R2008-132 AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT CLARK DIETZ, INC.

Home Browse Search

�� ` , . Engineering& Infrastructure Memorandum NO. 2008-70 DATE: August 26, 2008 TO: Honorable Mayor Carrigan and City Council FROM: John A. Smith, Interim City Manager� C�7�/� „ (J R i c h a r d G. M a r l e y, P.E., D i r e c t o r o f E n g i neering In f r'�s truc t'urr Mary E. Cave, P.E., Civil Engineer II � � � SUBJECT: Agreement with Clark Dietz, Inc. to Update the Storm Water Master Plan City Project 08-13 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by staff that the City Council approve the attached resolution authorizing an agreement with Clark Dietz, Inc. (CDI)to provide engineering services for the update of the Storm Water Master Plan. The proposed agreement is for an.incremental fee not to exceed $46,540. BACKGROUND: At the City Council meeting of October 19, 1998, a resolution was approved authorizing an agreement with CDI for the City of Decatur Storm Water Master Plan Update. CDI was recommended for this project based on the results of a Qualification Based Selection Process. This process consists of issuing requests for proposals, review of those proposals and interviews by the selection committee which resulted in a recommendation for contract approved by City Council. The key objectives of the project were to: • Inventory storm water problem areas • Assess impact of U S Environmental Protection Agency's (US-EPA)National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) storm water regulations • Evaluate operation and maintenance needs • Develop updated storm water management policies and procedures • Evaluate City legal authority for storm water management • Identify funding options for the program • Update improvement needs, priorities and costs The Storm Water Master Plan was slated to be achieved through two phases: Phase I Inventory Update and Program Framework Development Phase II Individual Watershed Plans, Capital Improvement Plan(CIP) Program and Final Master Plan. This phase may have multiple parts. The 1998 agreement with CDI was for Phase I work only. Work on the project commenced immediately. CDI produced a preliminary draft document in August 1999 which was reviewed by staff. CDI produced a"pre-final" draft in September 2002. City staff previewed the pre-final draft, but did not return comments to CDI. There were no written records documenting why the project was not completed in 2002. It is assumed that other budget priorities and staffing constraints prevented the completion of the project.