Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Calaveras Dam topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee backs authorization for $38 million Calaveras Dam construction management contract
Summary
The Budget & Finance Subcommittee heard SFPUC staff describe seismic risks at Calaveras Dam and forwarded a resolution authorizing a construction‑management services agreement with Black & Veatch not to exceed $38 million to the full Board with a recommendation to approve.
Chair John Avalos convened the Budget and Finance Subcommittee on July 20, 2010, to consider a San Francisco Public Utilities Commission request to hire a construction management consultant for the Calaveras Dam replacement project.
Dan Wade, senior project manager for the Calaveras replacement, said the existing dam is “seismically vulnerable” and described Calaveras as the city’s largest local reservoir, storing roughly 100,000 acre‑feet. He said the replacement would be roughly the same dimensions as the current structure — about 210 feet high and 1,200 feet long — and that the construction schedule anticipates environmental‑review certification in the fall and construction beginning next spring with an estimated four‑year build period. The proposed consultant would provide preconstruction services, constructability reviews, contract administration, construction quality assurance and environmental compliance, Wade said.
The resolution before the subcommittee would authorize the SFPUC general manager to execute a professional services agreement with Black & Veatch for construction management services for the Calaveras Dam replacement project for an amount not to exceed $38,000,000 and a term up to five years and six months.
Budget analyst commentary and committee questions focused on the procurement process (the department said it ran a competitive process and received three proposals) and on environmental concerns raised during the public comment period. Wade said most public comments relate to fishery issues in the Alameda Creek watershed and to asbestos mitigation; he reported the agency is responding to comments and coordinating with regulatory agencies.
Supervisor Ellsberg moved the item and Supervisor Mark Grama seconded; the committee forwarded the item to the full Board with a recommendation, taken “without objection.”
The subcommittee’s action was procedural: it forwarded the authorization to the Board of Supervisors for final approval rather than awarding the contract itself. The SFPUC said it expects to return to the planning department this fall as part of the environmental‑review process and to seek construction approval next spring.
