The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 07-01-93 ~ Central ~~~:~ g~~~R~~~ba~~ Jistrict PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR d. SUBJECT DATE June 20, 1993 QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO JANET CAPRILE, IN THE MARTINEZ AREA, JOB 1 832 TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF SEWER EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Division ISSUE: Ms. Caprile, owner of the property at 100 F Street, Martinez, has requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: In 1988 the District was notified of a stoppage in an existing sewer on F Street in Martine7.. District forces responded and found that the cause of the stoppage was a failure of an existing pipe under an existing home. It was determined that the existing sewer could not be repaired and a new sewer was installed by the District along the western side of the property in Glendora Drive. Staff has been unable to find a recorded document reflecting the deeding of an easement to CCCSD along the alignment of the original sewer pipeline and doubts that the rights were ever perfected. The District, however, may have acquired a prescriptive easement over this area because the sewer had been in use for many years as part of the old Martinez public sewer system. Ms. Caprile has granted a new easement for the relocated sewer main. The original easement or any rights obtained through prescriptive use are no longer required and may now be quitclaimed. The project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEOA) under District CEOA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. The Board of Directors' approval of the project will constitute a finding of agreement with this determination unless otherwise indicated. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to Janet Caprile, Job 1832, and authorize the President of the District Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said Quitclaim Deed, and authorize the Quitclaim Deed to be recorded. R( j/1 JSM r1r1h7 vn'L) RAB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-9/85 DH 1 F ST ----- I I NEW SEWE~ PIPE LINE ' I I REPLACEMENT EASEMENT I I I I I I I ~ a ~ ~ (5 ----7~- . / ~~ " ~ lJ I I I I- I I I I I I /0' Ct:CSD I!""'$E'MENT IS' STORM DRAINAec EASFME'NT rKISr. HOUSE' I QUITCLAIM EASEMENT JOB 1832 MARTINEZ AREA Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR e. SUBJECT DATE June 22, 1993 SET PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 15, 1993 TO CONSIDER THE COLLECTION OF PRIOR YEAR DELINQUENT SEWER SERVICE CHARGES ON THE COUNTY TAX ROLLS TYPE OF ACTION SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Debbie Ratcliff, Controller Administrative/Finance & Accounting ISSUE: The District code and State law require holding a Public Hearing for placing prior year delinquent Sewer Service Charges on the County tax rolls for collection. BACKGROUND: As approved by the District's Board of Directors on May 20, 1993, collection letters were sent June 1, 1993 to owners of 760 residential parcels for the 1992-93 unbilled Sewer Service Charge. These letters stated that if the 1992-93 Sewer Service Charge was not paid by June 30, 1993, the charge plus interest at 6.5 percent and a ten percent processing fee would be collected on the 1 993-94 County tax rolls. In order to add delinquent Sewer Service Charges to the County tax rolls, a Public Hearing must be held. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize a public notice to set a Public Hearing on July 15, 1993 to receive public comment on the collection of prior year delinquent Sewer Service Charges on the County tax rolls. REWEWEDAND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD AcnON INITIATI,NG DEPT./DIV. 1302A-7/91 DR ~ Central ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~ba~~ &Jistrict PAGE 1 OF 3 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF SUBJECT NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR f. June 20, 1993 DATE AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 93-11, (ORINDA) AND P.A. 93-12 (MORAGA) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Division Parcel Area Owner I Address Remarks Lead No. Parcel No. & Acreage Agency 93-11 Orinda George G. Wolf, et ux Existing house with a CCCSD (69C4) 319 EI Toyonal failing septic system; Orinda CA 94563 owner wants to 265-090-010 & -011 connect to the public (0.62 AC) sewer system. Project is exempt from CEOA. 93-1 2 Moraga Town of Moraga The subject parcel is Town of (96B4) 21 00 Donald Drive a city park known as Moraga Moraga CA 94556 Rancho Laguna Park. 258-510-002 (8.44 AC) The public restrooms are being improved and must be connected to the public sewer system. Moraga has adopted a "Notice of Exemption" for this project. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 93-11 and 93-12 to be included in a future formal annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 RAB DH f/I'! JSM INITIA TING DEPT./DIV. AQur 4 I. 7 4 , AC h' ~.~ ,// ,./' GUAKAN 1 Y ..,....... ) ~ ~ - Z9 JOHNSON 65.7 AC --------- "" "- ... , ~ SEAIOIlGE 1I.6'AC lAC ENSMI.'EIl 17.1' AC 1 PROPOSED ANNEXATION 93-11 L e. M. U o. PROPOSED ANNEXATION 93-12 PAGE 1 OF 1 BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR g. SUBJECT DATE June 11, 1993 AUTHORIZE LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY FOR LESLIE CHAPMAN, ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN II, FROM JUNE 21, 1993 THROUGH OCTOBER 22, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE LEAVE OF ABSENCE SUBMIU.mI3Y William Clement, Engineering Support Supervisor INITIATING Q,EPT.IDIV.. D t tl ~nglneenng epar men Plant Engineering Division ISSUE: Board approval is required for an employee Leave of Absence Without Pay for longer than 30 working days. BACKGROUND: Leslie Chapman, Engineering Technician II, has been on Pregnancy Disability Leave since April 26, 1993. Under the provisions of the MOU, she may take up to six months leave for the birth of her child by using a combination of pregnancy disability leave, sick leave, vacation, earned overtime, and leave of absence without pay. To continue her pregnancy leave, Mrs. Chapman is requesting Board approval of a Leave of Absence Without Pay from June 21, 1993 through October 22, 1993. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize a Leave of Absence Without Pay for Leslie Chapman, Engineering Technician II, effective June 21, 1993 through October 22, 1993. RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON INITIATING DEPT./DIV. ()e- MI3 WEB 1302A-7/91 WVC ~ Central ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~~a~~ LJistrict PAGE 1 OF 6 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR h. SUBJECT DATE June 20, 1993 ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124, PARCELS 3, 4, 5, AND 6 TYPE OF ACTION COMPLETE ANNEXATION SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Division ISSUE: A resolution by the District's Board of Directors must be adopted to finalize District Annexation 124, Parcels 3, 4, 5, and 6. BACKGROUND: The District made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District Annexation 124. LAFCO has considered this request and has recommended that Parcels 3, 4, 5, and 6 as shown on the attachments, be processed as submitted. No public hearing is required and the annexation of these parcels can be completed. A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEOA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. This Negative Declaration is included as Exhibit" A" in the separately bound document referenced in the position paper for the public hearing on District Annexation 124, Parcels 1, 2, 8, 9, and 10 covered later in this meeting's agenda. In accordance with District CEOA Guidelines Section 7.17 (f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration before approving the annexation. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution concurring with and adopting the Negative Declaration of LAFCO, certifying that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of Notice of Determination as a Responsible Agency stating that the District considered the Negative Declaration as prepared by LAFCO as required, and ordering the completion of District Annexation No. 124, Parcels 3, 4, 5, and 6. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING ~1.1DIV. '11 PII~n / tt\lL > 0> - \J '/ RAg 1302A-9/85 DH JSM .:r~7';7":l :i---"'~-- .._. ..~~._" -. , . .. --'--T~"--"'---'_""_d' .....-...-- "~i~t-'L'!;: C.C.C S.D. ANNEX~ ,ON NO. 124 , ..~ , ',' ~t:' ....._..; r L:e~fi.;:;q..""""" ~ ,-'. _.. ~., .~ . . '", '.,'.,.:(' ,,~ _ ~ TJ '-, ;0;'...1 '\ . '.;>c"~,;x' \":"'}.;; < v'c;d"N" /. J .' ,.1......, ~ ,,,,,...' :x- """~ ~~:;:~ ~ t/:::' ~ ::.:;.;;.-::~ , '~<l' .\,' '.: < .....',. - '.. ~ _~"""'t'-'" :~,:-,+,...:1;4-1;7'1tr7 . ~,""",~........,.I'"I"'~ ........- .'t'''t'''f :I .'\ .:t~~~ .h:~;;';-":~:;;."~ ~ 'I\. ...._,:"1'~:;:~i~~.i~(dl-- :i:"@~i<T~lT ~+~y ;';:';," ;:~'L ..~ / +:,~.- , ~~r ~ 'iI'~~~ \ :' i. iT"" to ~-~:'.'..~ \.. .' /, ' :<' ht::"!~" ",,,, <,' {....:...,..,< .' ;'0\ \tl[~{ ""(< .~ ...~. '...... '~f::~j ~ :. ... I ~ ~ :l,F:t..., :.:...., :::~~1~~'" ~ .' .. ^. ~ ' ~~'~4 ~;~ ' -'J-:<::':" .~~ ,.., ~ ' .. ....i'~T; !"t U:irl'~ n '~;"<i: 1'.L.,.~~.~~::~ ,\;\ ~ 1 ,~,,'1 j' ,.."d",\, - ': ...:: ,.> ..>~trt;t Ltf' "".~':. , ::::::> J.::- l ,,(t- ~ 'i':.;:\ ...-....~ {~ ... "'"\:~-^,,, ~ ~- (,; '1~l;~;t}Y:<\<::-;::::~i:,.:J '"?+:.:)~;:~; :.;.::J:-... :" . : , .-.".:"i:.., " .... .r:~.x-:TJ..: .\: ..::;T!<;:'~'i\':.~'"", ....' ..'vy;:.:., i..........t"x ' '. . w-",,:i>' ,"' ~,\..~N'Y. ..;~ -...oj;: ~~', *""r.;:.l> +'"" ....,,<"'W".....>i'.}.:S .' .i@S"","",-. .,~- "Th" " <'j"N 2. , ~.. .7;;lISi'&,; >di>. . \. 'j< " . . . -, '" , '~:M.,,,,;},; ,:_ '<1; 'a': }; ,~t;,~L~'>'~~i+Yi .l. 'A~ :~~--'-~>....~_/' ~~ee.; J~~~\J<9~U~T~ CR'E~~~~~~.<...yti ~~" "'~~_ :',~, ..q~o 0 S~r~s '. Jig' '..'""i- ,-\~ \ lo- ~ <<y';. -.,;.. '. \, - '\. "';'v':::::' '~'2$!. . ,.. C '-' ~AJ "'- D"'.1...L " "C~~ ".i '\i...", ::~3~""o ........~-,I" ~ ".~ ,"~""'1..~""" \ )\ _..:i . '-. '-', _ ._..:.... ..""'... ... ..trr v 2 "" ,t",..., ~"""";'.; '" "/~', ~.fif: "', , <~:", V'. , , ~~lJjW~'" ~~~~:,~~'::'':;:~~:)~~10~1i~}I...?".,.. ,.' ~-'\ ". ~ . ~ \'.:~-- .' ~, ...D ,........,'. .':- " ,,> -' tXh ;',,'.;c.Hd.:A.j ,.~<i ~~l(.:: ,," #.:\.\.} : o:!} ~>t-'''::;~\:_ '~", ,.K' \. ;.~ '~;-':::~::>:7J~;;-(:~'~ ' ~>f;h:";<',., -, ...':" " ";=V ,~, ' .:' ";",~:,, .'.;." \"'~'C'<)~< ;, to; \ _.1 .. ~ ~ ',. ..." . ~, .....~.~...,L-2.../ ...K M')::/' :.0,: ~' 1 JB.2-... .;',< ',,,,"tl";, ,+' -,':""...;:.rS~ ~" ~l.;j:;' ,'. fi"'" .,'.,\,. ~ .i{".~ ,....,}',... .~'l'-4:;.,~. __ . 'c. """"'0. - @<,'.\.''c''\.:, " ~.~ '.' ", " ~<y' " ',' ~',.' / ':/\....,.,. ~ '1:\'.,</ Q<( :'J.:,~,;, ;.'<'i.:',' i~;' : !\J 1;;]'1 ,~'T.' " . ~;." ;, ~. ..i( ~ . .>+ t'c FY,.: ~l"'..~* {. ".' , ~. ':',. .....:<.>>: ."2 I ~, t'."z, ,81'" , !t"q ~., '_~ ,,',,ii ~..-,_ ;.~7r.< [::-:c: lIi" '" ,... ,,,,. . ;,... .... .....;.t... ' ~, 1 ~~:'::~:". :'~,,:: )L.:.....-: ,:;:':::::::;:::::: if:.:?>,. ,<Y" ;- . " y." \:\"\'j..Y~E 3 .u< .~2'\ , ' '" ", '~, \: ~\'~;- ,1'... 4 :;: ~ '. .<~.,.,:. '" " 'r1\ ".~.",;."...i"'- :r . .. j" - """"""'.' ~~ I;..~.:'\.;:.. .~. '\.. .. '0 :'l~~C 2l.2:1.;~tt:A.:;..7tl/:'< '.,' 5 ............ t.X.. ' ;)'\. I," ".JJ;~>' 'T',,~::,...k.:'.t: ,......."8 ;/< , ~i.~~)Ji.C: _ ~ " "i, ,.0:' . ~ ), "'Al\~L' ..:.....t~.i%\'"j;'~:. \i " . ," ;r:S(i~(;l... !:::,>, :'.: .. . ~< 1< " . c.:~:",,~ AMoy'lC(:~;W\: i.. . ;' "> ~..~'.. 1 " ....... -,,,,- " ' ,./ "" ''''''.. -;[:, ".< '.' < 'fa ...... .. f'.". . "r"-:', ' ')~ 1\..; ~< STONEj:, VALLlfy:....'., . ~\6. . "<.U', .... ..... '['(; 0;';. (;}~. '. '.. "', ,+. ':" ~ '. '\.SSi~;~~:.:, .; . ":: ;~~'!i~~',.' ...... ~iu, .' ...,,:,' .' . ...eL . ,. .' "\,'.' .'. ..,. '<~~"'6 ....{,.. .: ,. ~.~.2,?,''''' " , J; G<' ..,- .' .: .', ',. . . 'J?t~ '.(i1i' '" ,.~.~ . ....~.}.. .,,, ..: } ;l:..> .... - " . ..,~ ",\. .",~~4". .,.. k,ll,'~ ,"!.; ~, .,..~. ~.< '~..~ :f..... . , .,' .,' ..:.,\. '. ..;. ,.' t ..-'n ."'~ '. ' ,I' - ..~;...<. ......... . .. '''''~' "i?~'....,.....:.?. .~;>> <::F' ,-.... ~,.~ '...,.'-"" '.,.:\ ~i> .... ,:C:""~<'., ~ ''', 'TJ.A>f,'~:",~ C;."'~9' ><>i:/". < ",{/ ~ *,,:",sl\\ w....f ,~ " ~ . .:.. ..' , " ~rvy + ~'f.:">' iIIr;c.- =~(,:"",f<:." .... .,.,.,... ~. << ""~" 6~:"'" <r;;\"Y" ~...."..: "";1:' . "'-" ,,&-""'"i.:." .........,:.'.>', ::~\ .......... " '.,' ~ '.f ' 7 S,' C9q, ~\? .'n)2:J -' ".;.... ~. ':;.md:-+'(r'"-~<. ~~':"""'.C\:<.Lt.../" ~!:;"',} ,'<}",;'''.f-,~<''" ,,~. 9 .10 '",;z;':~jf'''' ..'~< :'" ~~"~i .H,"k~'.." /.;;.~~- ':.] - '~...'\ '~<::>iJ..~ ~, ~.t~..Jf/'i.f" ,'!'~'N >,~~ ~~~v,tLEY< ~: .'-' . ,-.'. '~i4;.2{s..~.~. " --.' '.\ . .,~>i>\ ~:~1lo...>+5~". " '.. :'::t~~'.N~. '" L " -.,~. .<' -';fll 'r~~,rt:i ~., ~:. \. ":~~:.~.~7r;::'~"~""7".~T-~:: I;" - ~>f'-..~ .,j:' ...,.. ~~ ,..,.:'..::'<:'...'t">.i4:- . ,'de. <."". '....".;. ..." N.,l,."..:- '," ..... . ~~.'.','." ~"",i.. ~r.:;.'i~1~1i8" ........>fj.:.. .,:-.i' '.\?, ...-. """"", .>>'';'''"'':: :-:-. ...::...... $: ^ ....i, x ... .:. .~ ~ ;", y-t:~' ~,,, ~ ' . .u._.~...... ~.-._.-.-. :Qf,... 'J&~;}...\..}... C," - _ _ ., 8,. ,.;....> < .~;~~;~' .. .,.," tII\. ~j0:;t~,j.:.~:;.:'1tA ;.' \.. ' ,. ~".,.tii.iJ{1i: . +.. '" c'<< ';~'f~. '~::.;;.::':,::.: ::::.;-:.. . '-"'. . . bi' hi' ..... ........ d. '. J~i~Z,;~ p,j? 'if ;(1 ~ ~q,,:,~"'" ~,: ~".....){= \.... . ....~., '''''..: . ~ . '" ..~ .........,.,...' ~; .l\<~~~~'RfMZ\~ - j .. ?<;;;:. '.' <.;~.,,:ON)'.. ....... ""'" /' ~~ ...,0i~~,i~\.~;t;t~%j;j _" / :1~~:-._>~:':',~2~~~1.:- .,' . i ~.. ". .. , " ':-.... . :~. -~~r ~ -?"""'-',,,", ...'.,........,...;.. .........,'... .'. ........ ........... .........,;,...:.,;... . .<:::::;:;:::,:..... ".' . . . , .. .... . " .'. . . . . .,. . C;':,::t ~'?d i}~\..~ 0.... :'. ..... ;.......~~ (,I " ~ ;.... ..: ....: ..:.- :.::.... ........ '.. ,.. ...:..,...... ,,':" .:..:. ", .:..':.. . .... ................ . . ....; .: ,.'~"'" "~J.... '~\.., ".~\ '. (~ \-:'~~ ~ C1\ \@J Sue. @) 1977 SUB 4948 ~@ w ~ ..J Sue. ~ ~ L1VORNA @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXA TION ~ - EXIST :::::::::~:::::::::::::. - ING CCCSD BO _;,;;,;;;;. _ UNDARY * = PROPOSED ANNEXATION - SIGNED PETITION v - DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 1 parcel 3 @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY -- = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 4 NtJl"23'~"e 121.17 STATE OF CALIFORNIA * PORTION 8423 O.R. 110 ~ ~ 1::). , ~ ~<::) ~~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ,~ :.a \1\ ~~ ~ LOT 35 ~~ ~ q.& 0-1:1' .~ ,~ ~,...t1 _6 ~", \ ~ .y;,,,,-" ~"&. t;Tr N6tS".u'lG'C ~ ~ ~ . 14) ~ Sse-4Z'Z2."w ::::**~::. ~~. ...}..'!;.. ..> :t:.."*{:;:..~.... LOT 88 LOT 69 @ a PREVIOUS AMCEXAT10M .... = EXISTING CCC5D BOUtI)ARY _ - 2' PROPOSED ANNEXA TIOM * = SIGNED PETITION W'LD FLOWE" " PLACE DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 5 01l~ /.. ~tJ O'A1'~~ ~ ~. ~ I(!![j NB6.az'.sr~ 666. 43 ~ '-3'.,.,. SUa E'-4S1" 8 P1"N. 4999 ~ "If 41. . l.o '\- lJNlc 1" '" , IP-4l. s,,~, 0 Il. U1"Il.I1"., . . 3~~ O/S1"p ri/C1" tJ'l ~. \S' -~- .s". '" ~. ~ ~ i.. \S> ~. -=>.. ~, ~ ..,. ... ~. ~ ~- -i. e- ~ o ~ ..,. -p ~. " ~ _ S;o -0' ..;::, ~ ~.;. 'f,. Po .~ ~ "-40 ,~" 0 FlUOE'FI .FI. ~84 DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 6 , l.l) \) ~ ~ l}/ I\i llIl ~ \) I~ I @ :: PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ilimii' ~ EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY - - :: PROPOSED ANNEXATION * :: SIGNED PETITION ~ Centra. ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~baR~ .Jistrict PAGE 1 OF 8 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 4. HEARINGS a. SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124, PARCELS 1, 2, 8, 9 AND 10 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO DATE June 20, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of several of the parcels included within District Annexation 124. The District must hold public hearings and consider testimony by affected property owners before acting on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. Part of the annexation, consisting of four parcels, was not changed. These four parcels are submitted for Board action on the consent calendar for today under a separate position paper as District Annexation 124. No public hearing is required for these parcels because they had 100 percent landowner consent. LAFCO amended the boundaries of the six remaining parcels to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. One of the amended parcels, District Annexation 124, Parcel 7, is inhabited (1 2 or more registered voters). This single parcel annexation is submitted for Board action on this agenda as a separate hearing. The remaining five amended annexations are designated District Annexation 124, Parcels 1, 2, 8, 9, and 10 and are considered to be five separate annexations. Of the five amended annexations, all are uninhabited. These parcels are shown on the attached maps. The exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. CEOA REQUIREMENTS A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexations was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEOA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. In accordance with District CEOA Guidelines Section 7.17 (f), the Board must review and consider the environmental effects of the project as shown in the Negative Declaration which is shown in Exhibit A before approving the annexation. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. INITIATING ~~/DIV 'It( ~~ REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB SU~lD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON UNINHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124, PARCELS 1, 2, 8, 9 AND 10 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE? OF 8 DATE .11InP?0 1 qq.''l ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS District Annexation 124 as submitted to LAFCO was a single annexation. The action by LAFCO separated a portion of District Annexation 1 24 into the subject five annexations, which require a public hearing. Normally a separate public hearing would be held for each of these five subject annexations. If no members of the public appear, these annexations can be considered in one public hearing. If a member of the public wishes to testify on a particular annexation, a separate public hearing shall be held on the annexation. The remaining annexations will then be the subject of the second or subsequent public hearing. Legal notice was published, and the affected property owners were notified of the public hearings as required by law. The subject five amended annexations are uninhabited (fewer than 12 registered voters). Factors to be considered by the Board in deciding to approve or disapprove the proposed annexations are set forth as Exhibit B. Following its review, the Board, not more than thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the public hearing, shall adopt a resolution reflecting the appropriate action taken. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing on all of the annexations or individual hearings on District Annexation 124, Parcels 1, 2, 8, 9, and 10 as appropriate, receive any testimony, and close the public hearing(s). 1 . Adopt a Resolution certifying that the Board has reviewed the Negative Declaration, ordering the filing of a Notice of Determination as a responsible agency stating that the Board considered the Negative Declaration, and concurring with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO. 2. Order the annexations if no majority protest exists, or 3. In the event that the Board finds that, after considering the factors set forth in Exhibit B, that the annexation(s) is/are unwarranted, the Board shall disapprove the proposed annexation(s). 4. If the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the hearing representing landowners owning 50 percent or more of the assessed value of the land within the territory proposed to be annexed, the Board shall terminate the annexation(s). 110?O q.w; "1-~7~~:'~~=r'I';'::;;'--C-~C--~'~-""C'- "'~S---D-'-A' ~N--N'E' X ^-T;.O-.....N ._.N.~-._.O"_...--.1.. 2" "4 T-~.d;~~i:.' /~': r · · J · · M J · , .~ ,/.it;~.........~..!.- ~f::=:';J':""'J""'>""""""""~;;tt~:*,,'\" , .~ "".f . ::m1- ;".......~~:---d ,f~;_..~J}I.<~\~?t;;{.. '( " 71:. ,.' ~'~. ""~':" .- ,~/t "''''~'' _, .""~.,,.. ~ '--'t' . . ; "t~)".;4s ""~ .....~."t""'" T"'Il'- ; ;+..~::;::(:,::.:~:;)~ ;;-. ~~ i :. :t"..;A.........~':.. ::~ ~ ".... ,~~ ~.i<I, ,~1 ((',~ C))'ry"'->" ,~~t _..~.~~:'ff~ ')...~.._~"..~ ;.!>"";''''~.' , ..~..~."..j " .';:;.,_.....~ l>- '~-..l''' f'\{' '..~. ... oj " ' !, _ ." " '.''>; _ '1 15~.. it'" . " . ."":)~, . ; ~ '.,.f:: ~ . ~ ....'. ... ;:~:;L k...':' (::t..::~:r:~ ; .....:::::~: - tI . _"""","" . --'j'l; '.>F~;:~"'~'. . ,. .~" '. .~F:::..";<...".';::O ~.,.. ^" ,..., ^ .,,* ~.,". ........... .,'" ~ .' ;:; .<.~ ,- 1 '~0. x .'t'\i, .,- ,"" . ........ "'>;,jI:", ~{~i+W'1'+ I' ;':"'. . ?t,~,r::\,.\;". ~ l ,~- ; ., .:.'.-' "''';'':M ': ~)f~C '}'1t'{"'qU:.'{ ~ I .... :~...., , <<> l:::.^ t ,,<', :'\ ,." . t...i , "<'!.-~. .. ".. ......~ . '. .:. j "f'. 'I j, ::.' .,' \ ki' '.:"'. ... ,", ':'",. '.' ';if' MJ. ~;n:"'~"'~~";:\;'~... ...., .,.... . Ii':'<) ",:,,4...t' ': ," .' . x<::i .'"S'; ,~~""~^1'\' .'<,.~-MA."'<< .,.~>.... ,(\~";:"'.,.... .....:'t.{ .' .;...:0;." . I:~'"';:/~..~\_.. 1(_""'-: \.';". #l'+":-, ,'t' \.... '<\)~;<. -4;' ::}\;;: ' ' ~ . =.' . ~>7~'...:~ !.,-;~;;V:'); ':/;.JJ1:;<. ~~~".,i. '. if ,,:\\. ;'''--._, ):--/. -'~--rr:e ; ~+:"'. \3~UT c~~ 7'V.) ~~) :, ; . ,>-,':",: ~ ,.q"'o SprJpfis . .~~,~J,~ \~t~~~l...:. "]i:..,.,,_...... ''''~--:v''~ ._.~~$!.,'~'c~,~', 1;.A'".. q...,~~" L.~ 'I qffI \ '\ _ .,j ...... --:~~'!e V"'.J.i ....tJF'~1tIj"j '\..... .- '). J.. . '.~. .... ' ., N' ' . v"--', r_.. ...... - Ll, f~,d"T1~ ...'@..7:(B<.;"l;;.,1 ,:'" ;/~;~~i2i:~ ..' ~-' '\" '" .. t!h \"">'" ...'.-:t..l ~ .,l:;;~:~~; > '< .;>~':t",~:"{:>f'" - ~ , ,r";- "'S;... ~'. ...4,J "'....... """ .~.,.' , )4L~~'~ .. -..,;2":'';';'''. ~(~r~.~:..)t\/\,~.' ~~} ~~''''::::J~'J' '.' ~.'~ V-~r \. :;.."t:"!Zf: "~::::~7~;',.'~ ' -"'''::'~'''''''''''' ..,:,., ~ "-:j" - , ", =,<:. ,,>' !\:\ ...Y...:::...;. . ,>, N:~:~:~:~:~' :::..~::.:::;:.:.:::~. -'. ~J~- .......~ !,'2 :-'... ::::'lr-- ~... ... 1"''''t''';'';''L~':>''' ,2~ -;-.'" ',;::~~;~;.~..l:~:;l!",: }' ','.:\ . .jj" ..... ' .-' - .t/'], ..,.....r"A~.. .......;.~.. .}/X~;; ..~~:::.,'; , ,,' t\". ',or""':;':. ~- ~ -'if? >:::. "l~~/ .,~ - "J ' :....<:. y ~~- ';;:'{ . ',\(:-.\.;' I; .\; +... ,,:.;....,:':.:11:'" ~ ,.".~ ,~.., '.jo'.~.: ~~:.:.>.<:::: ~ N;'" :.;::::::t<.-,.:~'''' ~ :;:.,. . ..,....l\~". " '. . ~-. '.'.i: ,d)) .;r;8":"t:' .... ..... : ,. ~\..:j~::;lt \~r' ;:;. -. "-;, , ".~'Ft,,;~>t;.0~. .~-w 'Ih ......\(., . '.,"', . ~' '~\>~\"~.... .~;'..'~:k~._ ~.... ....... ~t;';,v ...... . '\, ' ; ~;~~\ . 2 '"'\ k;;.;{,~f;:Vj>;/Xi. . . .... ............ 1'5' liJl&,........... .: ;<. ~', \ ~:~~};;' }J~~\F,:lrUr'~;it...,,{{...I;lj ....... ..' 1!2;f{;'> - .,~ ','\ . ~. "~"~ < <"" ': A L :/M;..L1~t1'~}t;1.?i( '~<. '. . . .. ............{t.:.: '.'.:...;,...~'..;....\.:<.i....:l.,. '. ......~,:.,.. ' '.',,;.:". .;.......: .. . '.. ............" Ou~/;....d><\r.. :....... ..i..=, .. ".'. '~"""\'.. '.' .;....,'. )., .,"" .' > -:) .1 '.. .. .... '.' .' . ..... .....Lll', ~ ", .. > ......'.~...,: ..;.1'~' , , . . ...'.' ..... ' :,..... ,,;)/ <:\t, ... '. 'I'.~\j~h :';?'~~'l' "r'.}"~;"" ..: . ':r";' ':':-. ": ~,~s;.~NE,:.>v,AU.~~sm1.;: j';i;~;~ ~l'>1: 'I;\i:;l\\:';~;. 'l C" . . ~.,.....~......}.....~:..:t...........~11. <'. '~ .'. '.' ...;~ l"€eL . '.", :> '.\. '.~ ..i)rit" 90ID . :. .... ., -. .~....);.';' '''',. .~ ".~} N\" ........ ".,)} <:1 ',.:; ~ ~ 6 ~~\i . ~,~.~:;:'"..:; '.I,L.:.: < '''~. .'.: "~'.., ,)..~:;j. .::,:...... ,';.r '., .~. ; . ~, .\;.,.~ ~i}:'i . · ". '. .... .,< ",' ~)S",\,,-... .'.', . ))? . , L." ;;;~&~, ~ .. . ~":..""" .:::.:> ....~1. ' '\ ii, ~"" :":''''"'~''..' ':x.~"-Iy~/..,iVC:~;;' .~tj"3) ~" .'.; ....:: ~!50ff);1>" w-.. " '" ... ..:::.;:" . ,/, ~,l"'" ~ :S;"t:]"'f .,.;: ';~i. .ld.... . f' .... .. ......... '1411. ".i:' \1';.< . ... '. <.?~'.r 7 J~O 8 '~.;~ :~.~'t':':. -.' :;~.;tti>,t~'~~~~"zi..ii~~i.'. ........ .' 17': . .{<...\..F;~ 11' ""'. l ,if >, , .,~ .~ 10 ~::7~ ~. ..... '. F. ......: '" 1:..... .."..<....~~!l'..,~ '.' ,....c~.\;" ~...~ 9 ~ .....~i ...:.~...::;i;~;. ~c,.....,... .' '>':"r;C;;,,, ,~. " . .\(4 "..-'~ '. - 9.~~ .~. $. '. .' .................. " J > '" ~jN."" DANV".... ,.f . X"._. . .....,... f1/~' ---. .<... ' ;: 1>....;;;:9d.~1..:~.:",~ LLE..p.t, g.... . . ... '. , %~~.tk..E. ~ · '::..... ~\n~t\~:&" ~- a:r:; > -. .""f:'t7j~ '""--. ...... ~.'~?~.~:\tk}<...w 'to ~ ~ " , ,; \ .~ . :<::;;? :::;~:t;l'~.:). " . ...- ,~cL~.:L ~ ... "':~.'" ~+' ;...:'i<~ '"', ~ :t-.;p ~:7) 'i.+;~.....; :::} ~ ..:: .,.."...... '~B' ,,'." ,',. ~" . ~<::::;::;::;W:~':~' .. ~. ,-.~:~ 4'!> + ~ - it: ~:~ ". , .",.. 'I!:.'f1PJ~:"" ....';;' ;,,,. ....... ",::.r'--.'\..... __.:Jti,:$~k'.,i; ",,,,,.,<,;~,: \~ ".~.v.(':~'r Brii '-'" ~ ....,pi.Ji::;.bt,j;;:;...i. '~., \nN::~?ir'<' ~ -""'" ~:\ ~ .. .:~::.;....;:~;;;.;(:.:;.;:::.:-<\t;r1?:i~::::::t~~ ' :t){/:r:~r~~;.:;{l ~~.:" ~: ~,!')' <' ,-\::.:::-; ~ ~,......,...< ". .' "';. ..........:..............,:::: """,::C ...::;.(....,... ..-s,~,...(. ''',' .... .'. ......:........ ':". . ":";;", 0'ilIII . . ~. ~ ..,::c..: ~\;.'....\ .. .~]:\~\\\\\: :na::; , l'.:.<::~;:~ ' :~~~;~ :::::cc<? ',.' ~i' c.' ;;ii ~ .'." ..:::::..r"'''' ;ra~/ .~,~ 1>. t~'~ e,. ~~~;~>!;;..;;.?>............ ... , . ... ....... .:~:~\~;j;!:~:.;\;;\\\\\\\:\1\\:~~F/{.',. . . ';'i~~N..~R~MON . ~ ,. .~li::::~~~::~ ~ ..... ',1 ; ....:":-- ~.::----' 1-"" .~ ~ '< (.1 ,. ~ ,.. t ............. U. .............-. i .~.. ~ k ," ( \".... . . ~ ., . " -,/ /.....r{'.... . .:;.:......... :~ . .W... .:./...../.. ....::;.:;.:;/:: .....,...\ 1\:::. . <';~~'" , ~. ~ o '" ,-' -;> o 01' . ----- ___ ~__'M~_. /;~<::;; , ~ ,~ ~ , +<>, ~I:) ........ ~ 'Y!!J) fl} I!!!} . ~.10fJt-. ",.,1- C. N1. t- . /.,. -,.' .;l'-' ~Jt @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ....................., = EXISTING CCOD BOUNDARY E:~' = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION V/ / / A,:; ADDED BY LAFCO DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 1 ( ONE PARCEL ADDED BY LAFCO) ~ ~ ~d' ~ ~ 6'~ '() l.4 * lIS ~I GESTER . () 16086 O.R. 603 () II') ~ lit TSCHARNER 14369 O.R. 573 DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 2 (ONE PARCEL ADDED BY LAFCQ) ~ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ~ ~. = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY :tEtE: = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION v// /Jl~ ADDED BY LAFCO ~ \@) LOT 31 ~ ~ ~~j:t~IlJIJ.j~~}1\~lft~~~~;:li;I\\W~~~::::6l\&:::~t~:~:.. I~~~~Mt :::~.:.:::: " .. ~ ~o ~" ~ o.,'b · .u~~ ~ ~ '" ~ ..~ '* R.H.FALK LOT 32 ;.:-:.;.: .;:>>:";: W:::' ~ 'eJ DO~PHIN DR. ~ = PREVIOUS ANtlEXA TION ~ ..d. = EXISTING CCCSO BOUNDARY .:;:': = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGtlED PETITION tz2Zj: ADDED BY LAFCO DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 8 ( FIVE PARCELS ADDED BY LAFCO ) PARCEL 4 I- I I I / WI z <I ..I I I 1 Zl i=/ ~I Q I I @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXA TIOH .. = EXISTING CCCSO BOUNDARY - - = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION VI/IliA == ADDED BY LAFCO DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 9 ( TWO PARCELS ADDED BY LAFCO ) ~ 'eJ 1 o <C o IX: > W ..J ..J <C > Z W W IX: CJ LEONARD CT. rii:.in 'eJ r;;;m \Z!!!J ~ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ~ tf4:" = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ;;:; - = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION r/ ////f= ADDED BY LAFCO DISTRICT ANNEXATION 124 PARCEL 10 THREE PARCELS ADDED BY LAFCO) PAGE 1 OF 2 SUBJECT CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING; CONSIDER APPROVING SEGMENT 14 OF THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF INTERCEPTOR AND CONSOLIDATING CONSTRUCTION OF SEGMENTS 1 AND 3 OF THE PLEASANT HILL AND A-LINE RELIEF INTERCEPTORS (DP 4879) NO. 4. HEARINGS c. DATfune 17, 1 993 TY~~T PUBLIC HEARING; CONSIDER FINAL EIR, ADDENDUM AND PROJECT APPROVAL SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Russell Leavitt, Planning Assistant Engineering Department/Planning Div. ISSUE: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA, and the District Code, it is now appropriate for the Board of Directors to consider approving Segment 14 of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor and consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors, and adopt Conditions of Approval, Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Consideration, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. BACKGROUND: At its September 4, 1991, meeting, the Board certified the Final Program EIR for the Pleasant Hill/A-Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project (the 1991 EIR) and approved several route segments for construction of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project (Segments 1, 3, 12, 16A, 19, 19A, and 20; see Figure 1 of Exhibit 1). For two locations along the planned Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor route, the Board directed staff to proceed with further right-of-way and design studies before recommending a final route selection: Segment 14 vs. 13/15 (Contra Costa Boulevard vs. Pleasant Hill Shopping Center); and 18 vs. 17 (Grayson Creek vs. Ruth Drive). Following these studies staff was to examine whether there was adequate analysis of the recommended route in the EIR and notify the public of the recommendation. Additionally, at its October 2, 1991, meeting, the Board certified the same EIR to then approve the A-Line Relief Interceptor Project for the purpose of right-of-way acquisition. At its March 4, 1993, meeting, the District Board of Directors received from staff a status update on the Pleasant Hill/A-Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project. The Board then provided staff with guidance for proceeding with final recommendations for certain project elements, including the routing of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor near the Pleasant Hill Shopping Center on Contra Costa Boulevard, and the sizing of the Marsh Drive pipeline. Due to ongoing right-of-way negotiations with the County Flood Control District, staff is not yet prepared to make a final recommendation on Segment 18 vs 17, which would be constructed in a later phase of the project. Staff, however, does recommend that Segment 14 be given final approval as part of the route for the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Project. Board approval is requested now so that this segment can be included in the first construction phase of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor. REWEWEDAND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD AcnON RL DRW RAB INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. r;(~ IJ5 1302A-7/91 SUBJECT CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING; CONSIDER APPROVING SEGMENT 14 OF THE PLEASANT HILL RELIEF INTERCEPTOR AND CONSOLIDATING CONSTRUCTION OF SEGMENTS 1 AND 3 OF THE PLEASANT HILL AND A-LINE RELIEF INTERCEPTORS (DP 4879) POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 2 June 17, 1993 Staff also recommends consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors. These segments are located immediately east and south of the District's wastewater treatment plant, beneath SR-4, Marsh Drive, and a portion of the Buchanan Field Golf Course in Pacheco. Construction of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor already has been approved for these segments; however, for the A-Line Relief Interceptor, the District Board has only approved these segments for right-of-way acquisition. Consolidating construction of these segments for both interceptors results in accelerating construction of this portion of the A-Line Relief Interceptor by at least ten years. Where possible, such as beneath Marsh Drive, capacity for the two interceptors would be consolidated into one pipeline. In other locations, such as beneath SR-4 and Grayson Creek, dual pipeline or box culverts will be required. The rationale for staff's recommendations regarding Segments 14, 1, and 3 is included in Exhibit 1. In accordance with CEOA Guidelines Section 15168, Use of a Program EIR with Later Activities, the recommended project elements were evaluated by District staff in light of the certified 1 991 EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. Staff has determined that these recommendations are within the scope of the program approved earlier and that the 1991 EIR adequately addresses the activity for the purposes of CEOA compliance. Pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum has been prepared to identify the 1 991 EIR analysis applicable to these recommended project elements and to apprise the public of the reasons for making these project approval recommendations (Exhibit 1). RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution (Exhibit 2) approving Segment 14 and consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors, Conditions of Approval (Exhibit 3), Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 4), and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (Exhibit 5). 1302B-7/91 EXHIBIT 1 ADDENDUM TO THE 1991 FINAL EIR FOR THE PLEASANT HILL/A-LINE SEWER OVERFLOW PROTECTION PROJECT JUNE, 1993 This Addendum to the certified 1991 Final Program EIR for the Pleasant Hill/A-Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project has been prepared by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CECA) Guidelines Section 151 64. The purpose of this Addendum is to identify the 1991 EIR analysis applicable to approving Segment 14 of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor and consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors and to apprise the public of the reasons for making these project approval recommendations. BACKGROUND: At its September 4, 1991, meeting, the Board certified the Final Program EIR for the Pleasant Hill/A-Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project (the 1991 EIR) and approved several route segments for construction of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor Protection Project (Segments 1, 3, 12, 16A, 19, 19A, and 20; see Figure 1). For two locations along the planned Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor route, the Board directed staff to proceed with further right-of-way and design studies before recommending a final route selection: Segment 14 vs. 13/15 (Contra Costa Boulevard vs. Pleasant Hill Shopping Center); and 18 vs. 17 (Grayson Creek vs. Ruth Drive). Following these studies, staff was to examine whether there was adequate analysis of the recommended route in the EIR and notify the public of the recommendation. Additionally, at its October 2, 1991, meeting, the Board certified the same EIR to then approve the A-Line Relief Interceptor Project for the purpose of right-of-way acquisition. At its March 4, 1993, meeting, the District Board of Directors received from staff a status update on the Pleasant Hill/A-Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project. The Board then provided staff with guidance for proceeding with final recommendations for certain project elements, including the routing of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor near the Pleasant Hill Shopping Center on Contra Costa Boulevard, and the sizing of the Marsh Drive pipeline. At this time, due to ongoing right-of-way negotiations with the County Flood Control District, staff is not prepared to make a final recommendation on Segment 18 vs 17, which would be constructed in a later phase of the project. At its July 1, 1991, meeting, however, the District Board of Directors will consider approving Segment 14 as part of the route for the Plea$ant Hill Relief Interceptor Project. Board approval is being sought now so that this segment can be included in the first construction phase of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor. The District Board of Directors also will consider consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors. These segments are located immediately east and south of the District's wastewater treatment plant, beneath SR-4, 1 Marsh Drive, and a portion of the Buchanan Field Golf Course in Pacheco. Construction of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor already has been approved for these segments; however, for the A-Line Relief Interceptor, the District Board has only approved these segments for right-of-way acquisition. Consolidating construction of these segments for both interceptors results in accelerating construction of this portion of the A-Line Relief Interceptor by at least ten years. Where possible, such as beneath Marsh Drive, capacity for the two interceptors would be consolidated into one pipeline. In other locations, such as beneath SR-4 and Grayson Creek, dual pipeline or box culverts will be required. The rationale tor staff's recommendations regarding Segments 14, 1, and 3 is as follows: Seament 14 vs. Seaments 13/15 A portion of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor could be constructed in Segment 14 by tunneling south from the median of Contra Costa Boulevard (opposite the Cal Spa driveway) to the northern right-turn lane at the Chilpancingo Parkway intersection, then using open trench construction from the right-turn lane to the west side of Grayson Creek, south of Chilpancingo Parkway (see Figure 2). The use of Segment 14 has several benefits over using Segments 13/15 which lie within the parking lot and loading areas of the Pleasant Hill Shopping Center: . Due to its shorter length (1,570 vs. 2,310 feet), Segment 14 would cost less to construct than Segments 13/15). The cost to construct Segment 14 would be approximately $2.12 million. The cost to construct Segments 13/15 would be $2.24 million for open cut or $2.53 million for tunneling. . Construction within the Contra Costa Boulevard right-ot-way avoids the need to acquire easements on private properties. The right-ot-way cost tor Segments 13/15 could be as much as an additional $0.75 million. . During potholing, petroleum-contaminated soils were found at the Contra Costa Boulevard/Chilpancingo Parkway intersection along Segment 14. Even after considering the soil cleanup and removal costs (estimated to be $0.1 million), Segment 14 is still less costly than Segments 13/15 by about $0.77 to $1.06 million. . Since Segment 14 requires fewer bends in the pipeline and is ot shorter length, it would have better flow velocities, less turbulence, and a lower potential tor corrosion and odors than Segments 13/15. Staff is recommending tunneling vs. open trench construction of the pipeline beneath Contra Costa Boulevard primarily to satisfy City of Pleasant Hill concerns regarding potential traffic congestion, safety, and community disruption along one of its busiest streets. Tunneling most of Segment 14 would produce less disruption for nearby 2 commercial and residential areas due to its limited surface disturbance (Le., noise, traffic congestion, and dust). In general, tunneling also is safer (for motorists, pedestrians, and construction workers) than deep, open trench construction as less excavation is needed. Despite its benefits as compared to open trench construction, however, the use of tunneling is being limited to only the most essential locations because of its relatively higher cost. The District currently is studying whether to construct a recycled water distribution pipeline in conjunction with the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor project. In locations where the interceptor project will be installed using open trench construction, the recycled water pipeline could be placed in the same trench, above the interceptor. If open trench construction were to be used for interceptor installation beneath Contra Costa Boulevard, then the potential recycled water pipeline could share the trench. A decision to tunnel this portion of the interceptor, however, neither precludes nor requires that Segment 14 be used for the recycled water pipeline. Options still available for constructing the potential 18- to 24-inch diameter recycled water pipeline include tunneling beneath Contra Costa Boulevard (above the interceptor), shallower and narrower trenching along Contra Costa Boulevard (still likely to be opposed by the City of Pleasant Hill), or tunneling or open trenching through the Pleasant Hill Shopping Center along Segments 13 and 1 5 without the interceptor (reuniting with the interceptor south of Chilpancingo Parkway). A discussion of these options will be presented in the environmental evaluation currently being prepared for the potential recycled water pipeline, which will require a separate District Board approval. Property owners along Segment 14 and 13/15 (including the Pleasant Hill Shopping Center) have been informed of staff's preference for Segment 14 by telephone or mail. No adverse comments from the public have been received to date. Consolidatina Construction of Segments 1 and 3 As previously stated, the District Board has approved construction of Pleasant Hill Interceptor Segments 1 and 3 beginning in 1993. The Board also has approved initiating A-Line Relief Interceptor right-of-way acquisition along the same segments (beginning in 1992) with construction anticipated in the year 2004. A subsequent Value Engineering Workshop on these projects recommended that staff pursue combining construction of the two projects within Segments 1 and 3 due to a present worth cost saving of $4.0 million. District operating costs also would be less if only one pipe would need to be maintained, rather than two. Based on the potential cost savings and the elimination of disruption associated with a second large project ten years later in the same alignment, staff is recommending that the District proceed with the combined pipe option along these segments of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor route that could be common to the A-Line Relief Interceptor route. The option to install a single pipe (Pleasant Hill and A-Line) or two parallel pipes was discussed in the 1991 EIR (see "Project Description," p. 111-20). 3 Consolidating construction of Segment 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors eliminates Segment 2 of the A-Line Relief Interceptor from further consideration. Segment 2 is located on the north side of SR 4, from the east side of Grayson Creek to the west side of Walnut Creek, then crosses beneath SR 4 and continues along the west side of Walnut Creek to Willow Way. Segment 2 is eliminated because it does not allow for the reduced construction cost and lessened community disruption of a consolidated Segment 3. Additionally, due to its shorter length in conjunction with Segments 4/4A or 4/4B (10,500 feet), Segment 3 would cost less to construct and have better flow velocities and less turbulence than Segment 2 (12,700 feet). Also, Segment 2 is closer to the Walnut Creek channel and the ends of Buchanan Field Airport runways, making construction more costly to minimize biological impacts and avoid aircraft hazards. Segment 2 also may be closer to the Concord Fault than Segment 3 and could be more susceptible to seismic hazards. For all these reasons, therefore, the District concludes that the alternative Segment 2 route is less feasible than Segment 3. CEOA REVIEW: Use of the 1991 EIR is appropriate for approval of these project elements for the following reasons: 1. There are no new significant environmental impacts that were not considered in the Program EIR (Guidelines Section 15162). Environmental impacts associated with Segments 1, 3, and 14 are summarized in the Draft Program EIR on pages V-3 to V- 10. 2. There is no change proposed in the project which will require important revisions to the previous Program EIR (Guidelines Section 15162(c)(1)). Segment 14 is to be constructed beneath the southbound lanes of Contra Costa Boulevard (between the median and the eastern edge) rather than along the eastern edge (as described in the Program EIR). However, no important revisions of the Program EIR are necessary because the impacts will remain the same. Regarding the sizing of Segments 1 and 3, the 1991 EIR addressed construction of a combined Pleasant Hill/A-Line pipeline of up to approximately 120 inches in diameter in this right-of-way (p. 11-20 & 11-23). Thus, approval of a consolidated, 102- inch diameter pipeline in Marsh Drive is allowable as a lesser-and-included version of the combined pipeline concept addressed in the EIR. Likewise, District design criteria and the requirements of other agencies dictate that the crossings beneath SR 4 and Grayson Creek must consist of two smaller diameter pipelines or box culverts. These facilities also may have greater capacity than needed to meet the 1991 EIR's projected demand, although their useful and, therefore, actual capacity would be limited to the upstream capacity of the 102-inch diameter Marsh Drive pipeline. Furthermore, the 1991 EIR identified that "isolated segments" of the A-Line Relief Interceptor may be constructed ahead of schedule, "in order to coordinate with the construction of other projects, avoiding a second disruption of the community. 4 Constructed portions of the project mayor may not become operational as they are completed" (p. 11-21). 3. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken. such as a substantial deterioration to the project area environment. that would require important revisions to the Program EIR due to new significant environmental impacts not previously considered (Guidelines Section 15162(c)(2)). The District currently is studying whether to construct a recycled water distribution pipeline in conjunction with the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor. However. a decision approving Segment 14 and consolidating construction of Seg- ments 1 and 3 neither approves nor precludes construction of the potential recycled water distribution line. The potential recycled water pipeline project. which will undergo its own environmental evaluation and approval process prior to award of a construction contract for Segments 1, 3, and 14, is not expected to alter the environmental impacts of the interceptor projects nor substantially change the circumstances under which the project elements are being undertaken. 4. No new information of substantial importance to the project has become available regarding new significant impacts. the severity of previously identified significant impacts. or the feasibility or availability of mitigation measures or alternatives (Guidelines Section 15162(c)(3)). It should be noted that based on an existing capacity of 140 mgd in the A-Line, a combined pipeline in Segments 1 and 3 would need to carry 208 mgd (the difference between the 1991 EIR's 348 mgd of projected demand and the existing 140 mgd of capacity). Given the physical constraints of the pipeline routes, the limitations of concrete pipe suppliers, and the design requirements of the District, CAL TRANS, and other agencies, Segments 1 and 3 incidently will have a physical capacity which exceeds the 1991 EIR's projected capacity need. For example. since pre-cast. reinforced concrete pipe in the size range anticipated is commercially available in standard size increments of only six inches. a 102-inch diameter pipe in Marsh Drive is the smallest standard size available that can meet the projected capacity need of 208 mgd. The actual capacity of the 102-inch diameter pipe in Marsh Drive, however, would be 219 mgd. 11 mgd greater than needed to meet the projected demand. Likewise, District design criteria and the requirements of other agencies dictate that the crossings beneath SR 4 and Grayson Creek must consist of two smaller diameter pipelines or box culverts. These facilities also may have greate_r capacity than needed to meet the 1991 EIR's projected demand, although their useful and, therefore, actual capacity would be limited to the upstream capacity of the 102-inch diameter Marsh Drive pipeline. No additional, potentially significant operational impacts could result from the incidental availability of pipeline capacity in excess of that needed to meet the projected demand addressed in the 1991 EIR. The ultimate capacity of these facilities could not be put into service until the remaining six miles of the A-Line Relief Interceptor is environmentally reviewed, approved, designed, and constructed 5 between Buchanan Field Golf Course and Ygnacio Valley Road. The remainder of the A-Line Relief Interceptor is scheduled for subsequent environmental review and design in the year 2003 with construction between the years 2004 and 2009 (unless con- structed earlier in conjunction with other public works projects). If the remainder of the A-Line Relief Interceptor is proposed to accommodate development beyond the planned growth identified in the 1991 EIR, the environmental review for the remaining portion would need to address the impacts of serving that additional development, as well as update the environmental conditions under which the pipeline would be built. Finally, consolidating construction of Segments 1 and 3 would not allow the District to provide service to areas excluded from analysis in the 1991 EIR, such as Dougherty Valley, Tassajara Valley, and the Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA). Before sewer service to such areas could be provided, further environmental review by the District (as a Lead or Responsible Agency under CEQA) and a separate approval of the District Board of Directors would be required. This position is consistent with the commitment made in the 1991 EIR with regard to growth-inducing impacts (p. IV-7 & IV-8). For these reasons, the District Board of Directors can approve Segment 14 of the Pleasant Hill Relief Interceptor and consolidate construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the Pleasant Hill and A-Line Relief Interceptors. These project elements are within the scope of the project covered by the 1991 EIR. 6 ~ Centra~ ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~~~~ .Jistrict PAGE 1 OF 7 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1 993 NO. 6. BIDS AND AWARDS a. June 22, 1 993 SUB-llJTHORIZE AWARD OF CONTRACT TO V & M CONSTRUCTION/BACKHOE FOR THE GLENSIDE/VERDE DEL CIERVO SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN LAFA VETTE/DIABLO D.P. 4925 DATE TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AWARD SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department ISSUE: On June 21, 1993, bids for the Glenside/Verde Del Ciervo Sewer Replacement Project, D.P. 4925, were received and opened. The Board of Directors must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 50 days of the opening of the bids. BACKGROUND: This project consists of two locations where sewers are deficient because of physical deterioration and limited access due to existing terrain and manmade improvements. The first location is in Lafayette on Glenside Drive (Exhibit A). The existing sewer located along the north property line of 735 Glenside Drive has numerous cracks, dropped joints, and at least one location where cleaning equipment cannot pass. The existing easement alignment is located on a fill embankment which would make replacement difficult. District records indicate that an easement was never obtained for this alignment, and the present owner is not interested in granting an easement for a replacement sewer. CSO is also desirous of eliminating this easement line. This easement sewer will be relocated in Glenside Drive and will serve the residences at 735 and 766 Glenside Drive. The second site is located in Diablo Country Club at 118 Verde Del Ciervo. During a recent (September 1992) District review of a building plan for an addition to an existing residence, District staff discovered that a portion of the residence was constructed over the public sewer. This sewer was constructed as a part of the original sewer system for the town of Diablo. The District took over the Diablo sewer system in 1956. After the building encroachment was discovered, the District inspected the sewer and found it to be in need of repair. In addition to the building encroachment, the sewer across this property and the adjacent property at 106 Verde Del Ciervo is also near two swimming pools and under concrete patios, asphalt paving, and numerous mature eucalyptus trees. In order to eliminate the encroachments and inaccessibility of the existing sewer, the sewer will be relocated in the paved area of Verde Del Ciervo. Exhibit B shows the sewer's existing backyard location at both 118 and 106 Verde Del Ciervo and the proposed location in Verde Del Ciervo. The two sewer relocations will include the installation of approximately 760 feet of 8-inch sewer and 6 manholes. The new sewer will eliminate approximately 815 feet of easement sewer. The project was advertised on May 30 and June 6, 1993. The engineer's pre-bid estimate for the construction contract was $102,000. Bids ranging from $71,324 to $110,450 were REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~~ JI)( (ttIf!P INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB S~HORIZE AWARD OF CONTRACT TO V & M CONSTRUCTION/BACKHOE FOR THE GlENSIDE/VERDE DEL CIERVO SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN LAFA VETTE/DIABLO D.P. 4925 POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 7 June 22, 1993 received on June 21, 1993. A summary of bids is presented in Exhibit C. The Infrastructure Division conducted a technical and commercial review of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is V & M Construction/Backhoe for the amount of $71,324. The Glenside/Verde Del Ciervo Sewer Replacement Project is included in the 1993-94 CIB on pages CS-62, 63, and 64. Post-Bid Preconstruction Estimate, based on the lowest responsible bid, is presented in Exhibit D. The estimated total project cost is $115,000. Funds previously allocated were $21,000. An additional allocation of $94,000 is required from the Collection System Program to complete the project, including the construction contract, construction management, and consultant services during construction. The current balance of the Sewer Construction Fund minus unspent prior allocations plus projected dependable revenue will be adequate to fund this project. A funding summary is presented in Exhibit E. Staff has determined that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.2, since it involves minor alterations to existing sewer facilities with negligible or no expansion of capacity. The Board of Director's approval of this project will constitute a finding of agreement with this determination unless otherwise indicated. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of contract in the amount of $71,324 to V & M Construction/Backhoe as the lowest responsible bidder. 130?fJ g'8" ... I L ASANDON EXIST. SEWER \ ~\ 'i:, ll'\ ~\ ~\ , '1lJ :VI m. I NEW MAN \HOU A N o R loJ' 0 S .L DESORAH L KERLIN 236-022-010 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District . SEWER RELOCAT~ON PROJECT D.P. 4925 GLENSIDE DRIVE, LAFAYETTE EXHIBIT A 2523-1/87 ~ _../ -' UJ Central Contra Costa Sanitary DIstrict . SEWER RELOCATION PROJECT D.P. 4925 VERDE DEL CIERVO DIABLO COUNTRY CLUB EXHIBIT B 2523-1/87 EXHIBIT C Central Contra Costa Sanitary District SUMMARY OF BIDS PROJECT NO. 4925 -Glenside/Verde Del Ciervo DATE Julv 21. 1993 LOCATION Lafavette/Diablo ENGR. EST. $ 102.000 ORDER BIDDER (Name, telephone & address) BID PRICE 1 V & M Construction (510) 778-3121 $ 71,324.00 P.O. Box 3075, Antioch, CA 94531 2 D. R. Redick Construction (510) 784-0487 $ 72,909.50 22990 Claw iter Rd., Hayward, CA 94545 3 D. E. Bianchini, Inc. (510) 831-0400 $ 76,396.00 P.O. Box 2200, San Ramon, CA 94583 4 Mountain Cascade, Inc. (510) 736-8370 $ 79,970.00 P.O. Box 5050, Livermore, CA 94550 5 Rand E Construction Co.,lnc. (510) 944-1313 $ 87,220.00 1301-A Homestead Ave., Walnut Creek, CA 94598 6 Sarott Construction Co. (510) 672-7220 $ 87,330.00 3133 Morgan Territory Rd., Clayton, CA 94517 7 Manuel C. Jardim, Inc. (510) 487-0444 $110,450.00 P.O. Box 667, Union City, CA 94587 BIDS OPENED BY Jovce E. Murohv DATE June 21. 1993 SHEET NO.1 OF 1 EXHIBIT D GLENSIDE/VERDE DEL CIERVO SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4925 POST -BID/PRECONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL PERCENT OF ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1 . Construction Contract $ 71,324 2 . Contingency @ 15 % 10,676 SUBTOTAL $ 82,000 100.0 3 Construction Management . Project Management $ 2,500 IAdministration . Inspection 8,500 . Survey 2,000 . Legal 500 . Field Office Support 200 . Engineering Assistance 1,300 SUBTOTAL $ 15,000 18.3 4 Consultant Contractors . Resident Engineer (MW) $ 4,000 . Material Testing 1,500 SUBTOTAL $ 5,500 6.7 5 Miscellaneous . Permit/City Inspection $ 1 ,000 . Collection System Operations 500 . Community Relations 1,000 . Record Drawings 500 SUBTOTAL $ 3,000 3.7 6 Preconstruction Expenditures $ 9,500 11.6 7 TOTAL PROJECT COST $11 5,000 140.2 8 Previous Allocations $ 21,000 9 Allocation Needed to Complete $ 94,000 Project EXHIBIT E PROJECT FUNDING SUMMARY FOR THE PERIOD 6/8/93 - 7/10/93 Sewer Construction Fund Balance as of May 31, 1 993 Minus Unspent Prior Allocations $ 60,060,109 $ (36,699,983) $ 3.639.018 $ 26,999,144 Plus Dependable Revenue $26,999,144 > $94.000 (Allocation Required) . ----.~._-~--~----~---.-..-,---.,---~_________._~_..~..._.___.._..._~_ .'. _.' 0" "'"__"'~_""_""'___"'~'_""_'_""'._'..'~.m""."""_"'__"_"',_.._".,.,~...".__.,~_.__.._.._. _'~______"'___"_"_'_._______,..__.__.,_.__ . Central Contra Costa Sanitary LJistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 6. BIDS AND AWARDS b. SUBJECT DATE REJECT ALL BIDS FOR FURNISHING AND INSTALLING ONE COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS FUELING STATION, DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 30028 June 25, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION REJECT ALL BIDS SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Tom Godsey, Assistant Engineer Collection System Operations ISSUE: On April 21, 1993 sealed bids were received and opened for furnishing and installing one compressed natural gas fueling station, District Project No. 30028. The Board of Directors must award the contract or reject all bids within 90 days. BACKGROUND: The Board approved a capital project to convert four vehicles to natural gas fuel in October, 1992. The purpose of the project was to gain experience in this area in anticipation of Clean Air Plan requirements. District staff prepared plans and specifications for providing and installing a fueling station. The project was advertised on April 11 and 16, 1993. One bid was received and opened on April 21, 1993. The bid, from Shoreline West, Inc., was $64,620. The Engineer's Estimate for this portion of the project was $30,000. The bid included an excessive mark-up due to unfamiliarity with contract requirements. Staff recommends that it would be in the District's best interest to reject the bid. In light of current financial restraints this project will be held over and it may be reconsidered as part of a future budget. RECOMMENDATION: Reject all bids received for furnishing and installing the Compressed Natural Gas Fueling Station Project, District Project No. 30028. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON $1'T UL fNITIA TING DEPT/DIV. 1302A-9/85 PAGE OF 6 BOARD MEETING OF July 1, 1993 NO. 7. PERSONNEL a. SUBJECT DATE June 25, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EARLY RETIREMENT SERVICE CREDIT PERSONNEL SUBMITTED BY Cathryn Radin Freitas, Personnel Officer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Administrative ISSUE: In order to offer early retirement service credit to District employees, the Board of Directors must adopt an ordinance and resolution pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 31641.04. BACKGROUND: Due to the difficult financial times facing the District, staff has been pursuing various cost savings and containment strategies. Considering 79% of all District operations and maintenance expenses, including charge-outs to capital projects (contra), are labor and benefit related, we have researched the concept of offering early retirements as a means to reduce labor costs. Additionally, looking to the future, it may be difficult to accomplish a flat budget.for the second consecutive year without eliminating some staff positions. Consequently, by offering early retirement service credit and not filling those vacated positions, the District might be able to reduce positions, avoid lay-offs, and save operations expenses. Under the 1937 County Retirement Act, the District has the ability to purchase up to two years of additional service credit for eligible employees who are fifty years of age or more and have ten years or more of service credit. The additional years of service credit may not be used to achieve the minimum qualifications of fifty years of age and ten years of service. The cost to the District varies by such factors as an employee's age, age of spouse, years of service, salary, projected lifespan, etc. On an average, the cost is approximately $45,000 per employee for two years of retirement credit. If the District offered employees the two years, they would need to retire by August 31, 1993, for the cost to the District to be less than the cost of the employee's salary and benefits for a year. The District would save the entire cost of salaries and benefits the second year, unless the vacated position would need to be filled. Due to the time constraints inherent in this matter, staff has met and conferred with the appropriate bargaining groups. In the event the Board adopts the ordinance and resolution, we would notify employees of the opportunity and invite them to on-site informational sessions with the County retirement office. It is staff's recommendation to offer early retirement service credit to all employees of the District. Any retirement under this plan would need to take place prior to September 1, 1993, to gain any net benefit in this fiscal year. REWEWEDAND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD AcnON PM INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-7/91 CRF SUBJECT POSITION PAPER ,'>:<A ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EARLY RETIREMENT SERVICE CREDIT PAGE DATE 2 OF 6 June 25, 1993 At the last Board meeting, the Board raised a number of important questions. Staff plans to make a presentation at the July 1, 1993 Board meeting to answer these questions and clarify the impact of early retirements on the District. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt the attached ordinance and resolution pursuant to Government Code Section 31641.04. 13028-7/91 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT AMENDING THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT CODE TO ADOPT THEREIN BY REFERENCE THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 31641.04 WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ("District") by Resolution No. 441 of the District Board dated April 7, 1949 has resolved to include the District in the Contra Costa County Employees' Retirement Association; WHEREAS, the District Board desires to provide for the allowance of additional service credit under certain circumstances as set forth in Government Code ~31641.04; WHEREAS, the terms of such Government Code section require that the District Board must adopt such section by ordinance prior to providing for additional service credit by resolution; WHEREAS, Government Code ~50022.2 provides that a local agency ordinance may adopt a statute by reference, the adoption of which statute is expressly required or permitted as a condition of compliance with a state statute, without complying with all the procedures set forth in Government Code ~ 50020 through 50022.10; WHEREAS, the District Board now desires to adopt the provisions of Government Code ~31641.04 by reference; WHEREAS, the Board of Directors finds that the adoption of such statute by reference is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEOA") pursuant to District CEOA Guideline 20.29(b)(3), since such adoption is the implementation of a personnel procedure, which does not amount to a "project" within the meaning of CEQA; and Ordinance No. Page 2 NOW. THEREFORE. the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District does hereby ordain as follows: The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Code is hereby amended to add the provisions of Government Code ~31641.04. which are hereby adopted by reference as ~4.04.040 of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Code. as if set forth therein in full. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District on the 1 st day of July, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: President of the Board of Directors. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: District Counsel RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROVISIONS Of GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 31641 .04, PERMITTING EARLY RETIREMENT SERVICE CREDIT WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (hereinafter "District") Board of Directors resolves that by Ordinance the District has adopted the provisions of Government Code Section 31641.04, permitting early retirement service credit which Ordinance shall be effective on or before July 15, 1993; and WHEREAS, because of impending change in the manner of performing certain services in the District, and in order to achieve savings in money and other economic benefits, the best interests of the District will be served by permitting additional service credit for certain members of the Contra Costa County Employees' Retirement Association (member). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: THAT, the provisions of this resolution are applicable to all members employed in the District; THAT, every eligible member who retires between July 15, 1993 and August 31, 1993 shall receive two additional years of service credit for District service; THAT, upon demand by the Retirement Association, the Controller shall transmit to the Retirement Fund the amount(s) determined by the Retirement Board to be the actuarial equivalent(s) of the difference(s) between the allowance(s) the eligible member(s) receive(s) after getting the additional service credit hereunder and the allowance(s) the member(s) would have received without such credit; THAT, on later re-entry into District employment under circumstances otherwise requiring or permitting membership in the county retirement system, any member who has received additional service credit hereunder shall forfeit such additional service credit, and the District's payments hereunder shall be refunded, unless the re-entry is the result of a temporary call-back limited to the maximum hours of service in anyone calendar or fiscal year as provided by State law; THAT, the provisions of this Resolution are not applicable to any member otherwise eligible if such member received any unemployment insurance payment within six months prior to July 15, 1993 or to any member if the member is not eligible to retire without additional service credit under this Resolution; and THAT, the provisions of this Resolution shall be effective July 15, 1993. Resolution No. 93- Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of July, 1993 by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: President of the Board of Directors, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kenton l. Aim District Counsel