The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 11-18-93 PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a. SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CAL TRANS FOR DISTRICT INSPECTION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE BURNETT AVENUE RAMPS OVER THE EXISTING A-LINE INTERCEPTOR DATE November 5, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Rey Limjoco, Assistant Engineer INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. Engineering Dept.llnfrastructure Div. ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute a utility agreement with the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans). BACKGROUND: Caltrans, in conjunction with the City of Concord, has begun construction of the 1-680 off and on ramps at Burnett Avenue to relieve traffic congestion in the vicinity of Concord Avenue. Construction started in July 1993. Part of the ramps will cross over the District's existing 78-inch diameter interceptor sewer (A-Line) which shall remain in service. To ensure protection of this major interceptor sewer, the District will provide a full-time inspector during construction of the ramps in the area over the exiting interceptor sewer. Part of the construction involves placing a protective reinforced concrete cap over the interceptor sewer in the reach under the ramps. All costs associated with construction, including the estimated $15,000 to provide a District inspector, will be paid by Caltrans. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute an agreement with Caltrans reimbursing the District for the cost of providing an inspector during construction of the Burnett Avenue off and on ramps. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION P1f3 INITIATING DEPTJDIV. RAB. PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR b. DATE ESTABLISH DECEMBER 2, 1993, AT 3 P.M. AS THE DATE AND TIME FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND DISTRICT CODE TITLES 6 AND 9 REGARDING FEES, CHARGES, AND REBATE SEWER LINES TYPE OF ACTION ESTABLISH DATE AND TIME FOR PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Jarred Miyamoto-Mills, Principal Engineer Engineering Department/Planning Division ISSUE: The District Code requires that a public hearing be held prior to the Board of Directors' consideration of amendments to Title 6 and 9 code provisions for Facilities Capacity Fees, Annexation Charges, Rebate Sewer Lines, and Sewer Service Charges. BACKGROUND: Staff has studied several possible changes to the Capital Improvement Fee System. From these studies staff has concluded that several changes to the system would be appropriate. The proposal was discussed at the November 2, 1993, meeting of the Board of Directors' Finance Committee, and at the Board's regular meeting on November 4, 1993. A public hearing has been tentatively scheduled for December 2, 1993, at 3 p.m. to receive comments on the proposed code amendments. The Staff Report on Proposed Changes to the Capital Improvement Fee System, and the 1993 Capital Improvement Plan will be available for public review, as required. RECOMMENDATION: Establish December 2, 1993, at 3 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to receive comments on a proposed ordinance to amend District Code Titles 6 and 9 regarding fees, charges, and rebate sewer lines. RE~EWEDANDRECOMMENDEDFORBOARDAcnON ROGER J. DOLAN PJiS 1302A-7/91 JMM RAB ~ Central ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~g'~~ .Jistricl PAGE 1 OF 11 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF November 18, 1993 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR c. SUBJECT DATE November 4, 1993 ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125, PARCELS 1, 2, AND 4 THROUGH 10 TYPE OF ACTION COMPLETE ANNEXATION SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Engineering Dept.llnfrastructure Division ISSUE: A resolution by the District's Board of Directors must be adopted to finalize District Annexation 125, Parcels 1, 2, and 4 through 10. BACKGROUND: The District made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation of ten parcels of land designated as District Annexation 125. LAFCO has considered this request and has recommended that Parcels 1, 2, and 4 through 10 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 125, Parcel 3, 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. 125, Parcels 1, 2, and 4 through 10. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 ~ DH rM0 INITIATING DEPT/DIV. JSM RAB CCCSD ANNEX. NO. 125 "7 ,<~.;,.. " ,--< , ~- ..,. io 5 \J I s u N~ , - " .......--.. ~ .-..~. /'" -' 0 - /?"', ~ iJ. t~ '. \ I"~ ~ '-- " \ ~ '", '--. -~ /-c "y I :j ',' CCC-SD ANNEX-- NO. 125 \ s i \ );, . I j /' 1 ~ H~,~ ;'X ...k.... 7 ~h :\ ;; I .. ~ ./ f "):; ~j" ., :t '" '....~ , "t.:J r......~ '; ., \~ ~... 4t r J';I(. ,. . ?{ IN! /...... ".i> ~ I""';".^ ~ '" '<:'->,. >....,..";., . / / c ~~\~i>; .'~. . .re e ~ <.<!';..: .................. l..'...........~................. ',- ~::\ > " -..-;~.~.....:.w.;-" ' ~ ~ .:; . .... . ~ \ .,~ "',\ :; } J....~.,-: H ....:...... . "'> , ., :!o:" "~ .. He{ '*2 ROAD i~~7~;..~...:.::.;;.v ~ ;:': .' ..... ~.:- ~:~;.u "_.:" .' ^ ',.. :+. ~, f ..,.,....... ~..~..,,~~. :' .~::::~. . . " \~ .<!::\:l(,'- ,. ';". 1,: " :.~..., " ......."""........-... ,('''.;. ~ :.:r;;_.. . :!*., .'.; ':l!~:-:::':~!"~;' .. ".~' ~,.,...~;:;......~,~ ':, .~:~.:~~;i.~~~~~;:. ,: ,',. . "- ..('......;\io!.~,.w:~.>-:.'". .... .........\ /- u ~ "..it ~.. H "l .i -! ~(~: '.. ~'&, ", ...\.~ ~- ~ ~_._. (~ -ir7....... e'" ...............~ .2 Oe 8\ J I ~ :~O.>:e..~'~. .;$;.~. ~~.~.:.:.:~~... '. .::~ ',' ~ '\ .~...: " <5> .... C' , ~. ~QI "/,.9 II) ~... e,. C'r~ 1~1~ S'" . \4;.~~~i:* :-;...... '$, ':'" ~~.' ..~}~~;' '.< ~:...~ ;.~.' ;";~~~:" fl. :\ . -~ @ 1967 '\ ~ \!!!!J Q V!!!J ~ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ~ """"""""""",,,,,,, = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ="'= = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCEL 1 / 8 7 ~ ~ ~ 6 ~~. t::J~. ~ ~. ~. 19 20 w. LI @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION ::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::;:::::; = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY :;;';;;;;:'-:=' = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCEL 2 @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXA TION '::::::::\::::::::::::' = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ~'.;;.;.;;.' = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION 24 23 OAKS DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCELS 4 and 5 " , ~~ IS'I'$~ '- -Va::1.qf~"iSt .s' ~.7'. "i:- ......:.Q co VIOUS ANNEXATION @O'-PRERy DATE - CCSO BOUNDA - EXISTING C EXATlON !ill:!! : PROPOSE~~~~ON * = SIGNED P DISTRICT ANNEXATION PARCEL 6 ---S4S.W 25.00 OAK MONT MEMORIAL 125 -0 .0 .. . & V!!!J VALLEY V,STA ROAD . .' . N77055'~ }h'%\'rxhlMWK/{ttW/1.tmwxtWf4.WXif!l;X~%}h"":" CD 0 c: 1 ~ 3 " ~ 0 2 " ~ SUB ~ ~ 9 @o OAn = PREVIOUS A NNEXATION :{{{::,}}, = EXISTING CCCSD __ = PROPOSED BOUNDARY * = SIGNED P ANNEXATION ETITION 6 8 7 100 .~ S77.SS'W' DISTRICT ANNEXATION PARCEL 7 125 . G~~~~ /'" ,/' /'" /. . o~o ~ / ,/' ,/' () ~ ~ ~ \<' ,/' / 'I&~S~ o~Q r~ ~ \!!!!} ~ ~ = PREvIOUS ANNEXATION i'i':{{{:~:~ = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ~.~ = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCEL 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o l~ @ ~I'!: 11SZ ~ $;'},: 0 ~I ~ @ = PREVIOUS ANNEXATION :"::::':":::::::;:;;:::: = EXISTING CCCSD BOUNDARY ~.~ = PROPOSED ANNEXATION * = SIGNED PETITION ---I ;~~*~i~~ ;i~*j~ ::;::::*= ..;.:.:.;. III :lml ~j~~l~ ::::~:::~ :~:~:~:~r: ti1t- .:;~~ ::,~,i ~.:::i }:e:e~:IB;:#i ,j:m: ::::::::::: ~J!i~JiJ~J~ :::::~~:::: -@ 5890,4'/O"E ~oo' H(JWER *. o~. /5896 O.If. S/ ~. IV 4'l'/4'10''H/ .300' DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCEL 10 Q \l@ ;~ ~ ~ . I::l ~ ~ Centra. ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~ba~~ Jistrict POSITION BOARD MEETING OF November 18, 1993 PAPER SUBJECT HOLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125, PARCEL 3, AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer PAGE 1 OF NO. 4. HEARINGS a. DATE November 4, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION HOLD PUBLIC HEARING, DA 125 PARCEL 3 INITIATING DEPT/DIV Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Division ISSUE: LAFCO has amended the boundaries of one of the parcels included within District Annexation 125. The District must hold a public hearing and consider testimony by affected property owners before acting on the proposed amended annexation. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced annexation consisting of 10 separate parcels was sent to LAFCO as required for the formal annexation process. LAFCO amended the boundaries of one of the parcels during its approval process. This amendment was made to improve the continuity of the resulting District boundary. The subject annexation is an inhabited annexation (12 or more registered voters). The criteria for determining the validity of protests for inhabited annexations appears later in this position paper. Amended District Annexation 125, Parcel 3, is shown on the attached map. The exhibits mentioned in this position paper are included in a separately bound document. CEQA 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. ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS District Annexation 125 as submitted to LAFCO was a single annexation. The action by LAFCO separated a portion of District Annexation 125 into the subject inhabited annexation (12 or more registered voters) and added one property which requires a public hearing. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT/DIV ~~7 1302A-9/85 ~( DH ~ JSM RAB SUBJEf:lbLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125, PARCEL 3 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 5 November 4, 1993 Legal notice was published and the affected property owner was notified of the public hearing as required by law. Factors to be considered by the Board in deciding to approve or disapprove the proposed annexation 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. 1 . Certify that the Board has reviewed and considered the Negative Declaration and concurs with the adoption of the Negative Declaration of LAFCO. 2. Order the annexation subject to confirmation by election by the registered voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by either of the following. a. At least 25 percent but less than 50 percent of the registered voters residing within the affected territory, or b. At least 25 percent of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. If it is determined that an election is required, the Board may terminate the proceedings and avoid the cost of an election ($200 ~ special mailing election by County Election Department). 3. Order the annexation without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. 4. Disapprove the annexation if the Board finds the annexation is improper based upon any of the factors set forth in Exhibit B. 5. Disapprove and abandon the proposed annexation if the Board finds that written protests have been filed and not withdrawn prior to the conclusion of the public hearing representing 50 percent or more of the voters residing within the territory proposed to be annexed. 110?8 q.w; SUBJElioLD PUBLIC HEARING ON INHABITED DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125, PARCEL 3 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO) AND CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY LAFCO POSITION PAPER PAGE 3 DATE OF 5 November 4, 1993 , Parcel 3 of Annexation 125 includes 16 properties. Petitions for annexation were filed by owners of 15 of these 16 properties. One property was added by LAFCO. Because potential protests could be filed by one of the 16 property owners, Item Nos. 2 and 5 above are unlikely to be appropriate courses of action. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing on the annexation, 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, and taking one of the following actions: a. Order the annexations if no written protests are filed. b. Order the annexation without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. c. Disapprove the proposed annexation if the Board determines that the annexation is not warranted. 11028 9- R~) CCCSD ANNEX. NO. 125 -.y .'~:\ ~ , ". .~ --,[ :,,.:, F~--'-Y~- -,,-. . ,-" ? ;. + 5 \J I s u N~ >~- -"'0' .. J" --' ':J, .1'1_. ~ ~ - . "- ;, \ ~, ... '"- . ---//<---:: ...--/ "/' :j ~ 7 ~ V@ '~@fW~.fslllilli!:tl~t:.-. ". _.., ;~*.,'.->.,. P.O.B. \ SS/~OE /70 - ---- PLEASANT HILL ROAD ~~81" 8 ~ "lot ~ l/) B ~ ~ 1>1 5 () ~ 3 2 ~ f;(!!f} 20 '-- 21 9 10 \ \ \ / @O'-PREVIOUSANNEXATION DATI - CCSD BOUNDARY EXISTING C ~. : PROPOSED ANNEXATION -*- : 51GNED PETITION DISTRICT ANNEXATION 125 PARCEL 3 PAGE 1 OF 1 SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH EOE INTERNATIONAL FOR CONSULTING SERVICES RELATED TO THE SEISMIC EVALUATION OF TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES, TREATMENT PLANT SEISMIC UPGRADE PROJECT, DP NO. 7144 (20144) NO. 6. ENGINEERING a. DATE November 10, 1993 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT Timothy J. Ross, Staff Engineer INITIAT~a~e'~ftng Departmentl Plant Engineering Division SUBMITTED BY ISSUE: Authorization of the Board of Directors is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a professional services agreement in an amount greater than $50,000. BACKGROUND: The Loma Prieta earthquake substantially increased the awareness of public and private institutions about safety and the problems associated with maintaining service after a major seismic event. Since the treatment plant is located near several active faults, there is a potential for seismic activity. Previous seismic protection efforts at the treatment plant focused on life safety issues. The proposed evaluation (Phase I) of the treatment plant site will go beyond the issues of life safety to estimate the overall earthquake risk to the site, determine the primary sources of seismic vulnerability, and recommend the means to mitigate the seismic hazard. It will identify the structural and equipment modifications required to maintain levels of service varying from simply passing flow through the treatment plant to full plant operation. An agreement in the amount of $179,000 has been negotiated with EOE International for the seismic evaluation of treatment plant facilities. EOE International is a firm that specializes in risk assessment and engineering services related to practical hazards management with a specialized expertise in seismic hazards. EOE International has satisfactorily performed a seismic evaluation of the Secondary Clarifiers Improvement Project, DP 7089 (20089), which was done as part of that project's design. The Treatment Plant Seismic Upgrade Project, DP 7144 (20144), is included in the 1993-94 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) on pages TP-125 and TP-126. Following the Phase I study; the District will conduct an environmental evaluation of the recommended structural and equipment modifications. Depending on the outcome of that evaluation, the modifications may be exempt from the California Environmental -Ouality Act (CEOA) or may require a Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report. The appropriate CEOA documentation will be prepared at that time by staff or an outside consultant. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with EOE International for the seismic evaluation of the treatment plant facilities, Treatment Plant Seismic Upgrade Project, DP 7144 (20144). REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A- 7/91 TJR DJC WEB RAB INITIATI.NG DEPT.lDIV. ~ / cJfZ. /jt ~ f;1;{ 6 ~7