholder outreach, presentations, financial analysis and report writing. The storm drain component will include preparation of a nexus study for the purposes of updating storm drain fees (Stormwater Rate changes were deferred from the February 2024 Adopted Utility Rate Adjustment Study). The storm drain master plan will also incorporate waterway modeling and identify areas to serve as flood lay-off and/or groundwater recharge areas. The identification of potential groundwater recharge areas will require geotechnical investigation(s) and studies to determine conducivity for infiltration/percolation. Develop a city-wide contour map based on available LIDAR data. Finally, the master plan update will also include a Renewal and Replacement Plan and Budget for all three utilities. This plan is necessary to systematically identify, plan, and budget for annual routine-type maintenance projects.
SELECTION PROCESS:
Staff published a request for proposals (RFP) for a Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Drain Master Plan Update, beginning July 24, 2024 through August 20, 2024. The City of Hanford received one proposal in response to the advertised Request for Proposals, RFP 2025-01.
The following single proposal was received:
Company: Location:
1. AKEL Engineering Group Inc.
Fresno, Ca
Akel Engineering Group was found technically qualified to do the work Following the review of their proposal and reference checks, staff determined that Akel Engineering Group, Inc. is a qualified candidate due to their portfolio of Master Plan projects of similar size and scale, as well as their longstanding record of excellence within the industry.
AKEL Engineering Group Inc has completed many recent Master Plan projects for cities in California and across the Western US including:
1. City of Madera
2. City of Morgan Hill
3. City of Pleasanton
4. City of Clovis
5. City of Fresno
6. City of Yakima
7. City of Gilroy
AKEL Engineering Group Inc comes highly recommended, receiving praise from their references.
These references include City of Clovis, City of Morgan Hill, City of Pleasanton, City of Fresno, and others. Their references described them as an excellent company, the 'guru' of the industry, phenomenal to work with, and incredibly knowledgeable in their field. AKEL Engineering Group’s references expressed that they have worked with AKEL for decades and want to continue working with them into the foreseeable future. Kevin from the City of Clovis said, " Akel has an incredible knowledge when it comes to master plans – you can’t go wrong with using them." In addition to AKEL Engineering Group’s impressive references, they have demonstrated their expertise through numerous successful projects completed on time and within budget. This can be attributed in part to their team's excellent problem-solving skills, industry experience, strong collaboration techniques, and standardized processes created through decades of experience.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Design of this project will be funded through the participating Impact Fee funds as shown in the following budget summary. This project has a total allocation of $705,925 for completing the master plans update. The below budget summary is an estimated breakdown of costs associated with this project:
Available Funding:
Water Impact Fees (Fund 0185)
$ 216,028
Wastewater Impact Fees (Fund 0186)
$ 247,287
Storm Drain Impact Fees (Fund 0184)
$ 348,499
Total Available Funding:
$ 811,814
Estimated Project Costs:
Engineer (Per Submitted Fee)
$705,925
Design Contingency (10%)
$70,593
Staff Time (5%)
$35,296
Total Estimated Project Costs:
$811,814
Budget Surplus (Deficit):
$0
The Utility Master Plan Update is currently unfunded, therefore the total appropriation in the amount of $811,814 is requested to do the work. It is recommended that the appropriation(s) be funded from the identified Impact Fee funds in the above table for completion of the project.
PRIOR COUNCIL ACTION:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Akel Engineering Scope of Work
2. Akel Engineering Fee Proposal
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 1 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update City of Hanford
Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Scope of Work
(DRAFT 2 - September 5, 2024)
The scope of work includes the following sections:
1. Project Management and Meetings
2. Sewer System Master Plan
3A. Stormwater System Master Plan
3B. Stormwater Nexus Study and Storm Drain Fee Update
4. Water System Master Plan
1. Project Management and Meetings
This task includes completing project management tasks throughout the duration of the project, including meetings, progress reports, presentations, and workshops.
Task 1.1 – Kickoff and Progress Meetings/ Reporting
The task includes the following subtasks:
• Kickoff meeting between consultant and City staff
to review objectives of study, agree to
methodology, and exchange information with City
staff
• Review findings with City staff. Consultant to
provide information supporting findings to date
and proposed fees
• Potential stakeholder meetings with groups such
as the local Building Industry Association or other
groups as later determined to explain
infrastructure needs. Attendance at a City Council
meeting to present draft Nexus Study and Fee
Updates. Discuss methodology and findings,
provide a formal presentation, answer questions,
and collect input to prepare the final draft
• If needed, an additional City Council meeting to
follow up on the first meeting and present the
final draft
• Unless otherwise determined by the City, the
Consultant shall plan on City Council-involved
meetings
Approach
Our success factors start with stakeholder
collaboration and engagement, and
continues with effective communication
throughout the project. We communicate
often and at critical milestones and at key
decision points, and with submittals that
include “decision packages” (not just when
submitting the technical memorandums). The
key decision packages keep the team
informed and a part of the decision process
throughout the way. When the technical
memorandums are submitted, there are no
surprises, and when the final report is issued,
all the information has already been covered
in either the technical memorandums or in
the “decision packages”.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Review Meeting Minutes
• Provide Project Guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Monthly Progress Updates. This task
includes providing monthly budget and
schedule updates to City staff.
• Workshops and Team Meetings. This
task includes hosting team workshops
and meetings with City staff to provide
progress updates.
• Document Key Decisions. This task
documents the key assumptions and
decisions for City staff approval.
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 2 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Task 1.2 – Stakeholder Meetings (Stormwater) / Council Presentations This task is specific to the stormwater master plan and includes the following:
• Project Meetings (8) – These meetings will begin with the Kickoff Meeting and will occur periodically at important milestones during the project schedule. Representatives from City departments will be attending.
• Stakeholder Meetings (11) – The following groupings of stakeholder meetings are envisioned based on their audience and purpose. Development Community & Other Agencies (4) – These are the primary stakeholder meetings where the Consultant and City will provide detailed information and vet issues with the development community at important milestones during the project schedule. • City Council Meetings (2) – Consultant will make the first presentation to City Council as a study session item. This presentation will occur after the modeling work has been completed and stakeholder meetings held. The goal is to present all the findings and alternatives for Council to review and provide direction as needed to complete the Draft Master Plan Update. Consultant will make the second presentation to City Council as a regular item. This presentation will be for the adoption of the Final Master Plan Update.
Task 1.3 – Package of Deliverables
The following are some of the major deliverables:
• Inventory of existing system (GIS format)
• Hydrological Calculations/ Modeling and Maps (GIS Interface) • Existing Utility Infrastructure Inventory, CIP Priority List, and Preliminary Cost Estimates • Draft and Final Master Plan Update/ Infrastructure Reports • 60% and 90% draft reviews
• Three (3) hard copies of final report and pdf version • GIS-based Atlas (latest ArcView GIS version/format)
2. Sewer System Master Plan
The Sewer Master Plan includes the following scope of work tasks, approach, deliverables, and report chapters:
Task 2.1 – Review Data and Characterize Existing System This task consists of reviewing existing reports and collecting existing data. Review City’s sewer system information, including:
• Relevant reports, studies, master plans, maps, facility information, and other required data • Sewer System Maps
• Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
• Proposed or planned development or redevelopment projects to be included in the Sewer Master Plan
• Pump station as-built drawings, operating information, and SCADA data • Available customer billing or recent water use data
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 3 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update • Maintenance logs, maintenance management
system data, sewer blockages and sanitary
sewer overflow records
• Wastewater Treatment Facility Data and
Information
The task then proceeds to inventory and characterize
the existing system, engaging staff with reviews and
with resolving discrepancies. Construction drawings will be consulted as needed for verifying and expanding the
network.
Task 2.2 – Document Growth Planning Assumptions
This task consists of reviewing the latest general plan, any planned amendments, and specific plans, and
regulatory requirements pertaining to land use,
including reviewing existing reports and collecting
existing data.
Task 2.3 – Develop System Performance Criteria
This task consists of developing the system performance criteria that will be used for judging the capacity
adequacy of the existing utility. Consultant to consult existing performance criteria used in the 2017 master plan, make recommendations for updates, and submit to City staff for reviews and approval prior to the capacity evaluation. Subtasks include:
• Propose appropriate design and hydraulic criteria to be used for assessing the capacity of existing sewer facilities and sizing new facilities, including pipe friction factors, maximum flow depth to diameter (d/D) ratios, minimum and maximum velocities, slopes, depth of cover, and pump station design and reliability considerations (e.g., firm capacity, efficiency, emergency storage) • Review the City’s existing design criteria as compared to industry and other agencies standards, also taking into consideration the incorporation of accessory dwelling units Approach (Tasks 2.1 and 2.2)
Our approach is to engage City staff during the
data collection, and by completing a Data Gap
Analysis and verification packages to resolve
discrepancies in pipe sizes, or in invert
elevations. Our approach is also to engage City
staff planning department and to identify
planning assumptions.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide requested data, if available
• Review existing system inventories and
Maps
• Assist in resolving data discrepancies
• Provide general plan and specific plans.
Planned ADUs
• Provide general plan land use inventory
• Review report chapters
Consultant Deliverables
• Data needs matrix
• Data Gap Analysis and verification
packages
• Existing system inventories (tables and
Exhibits)
Report Chapters
• Introduction
• Planning Area Characteristics
• Existing Sewer Collection System
Data
Review
Data Gap
Analysis
Characterize
Existing
System
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 4 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Task 2.4 – Temporary Flow Monitoring Program and Future Flows This task includes the following subtasks:
• Develop a flow monitoring plan for the sewer
system
• The monitoring plan will be designed to isolate
major sewer drainage basins and subbasins in
the system and confirm and compare flows in
major trunk sewers to previous plan. Review,
re-use, and contrast with previous study
monitoring stations -if applicable.
• Confirm the locations are appropriate for
monitoring from the standpoint of hydraulic
conditions, safety, and access
• Calibrate and maintain the flow meters and rain
gauges during the rainy season (if applicable)
• Review the flow monitoring data during the
flow monitoring period to assure data quality
and consistency
Our subconsultants Villalobos and Associates (V&A) will be conducting the temporary flow monitoring program
for this project. Akel and V&A have been collaborating
on sewer master plan projects for the past 20 years.
Task 2.5 – Hydraulic Model Development and Calibration
This task include developing a GIS-based hydraulic model. Major subtasks include:
• Consultant will work with the City to collaboratively review the electronic data for this model for verification with the City’s infrastructure plans
• Consultant is free to build and develop their model and perform analysis in their software of choice; however, the model data needs to be delivered to the City in a form compatible for use with the latest EPA SWMM software or InfoWorks by Autodesk/Innovyze computer software package to be used to update modeling and design tools
• Consultant will configure the elected software for the City with all needed analysis parameters to match the setup used
• Develop a hydraulic model to quantify flows in
the sewer system and identify capacity
deficiencies and improvement needs
• Review existing parcel, customer billing and
water use data, land use type, number of
dwelling units, etc. to determine if the
information is sufficient to estimate existing
wastewater flows
• Estimate future flows by reviewing proposed or
planned development or redevelopment
projects to be included in the Sewer Master
Plan
• Estimate future capacity demands for the City’s
Wastewater Treatment Facility in five-year increments through 2040 planning year Approach (Tasks 2.3 and 2.4)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works in finalizing the
performance criteria that will be used for the
hydraulic analysis. This also includes
completing a flow monitoring program to
characterize existing sewer flows and to
calibrate the hydraulic model.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• System Performance Criteria
• Draft and Final Flow Monitoring Plan
Report Chapters
• System Performance Criteria
Characteristics
• Sewer Flows and Flow Monitoring
Program
• Appendix – Flow Monitoring Plan
Approach (Tasks 2.5)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works in updating the
hydraulic model, and performing reviews
during calibration. The calibration will include
dynamic extended period simulations (EPS).
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• GIS-based Hydraulic Model
Report Chapters
• Hydraulic Model Development
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 5 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update • Provide a high-level review or feasibility of discharging future WTTP effluent into Peoples Ditch • Develop design criteria to be used to estimate wastewater flows, including wastewater flow factors for residential and non-residential land uses, diurnal base wastewater flow patterns, and infiltration/inflow (I/I) parameters
• Assess potential capacity constraints under the model loads developed • Calibrate the hydraulic model and compare the dry weather and wet weather flow hydrographs with the flow monitoring data and SCADA data
Task 2.6 – Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements This task includes the following subtasks:
• Evaluate Existing System Performance
o Using the hydraulic model, Consultant will evaluate the performance of the existing sewer system under existing and future dry and
design wet weather flows
o Identify capacity deficiencies based on the
performance criteria
o Prepare thematic maps and hydraulic grade
line plots to present the identified capacity
problem areas
• Conduct I/I Analysis
o Review the I/I flow characteristics
associated with the different subbasins in
the system (based on flow monitoring data
and model results) and their location with
respect to identified capacity deficiencies
o Based on the analysis, identify areas that
may be suitable for rehabilitation to further
reduce I/I
o Develop estimates of the percent I/I reduction that can be achieved through rehabilitation of various combinations of mains, lower laterals, and upper laterals o Incorporate the I/I reduction estimates into the hydraulic model to determine the effects of the rehabilitation alternatives on peak flows
• Develop Capacity Improvement Projects
o Develop solutions to identified capacity deficiencies. Solutions may include upsizing or paralleling existing pipes, consolidating flows in new sewers or existing sewers with available capacity, implementing flow diversions at critical locations, or sewer rehabilitation to reduce I/I. o Determine sewer rehabilitation needs as well as long-term maintenance needs. Develop alternatives based on hydraulic modelling results and discussion with the City. o Based on preliminary model results and discussion with City staff, the alternatives will be refined and focused on the most viable solutions for more detailed project development o Evaluate potential improvement projects in further detail, including conducting field visits to potential project sites. Confirm the suitability of pipeline alignments and identify any design, constructability, permitting, or environmental issues that might impact the project. o Develop planning level cost estimates based on the most viable construction method for each potential solution for the identified deficiencies
Task 2.7 - Develop Long Range CIP
This task includes the following subtasks:
Approach (Tasks 2.6)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended improvements and phasing
plan.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Capacity Improvements to mitigate
existing system deficiencies
Report Chapters
• Sewer Utility Evaluation and Proposed
Improvements
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 6 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Prioritize the recommended capacity improvement and rehabilitation projects. Prioritization criteria will include but not be limited to severity of existing capacity deficiencies as indicated by the extent of surcharge or potential overflows predicted by the model, and the relative impact of the predicted surcharge or potential overflows on the following:
• Public health and safety, water quality,
business and community facilities, etc.
• Timing of proposed
development/redevelopment
• Maintenance history and/or sewer condition
information
• Coordination with other City projects (e.g.,
road improvements)
The prioritized list will be used to develop a phased
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for short-term (5-year) and long-term (10 to 20-year) sewer improvements.
The phasing will also consider the City’s financial constraints.
Task 2.8 - Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan
and Budget
This optional task will include developing a risk
framework to review and evaluate any available PACP
coded pipeline data. Alternatively, the system’s
remaining useful life (RULS) will be calculated in order to develop a priority annual replacement plan.
Task 2.9 - Develop GIS Atlas
This task includes developing an Atlas for the GIS-based sewer system. The Atlas is intended for use by engineering and public works staff and includes sufficient detail. Options include showing the parcels layer and the aerial photo background.
Task 2.10 - Prepare Master Plan Report
Develop and prepare a Sewer Master Plan report that
provides a clear rationale for identifying, justifying, prioritizing, and costing the recommended improvements.
The Sewer Master Plan will serve as a basis for future
master plan updates.
• Draft Sewer Master Plan Update Report. Incorporate
the finding and recommendations of the project into a
Draft Sewer Master Plan report. The Draft Sewer
Master Plan will document the methodology and
assumptions used to develop the hydraulic model,
recommended performance and design criteria,
Approach (Tasks 2.7)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended long-range CIP and phasing.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Capacity Improvements and costs
Report Chapters
• Capacity Improvements and CIP
Approach (Tasks 2.7)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended renewal plan.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Pipeline Renewal/Replacement Plan
Report Chapters
• R&R Plan
2025 Sewer Master Plan
Report Outline
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Planning Area Characteristics
3. Existing Sewer Collection Facilities
4. System Performance and Design
Criteria
5. Sewer Flows and Flow Monitoring
Program
6. Hydraulic Model Development
7. Sewer Utility Evaluation and
Proposed Improvements
8. Renewal and Replacement Plan
9. Capital Improvement Plan
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 7 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update analyses of the model results, and the recommended capacity improvements CIP program. • Final Sewer Master Plan Report. Prepare Final Master Plan report based on the City’s review comments on the Draft report.
Task 2.11 – Wastewater Treatment Plant and Effluent Use Alternatives This task includes a high level summary of the wastewater treatment plants capacities. Previous relevant reports will be referenced, and current as well as projected sewer flows will be used.
Additionally, the current effluent use will be discussed and alternatives use and corresponding required treatment will also be discussed. This effort is intended to be high level, and does not include a feasibility study and recycled water feasibility study with a system-wide market assessment. Rather, this effort includes high level alternatives that can be considered.
3A. Stormwater System Master Plan
The Stormwater Master Plan includes the following scope of work tasks, approach, deliverables, and report chapters:
Task 3.1 – Review Data and Characterize Existing
System
This task consists of reviewing existing reports and
collecting existing data. Use of existing data by the
consultant will be an important factor in determining
the work effort to update the Stormwater Master Plan.
The following list of available documents and data can
be obtained on the web:
• General Plan
• Engineering Documents (Standard Plans, As-Built
Drawings, etc.)
• Groundwater Sustainability Plan – Mid-Kings River
Groundwater Sustainability Agency
• Peoples Ditch Company Agreements
The City will provide the following list of available
documents and data to the selected consultant:
• All available hard copy and digitized infrastructure
plans for storm water basins, pumps and pipes
• All existing agreements between the City and ditch
companies, conservation districts, irrigation districts and surface water rights holders
New data to supplement the existing data may be
needed. New survey data required by the consultant will be collected by the City. Other new data needs will be
discussed between the City and consultant and a
Approach (Tasks 3.1 and 3.2)
Our approach is to engage City staff during the
data collection, and by completing a Data Gap
Analysis and verification packages to resolve
discrepancies in pipe sizes, or in invert
elevations. Our approach is also to engage City
staff planning department and to identify
planning assumptions.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide requested data, if available
• Review existing system inventories and
Maps
• Assist in resolving data discrepancies
• Provide general plan and specific plans
• Provide general plan land use inventory
• Review report chapters
Consultant Deliverables
• Data needs matrix
• Data Gap Analysis and verification
packages
• Proposed Field Surveys
• Existing system inventories (tables and
Exhibits)
Report Chapters
• Introduction
• Planning Area Characteristics
• Existing Stormwater Collection System
Data
Review
Data Gap
Analysis
Characterize
Existing System
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 8 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update decision made on who will take the lead to obtain the new data.
The task then proceeds to inventory and characterize the existing system, engaging staff with reviews and with resolving discrepancies. Construction drawings will be consulted as needed for verifying and expanding the network. Additionally, field surveying will be included to characterize typical cross sections of the creeks that meander through the city.
Task 3.2 – Document Growth Planning Assumptions
This task consists of reviewing the latest general plan, any planned amendments, and specific plans, and regulatory requirements pertaining to land use, including reviewing existing reports and collecting existing data.
Task 3.3 – Review Industry Legislative Requirements
Consultant will review the following topics and provide the necessary review, evaluation and coordination for
each of these topics during the development of the
Storm Water Master Plan Update.
• MS4 General Permit
o Post-Construction Storm Water
Management Program per the
requirements of General Permit Section
E.12 and establishment of LID design
standards
o Determine a numeric sizing criteria for LID
storm water retention and treatment
o Coordination with update of the Storm
Water Ordinance for adoption by City
Council
• FEMA Maps – Review FEMA Flood Maps for areas of relevancy; identify and discuss as appropriate as part of the Study’s watershed master planning, include as a potential modeling scenario in conjunction with modeling local watersheds. Identify potential inundation areas as a layer.
Task 3.4 – Develop System Performance Criteria
This task consists of developing the system performance criteria that will be used for judging the capacity adequacy of the existing system. Consultant to consult
existing performance criteria used in the 2017 master
plan, make recommendations for updates, and submit
to City staff for reviews and approval prior to the
capacity evaluation. Subtasks include developing
analysis scenarios as documented in this section.
The following points of information are offered for
basins, pumps and pipe network:
1. Standalone Basins
a. All future basins will be sized for retention
capacity.
b. All existing detention basins will be evaluated
for possible expansion to retention capacity.
c. Future retention basins will be planned adjacent
to existing waterways as best possible to allow
easy recharge inflow and to allow occasional
Approach (Tasks 3.4)
Our approach is to engage City staff to finalize
the analysis performance criteria described in
this section. This effort will also include a 2D
floodplain modeling to simulate the ability of
the waterways to carry floodwater during
storms, while allowing the surface streets to
surcharge below 1 foot from the gutter line.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Performance Criteria
Report Chapters
• System Performance Criteria
Approach (Tasks 3.3)
Our approach is to review legislative
requirements associated with the stormwater
and provide coordination and
recommendations for addressing in the
stormwater master plan.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Industry Legislative Requirements
Report Chapters
• Industry Legislative Requirements
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 9 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update pump-outs by the City for storms that exceed the design storm and threaten localized flooding. d. Acreage sizing of future basins will be based on existing City standards for perimeter geometry.
Presume: 3:1 side slopes, 23 feet of total depth, 18 feet of water depth. The total depth and water depth may be adjusted and potential multiple iterations used for the alternatives analyses to be modeled.
2. Combined Park-Basins
e. Consultant will coordinate with city staff to site future park-basins next to waterways as best possible to allow easy recharge inflow and to allow occasional pump-outs by the City when the park turf area is inundated with storm water.
f. Sizing of future park-basins will be based on a three part approach:
g. Part 1 – Playground area is to be set at street grade level and above the water level. h. Part 2 – Park turf area to be set at a grade level so that it is above the HWL of the 50% design storm.
Presume 6:1 side slopes.
i. Part 3 – Dedicated basin area (fenced) with standard geometry. Presume: 3:1 side slopes, 23 feet of total depth, 18 feet of water depth. The total depth and water depth may be adjusted and potential multiple iterations used for the alternatives analyses to be modeled.
3. Basis of Design
j. Design Storm (1995-current) – The rainfall depth-duration-frequency data shown in Table 3.2 of the current adopted Storm Water Master Plan and is a continuance of the 1995 Adopted Storm Master Plan. The data is consistent with the NOAA 14 published Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Estimates for the City of Hanford. This Design Storm is utilized for identifying deficiencies of existing and future storm drainage infrastructure.
k. Design Storm (updated) – NOAA is currently working on Atlas 15 that will update the Precipitation Frequency Estimates while accounting for climate change. Atlas 15 estimates will provide new data used for the design of local drainage infrastructure under changing climate conditions. Expected completion of Atlas 15 is 2027. As such and in anticipation of likely increased rain intensities as been experienced, the Consultant will work with City Staff to develop an interim Design Criteria in anticipation of Atlas 15.
l. Level of Protection – Though the city’s minimum required pipe size is 12-inches, pipe sizes have ranged as low as 8-inches. Moving forward, maintenance of storm drain pipes has been a focus of the City’s Public Works Department and they desire to have an 18-inch minimum pipe size for all new pipe to reduce debris plugging.
m. Overland Flow – The City’s topography has a fairly consistent fall from east to west that allows for the overland flow of flood waters. FEMA’s flood maps show localized flooding areas. The City desires to continue using the design criterion that all new development shall be designed such that the surface of overland flow flood waters does not exceed more than one foot above the lowest top of curb in the development. Applying this design criterion requires each development project to be evaluated for the breakout of presumed overland flow flood waters at the boundaries of the project. n. Low Impact Development – This is a new addition to the basis of design for storm water that is being driven by the MS4 General Permit. Determining the numeric sizing criteria for LID storm water retention and treatment is an important input for the storm water model development. o. MS4 General Permit Regulated Projects – The following projects will be subject to LID design standards:
• New development projects on public or private land that fall under the planning and permitting authority of the City
• Redevelopment projects on public or private land that fall under the planning and permitting authority of the City that result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the impervious surface of the previously existing development • Public road projects that create 5,000 square feet or more of newly constructed contiguous impervious surface
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 10 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update • Linear underground/overhead projects that create 5,000 square feet or more of newly constructed contiguous impervious surface.
Task 3.5 – Hydraulic/Hydrology Model Development
Use all existing and new data to build a functional, realistic model that will be utilized by the consultant for analysis required in developing the Stormwater Master Plan Update. The consultant will also provide training sessions and materials needed for City personnel to operate and change the model for future use and maintenance during the estimated 10 to 20-year useful life of the Stormwater Master Plan. • Use of Existing Model: The existing storm water system model was developed using HEC-1, all electronic data for this model will be provided.
• Consultant will work with the City to collaboratively review the electronic data for this model for verification with the City’s infrastructure plans.
• Consultant is free to build and develop their model and perform analysis in their software of choice; however, the model data needs to be delivered to the City in a form compatible for use with the latest EPA SWMM software or InfoWorks by Autodesk/Innovyze computer software package to be used to update modeling and design tools
• Consultant will configure the elected software for
the City with all needed analysis parameters to
match the setup used.
• Consultant will use the model data to create new
GIS shapefiles for the City’s GIS system. The
shapefiles will include: 1) existing pipe network, 2)
future pipe network and 3) future basin sites. The
pipe network layers will include elevation
information.
• Waterways will be modeled per another task.
• Existing and planned basins, pumps and pipe
network will be modeled per another task. The
selection of a pipe network scenario is a critical
decision point that directly impacts the work effort
involved in developing the model.
• All drain pipes, culverts and open channel
waterways will be modeled based on a presumption
of good maintenance and full available capacity.
Task 3.6 – Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements Approach (Tasks 3.5)
Our approach is to develop a combined
SWMM/InfoWorks ICM model and use it for
2D floodplain modeling to include the
waterways. Our subconsultant, Kasraie
Consulting, an expert in floodplain
management will guide this analysis. Field
surveying will be used to validate the
trapezoidal cross section capacity
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance.
Consultant Deliverables
• Hydraulic and Hydrology 2D Floodplain
Model.
Report Chapters
• Hydraulic and Hydrology Model
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 11 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Perform modeling and analysis of the City’s existing and ‘planned to-date’ storm water basins, pumps and pipe network shown in the existing Storm Drain Master
Plan.
The City has three main objectives of this modeling and analysis effort.
1. The first is to identify capacity deficiencies of the existing basins, pumps and pipe network based on
existing development.
2. The second is to identify capacity deficiencies of the existing basins, pumps and pipe network based on
adding future development occurring per the
General Plan that would impact these existing
facilities.
3. The third is to fully plan for future (including
‘planned to-date’) basins and pipe network.
Pumps and Pipe Network. The City’s Pump and Pipe
Network has been previously inventoried as part of the 2017 Master plan Update. The Consultant will be required to coordinate with staff to acquire a list of any added infrastructure. This also applies to any added basins.
The consultant is to base their proposed fee schedule on modeling the current pipe network. The final scenario to be modeled will be determined by the City and selected consultant during the negotiation of the scope of work and fee schedule for the contract. To assist the negotiation process, the consultant needs to provide a ‘per mile’ fee to add pipe to or subtract pipe from the pipe network.
Utilize the model to run a variety of scenarios that will provide all necessary outputs to support the decision- making process between the City, Consultant and stakeholders in determining the necessary capital improvements to be incorporated into the impact fees for new development and the storm sewer service charge* for existing development.
The following list of scenarios is considered a starting point for discussion with the Consultant and adjustments are expected. From a model analysis standpoint, existing deficiencies is defined as existing waterways, basins, pump stations, and pipes that do not have adequate volume or flow capacity to handle the specified storm event.
1. Existing Development (to determine existing deficiencies) a. 2-Year and 10-Year Storm (2017 master plan) without waterways b. 2-Year and 10-Year Storm 2-Year and 10-Ear Storm (2017 master plan) with flows in waterways
2. Full Buildout of New Development (no LID retention*) only in areas that will increase discharges into waterways (to determine increased impacts that may worsen existing deficiencies)
3. Full Buildout of New Development (LID retention) only in areas that will increase discharges into waterways (to determine increased impacts that may increase deficiencies)
4. Full Buildout of New Development per the General Plan (to determine future facilities and associated impact fees)
a. Design Storm (updated) with no LID retention
b. Design Storm (updated) with LID retention
* incorporating an LID retention component subject to further development of the City’s Stormwater Management or MS4 Program
Task 3.7 – Waterways Modeling and Analysis and Regional Park Locations Approach (Tasks 3.6)
Our approach is to develop a combined
SWMM/InfoWorks ICM model and use it for
modeling to include the waterways. Our
subconsultant Kasraie consulting, is a
floodplain management expert who will guide
this analysis. Field surveying will be used to
validate the trapezoidal cross section capacity.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Recommended Improvements
Report Chapters
• Recommended Improvements
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 12 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Consultant will perform modeling and analysis of the City’s Sloughs, Overland, Combined Street Pipe, Waterway conveyance systems. This modeling and analysis will also include existing and planned basins that are linked to these waterways and intended to serve as off-stream regulating and storage functions. The City’s storm water discharges into these waterways will be quantified and the channel capacities determined.
The City has two main objectives of this modeling and analysis effort. The first is to capture and retain our storm water discharges in off-stream storage basins and prevent them from continuing downstream. Ideally, these off-stream storage basins would be located in an area that recharges the groundwater to the benefit of the City. The second is evaluating these waterways on their ability to contain within their banks the storm event scenario consisting of the Design Storm plus concurrent flood release flows upstream of the main waterways identified below. A key element to this analysis will be the performance and operational parameters of existing and planned off-stream regulating (layoff) basins. Any deficiencies need to be identified along with developing capital costs for the projects that would eliminate these deficiencies that include increasing basin capacity, construction of flood and/or recharge basins. Flood control projects could include flood layoff areas upstream of the City and adjacent to waterways.
Recognizing that modeling of a waterway can be time-consuming, detail-oriented, and ultimately costly the City is open to the Consultant’s recommendation to some type of “high-level” yet effective modeling can be developed for the waterways below:
Peoples Ditch - The Peoples Ditch is primarily an earthen open channel with a trapezoidal cross-section configuration with the exception of the short culvert
segments at crossings (street, railroad, driveway,
etc.). The waterway has numerous City of Hanford
direct pump station and/or outfall connections. The
channel is owned and operated by the Peoples Ditch
Company and maintains an agreement with the City
allowing a previously approved and established
discharge quantity.
East Branch People Ditch– an e
arthen canal having
a trapezoidal cross-section which meanders through
the eastern portion of Hanford; east of 10th
Avenue. The canal begins near the intersection of
State Route 43 and Fargo Avenue and continues
Southwest to a terminus basin located at the City’s
Corporation Yard.
Alternatively, if these waterways cannot be modeled,
then an analysis will be necessary to determine their current flows, capacities, and to evaluate potential future discharges and impacts.
Task 3.8 – Develop Long Range CIP
Approach (Tasks 3.7)
Our approach is to develop a combined model
for the storm drain system and the waterways,
to simulate flood events. Our subconsultant
Kasraie Consulting is a floodplain management
expert who will complete this analysis. Field
surveying will be used to validate the
trapezoidal cross section capacity.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance.
Consultant Deliverables
• Waterways Analysis.
Report Chapters
• Waterways Analysis
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 13 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update This task includes the following subtasks:
Prioritize the recommended capacity improvement and
rehabilitation projects. Prioritization criteria will include but not be limited to severity of existing capacity
deficiencies lows on the following:
• Public health and safety, water quality, business
and community facilities, etc.
• Timing of proposed
development/redevelopment.
• Coordination with other City projects (e.g., road
improvements).
The prioritized list will be used to develop a phased Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for short-term (5-year) and long-term (10 to 20-year) sewer improvements. The phasing will also consider the City’s financial constraints.
Task 3.9 – Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan
and Budget
This optional task will include developing a risk
framework to review and evaluate any available PACP
coded pipeline data. Alternatively, the system’s
remaining useful life (RULS) will be calculated in order to develop a priority annual replacement plan.
Task 3.10 - Develop GIS Atlas
This task includes developing an Atlas for the GIS-based stormwater system. The atlas is intended for use by engineering and public works staff and includes sufficient detail. Options include showing the parcels layer and the aerial photo background.
Task 3.11 - Prepare Master Plan Report
Develop and prepare a Stormwater Master Plan report that provides a clear rationale for identifying, justifying, prioritizing, and costing the recommended improvements. The Stormwater Master Plan will serve as a basis for future master plan updates. • Draft Stormwater Master Plan Update Report. Incorporate the finding and recommendations of the project into a Draft Master Plan report. The Draft Master Plan will document the methodology and assumptions used to develop the
hydraulic model, recommended performance and design
criteria, analyzes of the model results, and the
recommended capacity improvements CIP program.
• Final Stormwater Master Plan Report. Prepare Final Master Plan report based on the City’s review comments on the
draft report.
2025 Stormwater Master Plan
Report Outline
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
3. Planning Area Characteristics
4. Industry Legislative Requirements
5. Existing Stormwater Collection
Facilities
6. System Performance and Design
Criteria
7. Hydraulic Model Development
8. Stormwater Utility Evaluation and
Proposed Improvements
9. Waterways Evaluation
10. Renewal and Replacement Plan
11. Capital Improvement Program
Approach (Tasks 3.8)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended long-range CIP and phasing.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Capacity Improvements and costs
Report Chapters
• Capacity improvements and CIP
Approach (Tasks 3.9)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended renewal plan.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Pipeline Renewal/Replacement Plan
Report Chapters
• R&R Plan
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 14 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update
Task 3.12 – Groundwater Recharge Geotechnical Report
The objectives of the geotechnical engineering investigation will be to assess the soil conditions at the project site and provide geotechnical engineering recommendations that can be used for preliminary evaluation of the feasibility study as a site for groundwater recharge. Based upon the above project understanding, BSK proposes the following scope of services, which will include field exploration, laboratory testing program, engineering analyses, and preparation of a report.
a) Field Exploration
BSK will perform a site reconnaissance and field exploration, which will include drilling six (6) test borings to approximate depths of 45 feet below ground surface (bgs), or until refusal.
The test borings will be drilled using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger. A field engineer or geologist representative from BSK will maintain a continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings. Sampling and standard penetration tests will be performed at 5 feet intervals.
The sampling of bulk and relatively undisturbed soil specimens for purposes of laboratory testing, performing standard penetration tests (SPT sampling), and visually classifying soils exposed during the drilling process will be performed by our field representative. The depth to groundwater, if encountered, will be documented. If we encounter groundwater, we may flood the augers with a water-bentonite mixture to reduce the risk that heaving sands could adversely affect our blow count readings, then terminate drilling within five (5) feet of encountered water. At the completion of drilling and sampling, the drill holes will be backfilled with soil cuttings. Excess cuttings will be spread onsite.
In order for BSK to complete the field investigation as described above, the project site must be readily accessible to a truck mounted drill rig. Access limitations due to existing improvements, inclement weather, etc., may result in time delays and/or additional charges. It is the Owner’s responsibility to ensure that proper site access is available and that the site is made accessible to a truck-mounted drill rig prior to commencement of the field investigation.
Prior to drilling, BSK will mark the boring locations for checking and clearance by Underground Service Alert (USA). BSK will not be responsible for damage to underground utilities or other installations unless they are accurately marked on the ground surface and/or on plans made available to us prior to beginning of field operations. It is the responsibility of the Owner or his Representative to verify that the proposed drilling locations are free of underground utilities or other obstructions not identified and located by USA. If boring locations clearance cannot be provided, underground radar equipment can be used to identify buried utility lines. Charges for these services, if needed, would be in addition to the proposed fee estimate..
In the event that obviously hazardous materials are encountered visually or by odor in the geotechnical test borings, the boring(s) will be immediately terminated and backfilled. BSK will notify you as soon as possible of such an occurrence, and we will both mutually decide whether to continue, modify, or cease the remainder of the investigation program. All added cost incurred as a result of suspected hazardous substances would be charged on a time and expense basis as an addition to our fee quotation below.
No permits are anticipated to be required.
b) Laboratory Testing
No laboratory testing will be performed as part of this scope. c) Analysis and Report Preparation
Based on the results of the field exploration and laboratory testing program, engineering analyses will be performed to evaluate site conditions and develop recommendations for site preparation procedures.
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 15 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Specifically, a geotechnical report will incorporate the following items:
• Vicinity Map and Site Plan with boring locations
• Subsurface Conditions, Soil Boring Logs, Groundwater Depth • Discussion of feasibility to construct the basin, for geotechnical considerations only The geotechnical report will be prepared under the supervision of a California Licensed Geotechnical Engineer.
Task 3.13 – Develop Elevation Contours
This task includes processing the latest LiDAR files and developing elevation contours that will be used for this project, but also become a resource for City staff. GIS tools will be used to process the LiDAR files.
3B. Stormwater Nexus Study and Storm Drain Fee Update
The following section presents a draft scope of services that we believe forms a sound basis for development of a financial plan and Storm Drain Nexus Fee Study for the City of Hanford. Bartle Wells Associates can work with the City and Akel to finalize a scope of services that meets the project team’s objectives and will remain flexible to adjust the scope of services as needed during the course of the project and at the City’s direction. 1) Project Team Orientation/Kickoff Meeting
To initiate our work, hold an online meeting with the City’s project team, including City staff and Akel, to accomplish the following:
a) Determine the roles and responsibilities of project participants b) Identify other parties that may have a significant interest in the project, such as community groups, business organizations, and large landowners
c) Discuss key issues related the financial plan and funding of storm drain improvements d) Establish project schedule and key milestone dates
e) Confirm the key goals and expectations of the project team 2) Investigation and Data Collection
Assemble the information necessary to understand the City’s storm water funding needs and finances, including long-term administrative, operating and capital funding needs. BWA can work with City staff and Akel to obtain key information and estimates for:
a) Storm Drain Master Plan capital improvement program and programmatic cost estimates b) City storm water budget and historical expenses by fiscal year for the past 5 fiscal years c) Resolutions or ordinances for the City storm water assessment charges d) Current & historical storm water assessment charges
e) Prior storm water rate study
f) Projections of any changes to future City storm water operating costs g) Other relevant information identified by City staff and Akel 3) Develop Forecasts and Projections
Based on evaluation of the data assembled and input provided by the City, prepare forecasts and projections to be used in the development of financial models for the City’s stormwater utility. Develop projections for the following areas (and others as appropriate). Review projections and alternatives with City staff for agreements on assumptions, interpretation of data, and completeness of approach. a) Capital Improvements Including Long-Term Repairs & Replacements: Based on input from City staff, identify future capital improvement program costs or alternatives to include in the financial analysis
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 16 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update and determine a reasonable amount to include for future, ongoing capital repairs and replacements.
BWA often recommends that agencies phase in funding for long-term system rehabilitation.
b) Growth & New Development: Work with the City to identify levels of growth to incorporate in the financial projections. Evaluate financial impacts under different levels of growth. c) Cost Escalation Factors: Review historical cost trends and work with project team to develop reasonable cost escalation factors for both operating and capital expenditures. Work with City staff to identify any anticipated changes in future staffing, benefits, and/or other operating costs. d) Identify Current and Potential Funding Sources: Review historical cost trends and work with the project team to develop reasonable cost escalation factors for both operating and capital expenditures. Work with City staff to identify any anticipated changes in future staffing, benefits, and/or other operating costs.
4) Evaluate Financing Alternatives for Capital Improvements Evaluate options for financing capital improvement projects. Our evaluation will:
a) Estimate the amount and timing of any debt, if needed, to finance capital projects. b) Evaluate the alternative borrowing methods available including bonds, COPs, state, and federal loan programs (including the State Revolving Fund Financing Program), bank loans and lines of credit, and other options.
c) Recommend the appropriate type of debt, its term and structure. d) As needed, develop debt service estimates to incorporate in the financial projections. 5) Establish Prudent Minimum Fund Reserve Targets
Evaluate the adequacy of the City’s current utility fund reserves. Establish prudent minimum fund reserve targets based on the City’s operating and capital funding projections. Develop an implementation plan for achieving and maintaining the recommended reserve fund levels. 6) Develop 10-Year Financial Projections & Evaluate Scenarios Develop 10-year cash flow projections showing the financial position of the stormwater utility over the next 10 years. The cash flow will project fund balances, revenues, expenses, and debt service coverage, and will incorporate the forecasts developed with staff input. After developing a base-case cash flow scenario, we can model alternatives for additional evaluation such as capital improvement alternatives, project financing alternatives, the impacts of various levels of water demand, etc. During this phase, BWA will work closely with the project team to evaluate financial and rate projections under alternative scenarios.
7) Evaluate Fee Options
Based on the cash flow projections, determine future annual revenue requirements from storm drain fees.
8) Develop Storm Drain Nexus Fee Study
Develop a comprehensive nexus study to recommend storm water fees which recover the necessary revenue in a manner proportional to the benefits provided. Final fee recommendations will be designed to:
a) fund the costs of providing service, including operating, capital, and debt service funding needs i) this includes funding the correction of existing deficiencies, permitting, and maintenance b) be fair and equitable to all customers
c) comply with the substantive requirements of Proposition 218 9) Draft & Final Summary Reports
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 17 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update Submit a draft and final reports that summarize and explain key findings, assumptions, alternatives, and recommendations. The final report will incorporate feedback received from the City and Akel. Provide an electronic version of the report in pdf format.
10) Meetings and Presentations
Participate in online meetings and conference calls with the City and Akel as needed. Our proposal includes participation in stakeholder meetings and up to 3 meetings and/or presentations at the City.
Additional meetings may constitute additional services if not achievable within the budget. 11) Public Outreach
BWA will remain available to assist and participate with any public outreach and education efforts as achievable within the budget. BWA has extensive experience helping public agencies build consensus and public acceptance for debt financing and increases to utility rates and charges.
4. Water System Master Plan
The Water Master Plan includes the following scope of work tasks, approach, deliverables, and report chapters:
Task 4.1 – Review Data and Characterize Existing
System
The consultant shall review all applicable previous
planning documents and confirm existing and/or
proposed land use designations with City staff. The task includes the following subtasks:
• Review of previous master plans, planning
documents, GIS-based hydraulic modeling data
and system, supply sources information, water
demands/water billing data, reservoir and pump
station data, the current potable water systems,
and other available pertinent records that will
assist in the preparation of the comprehensive
Water Master Plan Update document.
Information available includes:
• Production data and information
• Water system maps and atlas sheets
• 2017 Water master Plan
• Current Water System CIP projects
• 2021 Urban Water Management Plan
• 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan
Task 4.2 – Document Growth Planning Assumptions
Approach (Tasks 4.1 and 4.2)
Our approach is to engage City staff during the
data collection, and by completing a Data Gap
Analysis and verification packages to resolve
discrepancies in pipe sizes, or in invert
elevations. Our approach is also to engage City
staff planning department and to identify
planning assumptions
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide requested data, if available
• Review existing system inventories and
Maps
• Assist in resolving data discrepancies
• Provide general plan and specific plans
• Provide general plan land use inventory
• Review report chapters
Consultant Deliverables
• Data needs matrix
• Data Gap Analysis and verification
packages
• Existing system inventories (tables and
Exhibits)
Report Chapters
• Introduction
• Planning Area Characteristics
• Existing Water Distribution System
Data
Review
Data
Gap
Analysis
Characterize
Existing
System
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 18 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update This task consists of reviewing the latest general plan, any planned amendments, and specific plans, and regulatory requirements pertaining to land use, including reviewing existing reports and collecting existing data.
Task 4.3 - Water Regulatory and Policy Review
This section includes the following subtasks:
• The consultant shall review current and
upcoming/anticipated regulations that could
affect the City’s infrastructure planning,
operation of the distribution system and
potentially the wastewater treatment plants as
set forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
Division of Drinking Water, Local Groundwater
Sustainability Plan, and local air quality
management district
• Consultant shall review the City’s municipal code and offer recommendations on relevant updates as part of the water regulatory and policy review of this task.
Task 4.4 - Develop System Performance Criteria
This task consists of developing the system performance criteria that will be used for judging the capacity
adequacy of the existing utility. Consultant to consult existing performance criteria used in the 2017 master
plan, make recommendations for updates, and submit
to City staff for reviews and approval prior to the
capacity evaluation. Subtasks include:
• Propose appropriate design and hydraulic
criteria to be used for assessing the capacity of
existing sewer facilities and sizing new facilities,
including headloss coefficients, maximum
velocities, minimum and maximum pressures,
fire flow requirements, and pump station design
and redundancy/reliability considerations (e.g.,
firm capacity, efficiency, emergency storage).
• Review the City’s existing design criteria as compared to industry and other agencies standards, also taking into consideration the incorporation of accessory dwelling units. • Develop a system wide hydraulic profile.
Task 4.5 - Hydraulic Model Development and Calibration
This task include developing a GIS-based hydraulic model. Major subtasks include:
• Consultant will work with the City to collaboratively review the electronic data for this model for verification with the City’s infrastructure plans.
• Consultant is free to build and develop their model and perform analysis in their software of choice; however, the model data needs to be delivered to the City using InfoWater Pro by Autodesk • Consultant will configure the elected software for the City with all needed analysis parameters to match the setup used.
Approach (Tasks 4.3)
Our approach is to discuss existing and
upcoming regulations, review the current
water quality reports at each of the supply
wells and provide recommendations.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Industry Legislative Requirements
Report Chapters
• Water Quality
Approach (Tasks 4.4)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works in finalizing the
performance criteria that will be used for the
hydraulic analysis.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• System Performance Criteria
Report Chapters
• System Performance Criteria
Characteristics
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 19 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update • Develop a hydraulic model to quantify demands in the water system and identify capacity deficiencies and improvement needs.
• Review existing parcel, customer billing and
water use data, land use type, number of
dwelling units, etc. to determine if the
information is sufficient to estimate existing
wastewater flows.
• Estimate future demands by reviewing
proposed or planned development or
redevelopment projects to be included in the
Water Master Plan.
• Develop design criteria to be used to estimate
water demands, including waster demand
factors for residential and non-residential land
uses.
• Assess potential capacity constraints under the
model loads developed.
• Calibrate the hydraulic model and compare it to the SCADA data.
Task 4.6 - Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements This task includes the following subtasks:
• Become familiar with the City’s potable systems
by reviewing City-provided maps of the pipeline
networks and available GIS-based hydraulics
data from previous study.
• Develop a recommended distribution system
performance criteria; Determine if there’s a
potential need for establishing separate zoned
areas?
• Develop existing and projected water demands
and method to allocate demands throughout
the distribution system for hydraulic modeling purposes. • Develop an overview of the existing facilities including distribution mains, wells, reservoirs, and pump stations.
• Use of Existing Model: The existing water system model was developed using InfoWater by Autodesk/Innovyze Inc., all electronic data for this model will be provided. • Consultant will work with the City to collaboratively review the electronic data for this model for verification with the City’s infrastructure plans.
• Develop a new calibrated transmission and distribution system hydraulic model using GIS-based hydraulic modeling application and data collected during fire flow testing (InfoWater by Innovyze or approved Equal computer software package) to be used to update modeling and design tools for potable water.
o Provide cost pricing to acquire and furnish new software applications and adequate numbers of links for the City’s modeling system. (Note: The available water model systems Approach (Tasks 4.5)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works in updating the
hydraulic model, and performing reviews
during calibration. The calibration will include
dynamic extended period simulations (EPS).
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• GIS-based Hydraulic Model
Report Chapters
• Hydraulic Model Development
Approach (Tasks 4.6)
Our approach is to develop a model using
InfoWater Pro and perform system evaluations
using the updated performance criteria.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Provide reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Recommended Improvements
Report Chapters
• Recommended Improvements
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 20 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update shall be updated/upgraded and calibrated to current existing condition. All major facilities including data of transmission mains, pump stations, major PRSs and other control stations, reservoirs, wells, and water supply sources shall be updated and calibrated on the new modeling and mapping system.)
o Develop a testing and training plan for use of the new GIS-based hydraulic modeling application system. Field testing, reading, and measurements may be warranted. (Assuming 2-4 personnel staff to be trained to use modeling application). • Evaluate/update estimated time-phased potable demands to buildout, based on historic and current demands, projected land use, and realistic demand factors. Conduct system evaluation model run scenarios in 5-year increments through the 2035 planning year:
o Average Day Demand (Summer & Winter); 2024/2025, 2030, 2035 o Maximum Day Demand + Fire
o Peak Hour Demand
o Minimum Flow Demand Night
• Develop a hydraulic profile of the potable water system, depicting interaction between hydraulic zones through water supply sources, reservoirs, pumping stations, and other nodes as the consultant may recommend
• Evaluate the existing and future water systems in their ability to meet projected demands, ability to maintain minimum water pressure levels, using the computer model to identify deficiencies and size future facilities and upgrades.
o Evaluate storage and groundwater production wells based on system reliability, redundancy, and resilience requirements.
o Evaluate system and provide recommendations, if any, on methods to segmentize network for the purpose of sourcing illegal connections and/or water losses.
Task 4.7 - Develop Long Range CIP
This task includes the following subtasks:
• Analyze the adequacy and reliability of the
City’s water sources, identifying water quality
issues, legal/institutional/ contractual
constraints, environmental documentation
issues, and system issues as well as cost
considerations.
• Develop a strategic plan to enhance the
efficiency and reliability of the City’s water
supply sources.
• Evaluate current design criteria used in sizing
future facilities.
• Recommend priority and/or time-phased system improvements to meet evolving needs, develop capital improvement phasing plans for the water supply and transmission systems. • Update recommended and prioritized Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for required potable water infrastructure improvements.
Approach (Tasks 4.7)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended long-range CIP and phasing.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Capacity Improvements and costs
Report Chapters
• Capacity Improvements and CIP
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 21 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update
Task 4.8 - Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan
and Budget)
This optional task will include developing a risk
framework to review and evaluate any available PACP
coded pipeline data. Alternatively, the system’s
remaining useful life (RULS) will be calculated in order to develop a priority annual replacement plan.
Task 4.9 - Develop GIS Atlas
This task includes developing an Atlas for the GIS-based water system. The atlas is intended for use by
engineering and public works staff and includes sufficient detail. Options include showing the parcels layer and the aerial photo background.
Task 4.10 - Prepare Master Plan Report
This task includes the following:
• Provide a complete package of the Citywide Water
Master Plan Update including an Executive Summary,
Maps & Exhibits for approval and adoption. The
Consultant will incorporate the findings and
recommendations of the project into a Water Master
Plan report. The report will document study assumptions and methodology, recommended design and
performance criteria, model results, approach for
capacity enhancement, and the recommended CIP. The
appendices to the report will include the pertinent
backup data (e.g., model results) that support the plan. • Provide updated project costs, technical information, and support to the City’s Impact Fee consultant.
Task 4.11 – Annual Supply Capacity Requirements
This task consists of a supply capacity vs. demand analysis, to include the following subtasks • Demands. Characterize the current demands: average day, maximum day, and peak hour. • Supply. Characterize the supply for each well. Account for supply degradation by characterizing historical degradation rate for each well (historical well testing data needed) • Supply vs Demand. Compare supply versus demand, in annual increments, over the planning horizon.
Identify for each year, when new supply wells will be needed. • Mitigating supply Wells. Complete analysis based on supply meeting peak hour. Completing another analysis based on supply meeting maximum day demands. This reduces the number of wells, though will need storage facilities. Hanford already has many supply storage facilities. Is the pumping Approach (Tasks 4.8)
Our approach is to engage City staff
engineering and public works with guidance on
the recommended renewal plan.
City Staff Responsibilities
• Reviews and guidance
Consultant Deliverables
• Pipeline Renewal/Replacement Plan
Report Chapters
• R&R Plan
2025 Water Master Plan
Report Outline
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Planning Area Characteristics
3. Existing Water Distribution
Facilities
4. System Performance and Design
Criteria
5. Water Demands
6. Hydraulic Model Development
7. Water Utility Evaluation and
Proposed Improvements
8. Renewal and Replacement Plan
9. Capital Improvement Program
Akel Engineering Group, Inc. Page | 22 City of Hanford – Scope of Work Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Update adequate?
Task 4.12 – Meter Replacement and Locating Pressure Monitors The City of Hanford is embarking on a water meter modernization program and replacing all meters over a period of 2.5 years. Some of the meters installed at residences will be equipped with remote pressure sensors that provide instantaneous measurements to the SCADA system. The objective of this exercise is to identify locations within the distribution system that can provide an adequate distribution to monitor system-wide pressures. These pressure monitors will also be identified on the Atlas Maps.
5. Software Costs
This task includes purchasing a 1-year subscription to the hydraulic modeling software as follows:
• Infowater Pro by Autodesk. This software can be used for the water hydraulic model • Infoworks ICM Ultimate by Autodesk. This software can be used for the sewer and stormwater hydraulic models.
City of Hanford
Comprehensive Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer Master Plans Cost Proposal
Draft 2
9/5/2024
Costs (AEG + Subconsultants)
Task Number
Senior Principal
Engineer
Principal Engineer
Senior Engineer
Associate Engineer
Assistant Engineer
Senior GIS
Specialist
Secretarial
Total Hours - AEG
AEG
Subconsultant
s and Other
Costs
Notes
Labor Rates 289 261 215 193 165 171 113
1 Project Management and Meetings 51 51 2 42 0 46 84 276 $53,944 $53,944
1.1 Kickoff and Progress Meetings/Reporting 28 30 22 20 40 140 $28,108 $28,108
1.2 Stakeholder Meetings (Stormwater) / Council Presentations 22 20 20 20 40 122 $23,378 $23,378
1.3 Package of Deliverables 1 1 2 6 4 14 $2,458 $2,458
2 Sewer Master Plan Update 12 85 100 126 216 236 16 791 $149,275 $36,500 $187,600
2.1 Review Data and Characterize Existing System 1 4 8 12 20 32 77 $14,141 $14,141
2.2 Document Growth Planning Assumptions 4 8 16 28 $5,500 $5,500
2.3 Develop System Performance Criteria 1 3 10 14 $2,722 $2,722
2.4 Temporary Flow Monitoring Program and Future Flows 2 8 16 26 $4,578 $35,000 Flow Monitoring - V&A $41,328
2.5 Hydraulic Model Development and Calibration 1 8 18 30 40 24 121 $22,741 $22,741
2.6 Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements 1 8 36 18 24 87 $16,399 $16,399
2.7 Develop Long Range CIP 2 2 32 20 56 $10,548 $10,548
2.8 Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan and Budget 4 44 48 28 124 $23,212 $23,212
2.9 Develop GIS Atlas 2 30 32 $5,560 $5,560
2.10 Prepare Master Plan Report 2 20 18 16 40 20 16 132 $24,584 $1,500 3 Hard Copies $26,159
2.11 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Effluent Use Alternatives 6 30 32 26 94 $19,290 $19,290 3A Stormwater Master Plan Update 11 70 121 152 194 240 16 804 $151,658 $72,500 $227,783
3.1 Review Data and Characterize Existing System 1 4 8 12 20 32 77 $14,141 $14,141
3.2 Document Growth Planning Assumptions 4 8 16 28 $5,500 $5,500
3.3 Review Industry Legislative Requirements 4 12 20 36 $8,148 $8,148
3.4 Develop System Performance Criteria 1 6 10 17 $3,505 $3,505
3.5 Hydraulic/Hydrology Model Development 1 8 18 30 50 24 131 $24,391 $12,000 Hydrology Kasraie $36,991
3.6 Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements 1 8 42 18 24 93 $17,557 $9,000 Hydrology Kasraie $27,007
3.7 Waterways Modeling and Analysis and Regional Park Locations 2 2 $522 $33,000 Waterways - Kasraie $35,172
3.8 Develop Long Range CIP 2 2 32 20 56 $10,548 $10,548
3.9 Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan and Budget 4 44 48 28 124 $23,212 $23,212
3.10 Develop GIS Atlas 2 30 32 $5,560 $5,560
3.11 Prepare Master Plan Report 2 20 18 16 40 20 16 132 $24,584 $1,500 3 Hard Copies $26,159
3.12 Groundwater Recharge Geotechnical Study 1 18 8 16 43 $8,215 $17,000 Geotechnical BSK $26,065
3.13 Develop Elevation Contours 3 30 33 $5,775 $5,775
3B Stormwater Nexus Study and Storm Drain Fee Update 2 2 $578 $45,000 $47,828 3B.1 Storm Water Service Charge - Nexus Study 2 2 $578 $45,000 Nexus Study - Bartle Wells $47,828
4 Water Master Plan Update 7 58 100 188 176 212 16 757 $142,045 $16,500 $159,370
4.1 Review Data and Characterize Existing System 1 4 8 12 20 32 77 $14,141 $14,141
4.2 Document Growth Planning Assumptions 4 8 16 28 $5,500 $5,500
4.3 Water Regulatory and Policy Review 1 1 $261 $15,000 WQ Regulations MNS $16,011
4.4 Develop System Performance Criteria 1 3 10 14 $2,722 $2,722
4.5 Hydraulic Model Development and Calibration 1 8 18 30 40 24 121 $22,741 $22,741
4.6 Capacity Performance Evaluation and Recommend Improvements 1 8 32 18 24 83 $15,627 $15,627
4.7 Develop Long Range CIP 2 2 32 20 56 $10,548 $10,548
4.8 Develop Renewal and Replacement Plan and Budget 4 44 48 28 124 $23,212 $23,212
4.9 Develop GIS Atlas 2 30 32 $5,560 $5,560
4.10 Prepare Master Plan Report 2 20 18 16 40 20 16 132 $24,584 $1,500 3 Hard Copies $26,159
4.11 Annual Supply Capacity Requirements 4 48 52 $10,308 $10,308
4.12 Meter Replacement and Locating Pressure Monitors 1 18 18 37 $6,841 $6,841 5 Software Costs $28,000 $29,400
Software Cost (1-year subscription) - Water $10,000 InfoWater Pro $10,500 Software Cost (1-year subscription) - Sewer/Stormwater $18,000 InfoWorks ICM Ultimate (2D) $18,900
6 Totals (including / excluding optional tasks)
Total 83 264 323 508 586 734 132 2630 $497,500 $198,500 $705,925 Note:
1. Total costs reflect a 5% markup applied to subconsultants.
Total Costs
AEG Labor Hours
12.J.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval to enter into a professional services agreement with David Taussig and Associates (DTA) to provide a Comprehensive Update to the City’s Development Impact Fees and approval to appropriate $92,400 from various Impact Fee Funds.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with David Taussig and Associates (DTA) to provide a Comprehensive Update to the City’s Development Impact Fees for a not to exceed amount of $83,901; and
2. Approve the appropriation of $92,400 from various Impact Fee Accounts as shown herein in this report.
Recommended Motion:
I move to authorize the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with David Taussig and Associates (DTA) to provide a Comprehensive Update to the City’s Development Impact Fees for a not to exceed amount of $83,901 and to approve the appropriation of $92,400 from various Impact Fee Funds as shown herein this report.
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the City adopted a new General Plan for the planned and orderly development of the City. In conjunction with updating the General Plan, the City adopted both a new Zoning Ordinance and updated Utility Master Plans (Water, Sewer, and Storm Drain) also in 2017. Following the completion of these documents, a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee (DIF) was developed and subsequently adopted in November of 2019; this is the current DIF in place.
The City’s DIF program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with their growth impact on infrastructure. In accordance with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et. Seq.) and later amended by AB602, DIF’s can only be applied towards infrastructure or facility needs (new or expanding existing capital facilities) created by new development and not towards existing infrastructure deficiencies unless the deficiencies are contributed in part by new development. Costs for improvements that will serve the needs of both
new and existing development are split on a fair share basis according to the proportion attributable to each. Costs for Capital projects or facilities to meet the existing populace must be funded using other revenue sources.
Note that developmental growth also imposes added operating costs which are not funding with DIF’s. There are, at this time though, limited established funding mechanisms to generate revenue from new development to fund operations (I.E., Lighting and Landscape Districts, and Community Facilities Districts). Therefore, the primary purpose of the DIF Study is to calculate the fees necessary for the City to fund and expand the required infrastructure as new development creates increases in service demands.
The DIF amount must be reasonably connected (have a nexus) to the new development's impact and the associated costs of the required capital facilities and improvements. Thus, the fee must be justified by specific findings that clearly establish this connection. Additionally, the fee must be set in a way that ensures the revenue generated does not surpass the cost of providing the facility or improvement it is intended to fund.
As previously mentioned, the City’s current Development Impact Fee program was adopted in November 2019. The City is experiencing rapid and expansive growth and along with the States’s adoption of AB602 that establishes added requirements to the Mitigation Act, adoption of the City’s 2020 Parks Master Plan, development of the City’s ATP plan (Active Transportation Program), the need to update the City’s Utility Master plans, and because of significant construction cost increases since 2019, it is appropriate and necessary to initiate a comprehensive update to the City’s DIF program.
The City currently assesses impact fees on new residential, commercial, and industrial development that are currently comprised of the following:
• Parks and Recreation Facilities
• Fire Facilities
• Police Facilities
• Wastewater Collection and Treatment & Disposal Facilities • Storm Drain Facilities
• Refuse/Recycling Facilities
• Circulation (Transportation) Facilities
• Water Supply, Treatment, and Storage Facilities
Generally speaking, DTA will be evaluating each of the above listed fees and then update each in consideration of, but not limited to, current fee processes and methodologies, growth projections, infrastructure needs and levels of service, and updated utility master plans and costs.
To possibly reduce effort and costs, DTA’s first phase of work will be to conduct a preliminary evaluation and understanding of the City’s current DIF program. A report will be issued following the evaluation to identify possible re-use of existing fee structures (a potential cost savings) and/or re-do or enhance in the instances they are lacking. In addition, DTA will evaluate “City policies and procedures, and other regulatory requirements affecting potential fee structures and revenue”. DTA will follow up this first phase with a report to include a more concise scope and possibly an updated fee to bring the program up to date. A copy of DTA’s scope of work and fee is attached in this report.
Selection Process:
Staff published a request for proposals (RFP) for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study beginning May 21, 2024 through June 28, 2024. The City of Hanford received four proposals in response to the advertised Request for Proposals, RFP 2024-20. The following firms submitted proposals:
Company: Location:
1. DTA San Jose, CA
2. Wildan Financial
Services
Oakland, CA
3. RCS Fullerton, CA
4. QK Hanford, CA
A four-person proposal review committee was established to review, rate, and rank the proposals.
The proposal review committee ranked two of the four firms close together, creating the need for interviews. Interviews of the two highest ranked consultants were conducted August 15th by a three- person interview panel.
Following the panel’s evaluation of the interviews, staff identified DTA as the most qualified candidate due to their thorough and well-structured proposal, their presentation during the interview, and their excellent responses and engagement during the interview Q&A which demonstrated a clear understanding of the scope of work. DTA received the highest overall rating between the proposals and the interviews. Favorable feedback and recommendation for hire were received from reference checks performed. References included the Cities of Paso Robles, Palo Alto, San Jose, and Shasta County.
DTA is rated highly qualified due to their portfolio of DIF Nexus Studies performed as well as their longstanding record of excellence within the industry. Based on the above information, Staff recommends award of the Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Nexus Study to David Taussig and Associates.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Fee Update will be funded using the impact fees listed below. Estimated fees for the Study are set for not to exceed $83,901; $10,000 for the DIF Evaluation (Phase 1) and $73,901 for the remaining Phase 2. Below is an estimated breakdown of costs associated with this project:
Budget Summary:
Available Funding:
Fire Facilities (Fund 0182) $11,550
Police Facilities (Fund 0183) $11,550
Parks and Recreation Facilities (Fund 0180) $11,550
Circulation (Transportation) Facilities (Fund 0181) $11,550 Refuse/Recycling Facilities (Fund 0187) $11,550
Storm Drain Facilities (Fund 0184) $11,550
Wastewater Collection and Treatment & Disposal
Facilities (Fund 0186)
$11,550
Water Supply, Treatment, and Storage Facilities
(Fund 0185)
$11,550
Total Available Budget: $92,400
Estimated Project Costs:
DTA (Per Submitted Fee) $83,901
Project Management – 10% (Staff) $8,390
Total Estimated Project Costs: $92,291
Budget Surplus (Deficit) $109
This Study is currently unfunded, therefore an appropriation in the amount of $92,400 is requested to do the work. For ease, it is recommended that the appropriation(s) be funded in equal amounts among the various participating Development Impact Fee Funds as listed in the above budget summary.
PRIOR COUNCIL ACTION:
None
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DTA Scope and Fee
2. DTA Fee Structure
www.FinanceDTA.com 99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 875
San Jose, CA 95113
CITY OF HANFORD
COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
AUGUST 26, 2024
Prepared for:
City of Hanford
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Attention: Frank Senteno, Utilities and Engineering Department Director Project Contact :
Kuda Wekwete
Managing Director, DTA
99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 875
San Jose, CA 95113
Phone: (800) 969-4DTA x204
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I SCOPE OF WORK ................................ ................................ 1 II PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE ................................ ............ 6
1 SECTION I
SCOPE OF WORK
City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
I SCOPE OF WORK
DTA is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Hanford (the “City”). It is our understanding that the City is seeking a qualified firm to conduct a Development Impact Fee (“DIF”) study and recommend a DIF Schedule in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. ) and as also amended by AB 602. The AB 1600-compliant Fee Study would recommend the appropriate fee justification methodology and fee levels to support specific types of City-selected capital facilities needed to serve new growth. DTA will consider updates to the City’s current impact fees related to Wastewater Collection and Treatment/Disposal Facilities, Water Supply, Treatment, and Storage Facilities, Parks and Recreation Facilities, Fire Facilities, Police Facilities, Storm Drain Facilities, Refuse/Recycling Facilities, and Circulation (Transportation) Facilities.
DTA brings a practical perspective combined with real-world experience in working with municipalities, which gives us the ability to understand and communicate with all stakeholders throughout the process.
Regarding our engagement approach, we will work closely with City leadership to engage with property owners, business owners, and community leaders to understand any issues or pressure points, as well as what is envisioned for the future. DTA staff members have considerable experience working on fee mod els for a variety of public improvements and will take a hands -on, detail -oriented approach with an emphasis on accuracy, efficiency, and reliability. As a result, from unique deadlines to fluid, potentially changing priorities, DTA is able to begin work with minimal notice .
A Phase 1: DIF Evaluation
The tasks described below are envisioned for the proposed Scope of Work.
Task 1 – Data Collection and Coordination
DTA shall work with City staff to obtain the following information, to be provided by the City (hereinafter referred to as “Information to be Provided by the City”):
The City’s General Plan, Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) and capital needs information, any Specific/Master Plans, Development Agreements, and data regarding existing entitlements; To the extent available, detailed description of the proposed public facilities, including the facility name and number of square feet, acres, etc. (as applicable for each type of facility); Inventory of completed facilities within the City, including type, size, and location of facility; Cost estimates for proposed facilities (DTA anticipates that the City’s cost data and estimates will be reviewed by DTA staff and discussed with City staff); Existing City Fee Ordinances and/or Resolutions;
Current Annual and Five-Year Reports per Government Code Sections 66006 and 66001; and Identification of any committed revenue sources pledged to fund proposed facilities.
Task 2 – DIF Evaluation
DTA shall review and summarize the City’s current development fee structures, City policies and procedures, and other regulatory requirements affecting potential fee structures and revenue program requirements. We will also review the approach and methodology utilized in prior City fee justification studies so they can be evaluated in light of the City’s current needs.
Deliverable : Memorandum (“Memo”) Summarizing DTA’s DIF Evaluat ion
2 SECTION I
SCOPE OF WORK
City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study
www.FinanceDTA.com
Task 3 – Attend Meeting/Conference Call
DTA shall attend a meeting or a conference call to discuss findings with City staff.
B Phase 2: Comprehensive DIF Study
Work products stemming from the work plan described in this section will include a memo summarizing the fee methodology options and the Draft and Final Reports.
Task 1 – Development of Project Strategy and Kickoff Meeting DTA staff shall meet with City staff in a project kickoff meeting to finalize the details of the engagement, deliverables, timetables, and tasks, discuss the fee methodologies and best practices, identify needed information (i.e., reports, project/needs lists, stakeholder groups, data, etc.), prepare the final project schedule, discuss the public process, and resolve other concerns, as appropriate.
Task 2 – Develop Population and Dwelling Unit Projections DTA will compile and document existing and future population and development estimates for the City. The projections resulting from this task will ultimately calculate fee levels. This task comprises four subtasks.
2A
Population Projections : DTA will gather existing information on present and future population for the City from various sources, including City staff, the General Plan, existing Master Plans, Specific Plans, Municipal Code and other relevant City documents, the U.S. Census, the Kings County Area Regional Transit Agency (“KART”), the State Department of Finance, and from other data sources, including the City’s CIP.
2B Conduct Entitlement Research and Projections : DTA will coordinate with the City Planning Division to determine existing and future residential and non-residential development within the City over the planning horizon. To complete this subtask, DTA will review the General Plan/CIP and related plans to determine expected development land use patterns in the City, assess City records to identify existing entitlements for dwelling units and commercial/industrial development, and project the number of new dwelling units and commercial/industrial development based on existing entitlements and population projections for the next 20 years, or such other target year as selected by City staff.
2C Review Current City Fee Structure : DTA shall review and summarize the City’s current development fee structures, City policies and procedures, and other regulatory requirements affecting potential fee structures and revenue program requirements. 2D Review Prior City Fee Justification Studies : DTA shall review the approach and methodology utilized in prior City fee justification studies so they can be evaluated in light of the City’s current needs.
Task 3 – Review Facility/Capital Needs and Levels of Service This task entails DTA’s review of the facilities and capital needs required to serve new development in the City as projected in Task 2. DTA will use existing City materials as base documents and focus our effort on updating this information.
For any fee program to be comprehensive in its scope, it is necessary to complete a thorough identification and review of all the facilities that will be impacted by additional growth, including those already discussed in the General Plan or CIP. This task will require close coordination with all