The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 08-20-92 . . f, ~ Centr8\ ~ontra Costa Sanitary Jistrict ~d~,,1k BOARD OF DIRECTORS ;. PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF NO. SUBJECT DATE 992 August 11, 1 AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 92-7 (DANVILLE AREA) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT TYPE OF ACTION ACCEPT ANNEXATION FOR PROCESSING Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Dept.llnfrastructure Div. SUBMITTED BY 92-7 Area Danville 78E7 Owner Address Parcel No. & Acreage Shalom Eliahu 3491 Stage Coach Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 196-330-007 (2.067 Ac.) Remarks Property is being split into 5 lots to be designated as Subdivision 7665. A Negative Declaration of Enviornmental Significance has been prepared by the Town of Danville. Lead Agency Town of Danville Parcel No. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize P.A. 92-7 to be included in a future formal annexation. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION a I/It Mf1 INITIATING DEPT./DIV 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB ..__.._._.._..._...r..--._.__.....--_._.~... , 10 .~ VALLEy.... .... .... ....~......:~:.:.:.:.:. '"'~'>~::<-::' .>>:.:...:~:::::.:.>:::::: ........:.:........:.:..........'A. LLEY ROAD ::: :::::::::SrONE v, :) IAN IIAIION "'8" SCHOOL 41.10 AC E UN 'ON OA'NV'OLLL lI'JT!UCT ICHO . It. 14 AC PROPOSED ANNEXATION P.A. 92-7 ____H_.,.. ~ Central ~g~~~ g~~~R~~~~a~~ .Jistrict PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 20, 1992 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR c. DATEAugust 11, 1992 SUBJECT APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH ROBERT L. McADAM, ET UX, JOB 4404, PLEASANT HILL AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Departmentl Infrastructure Division ISSUE: The property owner has requested the District's approval to allow the encroachment of a portion of their garage over a District easement. BACKGROUND: The encroachment was first recognized when the McAdams decided to do a lot line adjustment with the adjacent parcel, Lot 5, which they also own. When the McAcams realized that the corner of their garage was within the District's easement, they contacted District staff to determine if there was a problem with the encroachment. District staff determined that the garage does encroach into the public easement, and that there is approximately a 3 foot horizontal clearance to the sewer pipeline. The sewer was constructed in 1987 of 8-inch ductile iron pipe and is about 10 feet deep in the area of the encroachment. The McAdams have cooperated with the District and have paid our fee for processing the subject agreement. Staff has determined that the improvements will not interfere with the present use of our sewer. If a need arises to excavate and repair this sewer, the excavation can be accomplished with little effect on the existing house. The agreement limits what may be installed in the easement in the future. The property owner accepts the liability for any damages to District's facilities and for additional costs to the District for maintenance and replacement of the sewer in the area of the encroachment. The property owner holds the District free from all claims and liability for injury to persons or to their property within the easement area. The property owner agrees not to impede the District's access to the property. The agreement provides for the District's emergency access. This project (the proposed agreement) has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Ouality Act (CECA) under District CEOA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Agreement Relating to Real Property with Robert L. McAdam, et ux, Job No. 4404, and authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said agreement, and authorize the agreement to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIA TI:,EPT./DIV. 1l1fJ 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB . r'" ...... ..... ....._... / I I I I ~ ~x, ~<{ o ~ x,~ ~v '\~ ~~ ~v <"~~ ,,~ . '!vV' CO ,v ~ LOT 5 / -~ ...........----......"'=-- ~ _---- EXIST -"""-....... '- 4- 1'\", 4' "'Vb,,:\ . '(S~ '\ ~ LOT 6 (;*"" ~~ <o'v~ 'v'r ~~ <( / / \V \ \ \ I II ~ / i !. l / ~ ~ # / ~ / ~ ~ ~,>. '0. U'~ (<' HOUSE ROBERT L McADAM, ef ux LOT 7 REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT JOB NO. 4404 PLEASANT HILL AREA . -- - --- . .-...- ----r.. ~ Central ~~~~~ g~~~R~~~g'R~ &listrict PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 20, 1992 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR d. DATE 992 August 11, 1 SUBJECT APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH TERRENCE D. RANAHAN AND SHARON W. RANAHAN, JOB 1572, PARCEL 73, ORINDA AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Departmentl Infrastructure Division ISSUE: The property owners have requested the District's approval to allow the encroachment of a 3 foot high wooden retaining wall and a children's play area over a District easement. BACKGROUND: The work proposed in the easement area is part of a comprehensive relandscaping project of the owner's property. At the District's request, the property owner has replaced the existing vitrified clay pipe in the area of the easement encroachment with ductile iron pipe. The new sewer pipe should outlive the useful life of the proposed improvements. The Ranahans have paid our fee for processing the subject agreement. Staff has determined that the improvements will not interfere with the present use of our sewer. If a need arises to excavate and repair this sewer, the excavation can be accomplished with little economic effect on the property owner. The agreement limits what may be installed in the easement in the future. The property owner accepts the liability for any damages to District's facilities and for additional costs to the District for maintenance and replacement of the sewer in the area of the encroachment. The property owner holds the District free from all claims and liability for injury to persons or to their property within the easement area. The property owner agrees not to impede the District's access to the property. The agreement provides for the District's emergency access. This project (the proposed agreement) 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. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Agreement Relating to Real Property with Terrence D. Ranahan, et ux, Job No. 1572, and authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute said agreement, and authorize the agreement to be recorded. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. AfJ/ '11 /JtrOj 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB ......--.--.----.,-.--.-------.---------.---............-... ~ EXIST. 6" V. C. PIPE - ~-~ -.-..~ - -=-~~ . ----~~ ~~ ~<i; V~ O'ff vq;. ~~ 5' SEWER EASEMENT ---- -- - -- C2>oc:Ce.. eA1..1. c.oult:t" PLAY AREA 000 FtE-Tll..lloI\\lG. 1;jl\.U.; OE<.oMP""P ~....~. PM"\ ~. -~ - -----..,-.. ....._....... * lAx ~< at t <( > ; .. 0 -, (t) " ", toO :c' ~ 3' HIGH WOOD _ RETAINING WALL -, I I / 6" DUCTILE . IRON PIPE """:"Y" (NEW) ';~ " / / f~ " ... " WOOD. RETAINING WALL REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT JOB 1572 PARCEL 73 ORINDA AREA ~ Centra~ ~ontra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict ~1.~"1k BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 7 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF August 20, 1992 NO. SUBJECT 3. CONSENT CALENDAR e. DATE August 11, 1 992 ORDER COMPLETION OF DISTRICT ANNEXATION 123 TYPE OF ACTION COMPLETE ANNEXATION OF DA 123 SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall, Associate Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Dept./lnfrastructure Div. ISSUE: A resolution by the District's Board of Directors must be adopted to finalize District Annexation 123. BACKGROUND: The property owner, Arthur W. Anderson, made application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation of one parcel of land designated as District Annexation 1 23. LAFCO has considered this request and has recommended that it be processed as submitted. LAFCO has designated this parcel to be District Annexation No. 123 (Anderson Annexation to Central Contra Costa Sanitary District). No public hearing is required and the annexation of this parcel can be completed. A Negative Declaration addressing the proposed annexation was prepared by LAFCO pursuant to CEOA and was used by LAFCO in making its determinations and approving this annexation. This Negative Declaration is attached to this position paper as Exhibit "A". 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. District staff has reviewed said Negative Declaration and concurs with its findings. 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 a 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. 123. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION All '!1 fIt$ INITIATING DEPT./DIV. 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB .-..-.-----..,.. ...... ~. I ~ ~m\~ .\l~~f~;r ,~ ~ 5/ I)> t I" ",,,,StiCe- ~/tJ ----, \ \. , I , f" I \ ',,<:--. , , "" \ \ I I e~ 'tJ-, I:r z:-' 133-; ~ -' .. ~ DISTRICT ANNEXATION NOG 123 (ANDERSON ANNEXATION) ALAMO AREA " ...:'" - ,-., "-:.:','4:;:"'-'!':._.. ~:;~~~:~~ . ,':,' ~ ", .: .. ~ ;' .'. l . ~ .....;. ... .., ... - ~1, -"EXHIBIT A 4# /"l(). ''''''''!') -CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AG~r- ""'4co.r;/~1 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION!)" ;":':/:>:)0 P;, ---- v~:YCZ;'_ ,~.'., ~.. 0) ,."'.... ':.t..;." ; CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT "If/ '):-"'- 651 PINE STREET NORTH WING-4TH FLOOR MARTINEZ. CALIFORNIA 94553-0095 ,," / Telephone: (415) 372- 2C91 Contact Person f. ol'en [rckc Project Description and Location: 5UBD!VISIOf'J 6960 (Appliccnt: CeBolt Civil Engineering) (Cvln€'r: Sc'rrcr Ccr's1ruction Co.) The applicant requests approval to subdivice i 2.9 acres into II lets. Subject property is described uS follows: Fronting 400 feet on the west side of T rf"'-:Y Lane, in the Alamo area. (R-20) (ZA: GIS) (CT 3461.02) (Parcel t 193-(!80-C~~;) D CKl [KJ- D Date w 0 ~ moo SEP ~ 9 1987 J. R. OlSSONt.. County Clerk 8 CONTRA COttTA C~UNTY I .. ~ --, ~. 11m1'A~putJ I ,7~.-,L v I The Project was (Denied) (Withdrawn). ,J1 / -:: The Project was Approved on A-b '; I A "- -/. . / ./ Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act: D An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified. D The Project was encompassed by an Environmental Impact Report previously prepared for czr A Negative Declaration was issued indicating that preparation of an Environmental Impact Report was not required. D Copies of the record of project approval and the Negative Declaration or the final EI R may be examined at the office of the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, County Administration Building, North Wing, Fourth Floor, corner of Pine and Escobar Streets, Martinez, California. The Project will not have a significant environmental effect. The Project will have a significant environmental effect. Mitigation measures for identified significant impacts were made a condition of approval, and are included in the attached documents. [==:J A statement of overriding considerations was adopted. D Findings were adopted pursuant to Section 15091 of the Stat; CECA Guidelines. / ; ~ ''7 /" I/, I I ;?h. _.< ..- '/ /;' .f ~ I . ../ /''' .,/ #' ,,/ / L. I ?:- - /' ,. -h . ~ jl/~ 1,/ fl. By~/~.~~/h -r- ,/ 7.- / u,.4'~_ _ f f Community Development Department Representative AP 20 5/87 c- r- "/. ~ . California Environmental Quality Act --- NOTICE OF D Completion of Environmental Impact Report @J Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 651 PINE STREET NORTH WING-4TH FLOOR MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553-0095 Telephone: (415) 372- 2091 Contact Person Robert Drake Project Description and Location: SUBDIVISION 6960 (Applicant: DeBolt Civil Engineering) (Owner: Somar Construction Co.) The applicant requests approval to subdivide 12.9 acres into II lots. Subject property is described as follows: Fronting 400 feet on the west side of Tracy Lane, in the Alamo area. (R-20) (ZA: G15) (CT 3461.02) (Parcel 11193-080-047) The project will not generate any adverse environmental impacts. rLJ Justification for Negative Declaration is attached. D The Environmental Impact Report is available for review at the address below: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 4th Floor, North Wing, Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez, California Review Period for Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration: ::/?";lfr~. ~~y'1! 21/- ~ BvZ~/~'- /7 ke ~ AP 9 R 5/87 Commun'W Development Department Representative -,.,-'------'-----r-~_.~--.--~.-.-..---~.--.------"......"..---...-..---.---,.--------.-.-----------_---0----.--- Cor_unit: 3velopment Dep~ent Administration Suilding. Nonh Wing. Pin. &. Escobar Streets. Martinez. CalifOfnia 94553.0095 Initial Study OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE File#U {~(" Date Date ~~ 11 It7 Prepared By Reviewed By RECOMMENDATIONS: DCategorical Exemption (Class_) ~egative Declaration D Environmental Impact Report Required OConditional Negative Declaration (Owner/Applicant must agree to mitigation in writing). The project (may) (will not) have a significant effect on the environment. The recommendation is based on the following (List all items identified as significantl: i:/~fr:rd- WAif JM>!- y---1<7 ~ ,6.(,~."".......J..( What changes to the project would mitigate the identified impacts? (List mitigation measures for any significant impacts and Conditional Negative Declarationl . ~_.',. U.S.G.S. Quad Sheet ~"If.t4 Zoning Atlas Sheet 1J-/) Parcel No. A:1- lIPo - '7 IJf- , GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. General Plan consideration!!, lA}Lal)d use ~ignation, (BIArea plan name, (CIDate, (DISpecifyany conflicts with proposal: j""'r,e L'tuu p.r'$l.. 2. Zoning district (AISpecify current zoning, (BIProposed zoning, (CISpecify any conflicts (D) Variances requested: 12.2..;!J 3. Nature of request or proposed land use: f)~~(.#".I"I~~ t'~ A- J L Ln ~/ J#''''~~611~ 4. ing and.neighboring land use: -17.<1 ~- 1.")l/.414h ~ k 5. ~ - 6. Will the project require approval or permits by other than a County agency? DYes %NO Agency namelsl: 8. Is the project within the Sphere of Influence of any city? (Name): .., 7. , :.~ ',: ....-1 ..-('~~;' - '~~t;.. ~ --...---. ,. ........ .; .: -, , "- ------,.- -- - ---~-~------"--- --~- - -~ --.-----.....- ~ . S=Significant :-l::Negligible C::Cumulative No::None U::Unknown 1. ~. Will the project result inr a) Is any portion of the project within a Flood Hazard Area? Reduction of surface or ground water quality or quantity? Increased runoff or alteration to drainage patterns and streams? b) c) d) Erosion of or sedimentation in a body of water? 2. Earth. (Consider the Seismic Safety Element) Will the proposal result in or be subject to: a) Is any portion of the project within an Alquist-Priolo Act Special Studies Zone? (if yes, date County Geologist notified ) 3. Potentially hazardous geologic or soils conditions on or immediately adjoining the site? (slides, springs, erosions, liqui- faction, earthquake faults; consider prime soils, slope, septic tank limitations). Cite any geologic or engineering reports. (C9unty Geolo~t consulted?) . '.' . l... 4 -,r.', ,'-. ~"'l.(;.,r [-2..:,. h,.t..... . rs.l~.J71t"t'~\ t/'I...:.\Jl...7+11.L.: ,..(..4~ ;'~ Grading (consider height amount, steepness and visibility of proposed slopes; consider effect of grading on trees, creek channels and ridge tops)(Are there any grading plans?) Plant/ Animal Life. b) c) a) Will there be a reduction or disturbance to any habitat for plants and animals? (including removal or disturbance of trees) Will the Project affect the habitat of any rare, endangered or unique species located on or near the site? b) c) What vegetation (habitat) types exist on the site (give relative' % or proportions if significant)? List habitat types. / . I 4. Air. Will the Project result in deterioration of existing air quality, including creation of objectionable odors, or will future project residents be subjected to significant pollution levels? 5. Noise. Will the project result in: a) Is any portions of the project within the 1990, 60 dBA Noise Contour? (check Noise Element at 1000 scale maps) b) Increases from existing noise levels? 6. Eneri;Y/Natural Resources/Hazards (Consider General Plan, Safety and Seismic Safety Elements). Will the projects result in: a) Any additional consumption of energy? Affect the potential use, extraction, conservation or depletion of a natural resource? b) c) Increase risk of explosion, release of hazardous substances or other dangers to public health and safety? 7. tJtilities and Public Service. Will the project: a) Require alteration or addition to or the need for new utility systems (including sphere of influence or district boundary change; water, sewer, solid waste)? DyES S N DC o JSJ: o ~. 0 D pi D DYES S N C NO J2~.t~ t:.I.1.,E1. [J B D 0 &ES S N C NO D & 0 0 o :m 0 0 " I i , . ,r7;J~7Ii.'-' A_(~ ,lirNO NO o ~NO ONO ------ 8 o o o o - ," U o o u o o S 1'01 C NO U o Gl 0 0 0 DYES o 0 D 0 o 0 0 0 ODD 0 o 0 0 0 XYES ONO D o o o tJNO ..... . . b) Result in ~he need for new or elC~aEsion of the following services: fire and police protection, schools, parks and recreation, roads, flood control or other public works fac- ilities, public transit or governmental services (include changes to sphere of influence)? c) S C N o t;:f o Affect recreational opportunities (consider General Plan Recreation Element-Trails Plans)? 0 ~ 0 8. Transportation/Circulation. (Consider the Major Roads Plan) Will the project result in: a) Additional traffic generation or increase in circulation pro- blems (consider road design, access, congestion, parking and 1"<<1' 0 accident potentiaI)? 0 I'-" b) Special transportation considerations (waterborne, rail, air or public transportation systems and parking facilities)? ~- -" NO u o o o o o o c) Increase in commuting to and from local community? o 9. Housing and Community Develooment. (Consider Housing Ele- ment). Is the project: a) Located within a Neighborhood Preservation Area? b) Is there an opportunity for construction of low and moderate income housing? 10. Cultural Resources. a) Review by the Reg~9nal Cleari~gh use? (their recommend- ation)? /" "'.1 t ..... '. /. b) Any nearby County Historic Sites (Consider Historical Resources Inventory) f I,., , , o '.& 0 0 DYES DYES DYES , 0 NO Date ~./I '51'1 = oNO oNO 11. Aesthetics. (Consider the Scenic Routes Element) Will the project obstruct any public scenic vista or view, create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or produce new light or glare? 12. Is this project a growth-inducing action (encourage additional requests for similar uses) or set a precedent in the area? 13. :\Iandatorv Findins;s of Significance. (A "yes" answer on any of the following questions requires preparation of an EIR) a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environ- ment? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts which are individually lim- ited, but cumulatively considerable? d) Does the project have environmental impncts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human bein~, either directly or indirectly? Discussion: ~ DYES ~NO DYES DYES QNO DYES (JNO DYES ONO LJ YES ::r NO gNO ------ . ,~. - ." "\-, \.. ~ Centra~ Contra Costa Sanitary .Jistrict ~a~..1k BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Au ust 20, 1992 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR f. SUBJECT DATE ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSE OUT OF THE ARLENE DRIVE SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (DP 4539) Au ust 7 1 992 TYPE OF ACTION INFORMATIONAL SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Henry B. Thorn, Senior Engineer Engineering Department/Infrastructure Division ISSUE: All work has been completed on the Arlene Drive Sewer Improvement Project (DP 4539) and this project can now be closed out. BACKGROUND: The Arlene Drive Sewer Improvement Project consists of replacing approximately 3,200 feet of existing 6- and 8-inch sewer mains in Arlene Drive between Newell Avenue and Orchard Lane in Walnut Creek. The location of the project is shown on "Attachment 1 ." Additional information on the project is given on page CS37 of the 1991-92 Capital Improvement Budget. The contractor, Fee Construction, Inc. of Livermore, commenced work on May 13, 1991, and substantially completed all work on October 25, 1991, ahead of the original project completion date of November 1, 1991. The project was accepted by the Board of Directors on December 5,1991. Fee Construction's original construction contract was for $531,218. There were 6 change orders issued on the project for a total net increase of $16,373.25. The total contract amount paid to Fee Construction was $547,591.25. The original budget for the project was $1,069,400. The total completed project cost is $1,086,982. A request for supplemental capital improvement budget allocation of $17,582 was recently processed to increase the authorized budget to $1,086,982. The project costs included approximately $244,000 of staff time and expenditures related to acquisition of easements, dealing with community concerns, mitigating impacts of construction on residents and maintaining an effective public relations program. RECOMMENDATION: This item is presented to the Board of Directors for information. No action is necessary. 1302A.9/85 ~HT JSM RAB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ffiJJ ...-..-----....,...-.-...-..---.-...---.-......- ---.-.-.-...-.--.-........-...-..-.-.....--....... ......-.-..----..-- ATTACHMENT Page 2 of 2 ---:?" DP 4539 ARLENE DR. SEWER IMPROVEMENT D E N .., '~~.,,-: Je, ....................~~ ........ """0:,' ...... ~ .. ..... ...... ,,""l,;: .. ..................... '....', " '" ",,, ...., " .'.....', ", " ~ " " " "\: ~~ " " ,'~ " . '''~" , , ..t~,,, " " '" ',,, ',', , '~.." , , ~'" ,'\: ',' , "'t" " , 'fl.:J " . , . ..... , , Oil "\. / / 2 ,- 1$17 _ c co ....... ,-, ,-, \ \ , 'SI -t!! -- -- --.. ,.,., .., .. ,.&..."c..., w T R .., A I':' -- ...... .. ~ ~~.. OIlC.....ICO~ ~ :''L .....; ~ ~ ! 'st - .. 1 .~ . I :i:: ~:! NEW SEWER ---.-----.,----'----r--- Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE OF 4 BOARD MEETING OF August 20, 1992 NO. SUBJECT 3. CONSENT CALENDAR DATE AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAilABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2 AUTHORIZE PUBLIC NOTICE SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer Administrative/Finance and Accounting ISSUE: The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District is required to establish its appropriations limit in accordance with Article XIII B of the California Constitution. BACKGROUND: Proposition 4 was approved on November 6, 1979, and was incorporated in the California Constitution as Article XIII B. Article XIII B, as implemented by Senate Bill 1352, limits appropriations of state and local governments to the appropriations of the 1978-1979 base year adjusted in each subsequent year for changes in the Consumer Price Index or California per capita personal income, whichever is lower, and the change in population. SB 1352 requires government agencies to establish their appropriations limit by resolution each year at a regularly scheduled meeting. Notice to the public of the availability of documentation in support of the appropriations limit must be given fifteen days prior to adoption. The appropriations limit is open to challenge within 45 days of the effective date of the resolution. The following key considerations have been used in applying the provisions of Article XIII B: . The District accounts for its activities in four separate funds: Running Expense Fund (General Fund); Sewer Construction Fund (Capital Fund); Self-Insurance Fund; and Debt Service Fund. The Running Expense Fund and Self-Insurance Fund are considered to be enterprise funds and are not subject to limitation under Proposition 4. Enterprise funds are generally used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises where it is intended that costs of providing goods or services to the public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. Bond proceeds used for debt service are not subject to the appropriations limit. The District's appropriations limit is required to be established for the Sewer Construction Fund. The appropriations limit is determined for yearly appropriations into the Sewer Construction Fund. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATI,NG DEPT.lDIV. 1302A-7/91 WNF PM ..----.---..---,-...---....-------...--...---.-........--..-- ....-.---........-.-.. _....- ----....-----.- SUBJECT AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PAGE DATE 2 OF 4 August 11, 1992 . Article XIII B defines "proceeds of taxes" as including, but not restricted to, all tax revenues, income from investment of tax proceeds, and the proceeds of regulatory licenses, user charges and fees to the extent that such proceeds exceed the reasonable cost of providing the regulation, product or service. "Proceeds of taxes" also include state subventions, other than those for mandated programs for which the state reimburses the local agency. S8 1352 further defines state subventions to include only money received by a local agency from the state, the use of which is unrestricted by the statute providing the subvention. Grant funds received from the state for capital projects are restricted to specific uses and are, therefore, not "proceeds of taxes." . Fund balances carried over into fiscal year 1 980-1 981 are generally subject to limitation unless they were appropriated into a reserve account prior to July 1, 1980; however, as the Sewer Construction Fund is a single purpose fund, the fund balance at June 30, 1981 has been construed as having been appropriated into reserves and, therefore, not subject to limitation. Article XIII B was amended in 1990 by Proposition 111, which resulted in the following changes: . Formerly, the appropriations limit was increased annually by a factor comprised of the change in population combined with either the change in California per capita personal income or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is lower. As amended, the Consumer Price Index is replaced by the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction. The Board is to select between the per capita personal income or the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction by a recorded vote. The 1990-1991 appropriations limit shall be the 1986-1987 appropriations limit adjusted from that year forward by the new growth factors stated in the proposition. The change in the local assessment roll, which is intended to be obtainable from the County Assessor was not available for use for the 1990-1991 fiscal year and, therefore, the per capita personal income factor was used. The County Assessor has since provided the change in the local assessment roll for the 1991-1992 fiscal year, but advised that the change in assessment roll for the prior fiscal years 1987- 1988 through 1990-1991 will not be available. The change in the local assessment roll for the 1992-1993 fiscal year has been reported by the County Assessor to be 5.1 percent. As the California per capita personal income percentage change is a negative .64, the change in the local assessment roll is used in .the calculation of the 1992-1993 appropriations limit, as shown on Attachment I. . Revenues received in a fiscal year and the fiscal year immediately following it in excess of the appropriations limit during that fiscal year and the fiscal year immediately following it, shall be returned by a revision of tax rates or fee schedules within the next two subse uent fiscal ears. 13028-7/91 --------T""" SUBJECT AUTHORIZE A PUBLIC NOTICE TO INDICATE AVAilABILITY OF DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF THE DISTRICT'S APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PAGE DATE 3 OF 4 August 1 J, 1992 . In the event an emergency is declared by the Board, the appropriations limit may be exceeded provided that the appropriations limits in the following three years are reduced accordingly to prevent an aggregate increase in appropriations resulting from the emergency. . The annual calculation of the appropriations limit for each entity of local government shall be reviewed as part of an annual financial audit. The appropriations limit for 1991-1992 was reviewed, and concurred with, by the District's independent auditors, Maze and Associates. The appropriations limit for each fiscal year is typically set during the fall; however, the 1 991- 1992 appropriations limit was established at the June 4, 1992 Board Meeting because of the time required by the County Assessor to determine the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction required by Proposition 111. The establishment of the 1992- 1993 appropriations limit is based on reverting to a normal processing schedule which calls for the present authorization to issue a public notice, and the setting of the appropriations limit at the September 16, 1992 Board Meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize a public notice advising that documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit shall be available fifteen days prior to the Board Meeting to be held on September 16, 1992, at which the appropriations limit for the Sewer Construction Fund for the fiscal year 1992-1993 will be established. 1302B-7/91 ADS/Pos Paper #2/Prop4.PP .-.----'--.--...,-..~--'----__r_'-"."---.------'-~...----..,--.--.----,.--.-."-.,-.-..,------.---,----.-~---.-- Attachment I Page 4 of 4 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Sewer Construction Fund (Capital Fund) Appropriations Limit 1978-1979 Appropriations Subject to Limitation $4.697.644 1979-1980 Appropriations Limit $5.285.789 $6.062.800 1980-1981 Appropriations Limit 1981-1982 Appropriations Limit $6.746.078 $7 .266.875 1982-1983 Appropriations Limit 1983-1984 Appropriations Limit $7.548.830 $8.010.818 1984-1985 Appropriations Limit 1985-1986 Appropriations Limit $8.416.165 $8.823.507 1986-1987 Appropriations Limit 1987-1988 Appropriations Limit < 1 > $9.303.506 $9.964.055 1988-1989 Appropriations Limit < 1 > 1989-1990 Appropriations Limit < 1 > $10.768.154 $11.575.765 1990-1991 Appropriations Limit 1991-1992 Appropriations Limit $13.574.899 1992-1993 Appropriations Limit: Nonresidential New Construction Change in Assessment Roll Population Change Compound Effect: 1.0510 1.0205 1.0510 x 1.0205 = 1.0725 $13,574,899 x 1.0725 = $14.559.079 < 1 > As required by Proposition 111, the Appropriations Limit was recalculated in 1990-1991 using the California per capita personal income factor, instead of the Consumer Price Index. ADS/PosPaper #2/Prop4.PP .------.-,-...- .---.--...---.....--.-..-...-.-..-.--..-..-..-..--....-.-.--.-...... .... -.-... --...---.-----. ~ Central Contra Costa Sanitary District , BOARD OF DIRECTORS (:::::::::::}:::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::::::.:.:::::::.::.:::~::::t~r::::::::::{::\r::::':::\::::::.:::::::::.::::::::: BOARD MEETING OF ... . ........ .. .... .. ... ....... .. . - .. ... ... ........... .. -, . .... .. . '-" ....... .... .... '.' ...... . ....... . -. ',' '. '...", . ..... ........ ... . .. . . . :.: ..... '.:.;.' ...... ;.;. :':'.' ',:,' :", .:.:.:. ....: :. ......: .......: .....: .... ' .. ... .. .... ... . .... ... :IIIIIII~:::::::::::::::~:~II:I~I~I~ PAGE 1 OF 4 Au ust 20, 1992 NO. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR h. SUBJECT DATE ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING EXHIBIT A, DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES OF THE DISTRICTS CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Au ust 11 1992 TYPE OF ACTION ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING CONFUCT OF INTEREST CODE SUBMITTED BY Joyce E. Murphy Secretary of the District INITIATING DEPTJDIV. Administrative ISSUE: A need exists to update the designated positions contained in Exhibit A of the District's Conflict of Interest Code. BACKGROUND: The Political Reform Act of 1974 and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Conflict of Interest Code require that the Board of Directors adopt a list of designated positions of officers and employees who make, or participate in making, decisions that could have a material effect on any personal financial interest. It has been the practice of the District to review the designated positions on an annual basis and to amend the District Conflict of Interest Code as necessitated by any changed circumstances, including the creation of new positions and relevant changes in the duties assigned to existing positions. Exhibit A, Designated Positions and Disclosure Categories of the District Conflict of Interest Code, was reviewed by staff and an amendment is proposed to reflect the current organizational structure of the District. It is recommended that the positions of Senior Engineering Assistant, Engineering Assistant, and Inspection Coordinator be deleted and that the newly created positions of Source Control Program Superintendent, Supervising Source Control Inspector , and Contract Administrator be added to the list of designated positions. After approval by the Board, the proposed amendment to Exhibit A of the District Conflict of Interest Code must then be submitted to the Board of Supervisors, the code reviewing body. The amendment takes effect upon its approval by the Board of Supervisors. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution amending Exhibit A, Designated Positions and Disclosure Categories of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Conflict of Interest Code, and authorize the Secretary of the District to submit a copy of said code amendment to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors for approval. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. 1302A-7/91 . .---.....--.------------..---.....---.-- ..,-..-.-.....-.....--.......---...-....--..-.-.-...... ....-............--...-.. RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION AMENDING EXHIBIT A, DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE WHEREAS, Section 2.20.020 of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Code provides that the Board of Directors shall from time to time establish by resolution designated positions of officers and employees deemed to make, or participate in the making of, decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on a financial interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District as follows: THAT Exhibit A, Designated Positions and Disclosure Categories of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Conflict of Interest Code, a copy of which is attached, is hereby approved and adopted for the District, subject to approval by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa; and THAT the Secretary of the District is hereby authorized and instructed to submit a copy of such Code amendment to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa and to request the Board of Supervisors to approve said Code amendment in accordance with Government Code Section 87303. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board of Directors this 20th day of August 1992, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members: Members: Members: President of the Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to form: Kenton L. Aim District Counsel ,------------------------ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11 . 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. "EXHIBIT A" DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES OF THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE Desianated Positions Disclosure Cateaories Director General Manager-Chief Engineer Secretary of the District Counsel for the District Manager Officer Consultant Control Systems Engineer Real Property Specialist Permit and Services Technician Principal Engineer Senior Engineer Associate Engineer Survey Party Chief Survey Supervisor Engineering Support Supervisor Senior Inspector Collection System Inspection Supervisor Construction Inspector Contract Administrator Source Control Inspector Source Control Specialist Supervising Source Control Inspector Source Control Program Superintendent Wastewater Control Technician Principal Buyer Senior Buyer Buyer Materials Coordinator III Plant Operations Superintendent Collection System Superintendent Field Operations Superintendent Plant Maintenance Superintendent Laboratory Superintendent Pumping Stations Superintendent Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance Supervisor Operations Support Supervisor Senior Accountant/Internal Auditor Accounting Supervisor Administrative Analyst A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H B,C,D,E,F,G,H B,C,D,E,F,G,H B,C,D,E,F,G,H B,C,D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F.G.H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H D,E,F,G,H ----r--.--.----......--.....-.----~--.---.---.---- "EXHIBIT A" (Continued) Cateaorv Index A Investments B Interests in Real Property C Interests in Real Property and Investments Held by Business Entities or Trusts o Income (Other than Gifts or Loans) E Income (Loans) F Income (Gifts) G Business Positions H Commission Income, Income and Loans to Business Entities or Trusts and Income from Rental Property ~~ ~m~-~~T~~ ~-~ ~ PAGE 1 OF 8 BOARD MEETING OF NO_ Au ust 20, 1992 8. BUDGET, & FINANCE a. DATE Au ust 17 1992 TYPE OF ACTION SUBJECT RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM YEAR-END REPORT RECEIVE REPORT SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIY. John J. Mercurio, Administrative Analyst Engineering Department/Planning Division ISSUE: The Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) system provides for a year-end report to the Board of Directors on the status of the District's Capital Improvement Program. BACKGROUND: The fiscal year concluded June 30, 1992, and the final budget figures are presented in this report. A comparison of the 1991-92 CIB estimated and year-end actual revenues and expenditures is presented below: FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1991 CIB Estimate Year-End Actual Difference Between Actual and CIB Estimate Revenues Expenditures Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures $22,696,000 $30,942,000 ($8,246,000) $21,916,000 $16,553,000 $5,363,000 ($780,000) ($14,389,000) $13,609,000 (3%) 47% Attachment 1 provides a detailed analysis of the year-end status of the District's Capital Improvement Program. Highlights are summarized below. Caoitallmorovement Revenues District Sewer Construction Fund revenues for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1992, total $21,916,000, which represents 97 percent of the $22,696,000 revenue projected in the CIB. Table 1 of Attachment 1 compares the actual and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) estimated revenues for the entire fiscal year. Exoenditures for Caoitallmorovement Proiects District expenditures for capital improvement projects for the fiscal year total $16,553,000, which represents 53 percent of the $30,942,000 projected expenditures for FY 1991-92 in the CIB. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JJM (If" JMM DRW RAB \ IN~~ DEPTlOlV 1302A-7/91 fJ~ /J~ ~ -------------------,------------------------------------------- -.-------- SUBJECT ..........................................-...................................... ..............................................................., .................. .....&11.,1111......111.&.11..... RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM YEAR-END REPORT PAGE DATE 2 OF 8 August 17, 1992 Table 2 of Attachment 1 presents a comparison of actual and estimated CIS FY 1991-92 expenditures in each budget program. The difference is primarily due to lower than estimated expenditures in several large projects, most notably the Headworks Facilities Improvements Project. Allocations to Caoitallmorovement Proiects Allocations of funds from program budgets to capital improvement projects for the fiscal year total $45,097,000, which represents 169 percent of the $26,620,000 estimated in the CIS for the entire fiscal year. Table 3 of Attachment 1 presents a comparison of actual allocations from program budgets to specific projects and estimates for these allocations made at the time the CIS was prepared. Actual allocations are greater than estimated primarily due to acceleration of the Headworks Facility Improvements Project bid award. Sewer Construction Fund Balance The Sewer Construction Fund balance at the end of FY 1991-92 was $68,176,000. This is $6,377,000 more than the $61,799,000 estimated in the 1991-92 CIS. This difference is mainly because revenues exceeded expenditures by $5,363,000. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the fiscal year 1991-92 Capital Improvement Program Year-End Status Report. 13028-7/91 -------,---------..--.....------.--.--------.---.. --..---.-..- Page 3 of 8 A IT ACHMENT 1 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT Fiscal Year 1991-92 Capital Improvement Program Year-End Status Report Detailed Analysis INTRODUCTION This report compares Fiscal Year 1991-92 actual revenues, expenditures, and allocations with those projected in the Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) adopted by the District Board. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUES District Sewer Construction Fund revenues for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1992, total $21,916,000, which represents 97 percent of the $22,696,000 projected in the CIB for the entire fiscal year. Table 1 presents the distribution of actual versus estimated amounts among the capital revenue categories. Specific information on the status of each of the revenue categories is presented below: Interest on Investments Interest income on temporary investment of the Sewer Construction Fund for the fiscal year totaled $4,132,000, which represented 93 percent of the $4,455,000 projected interest revenue for the entire year. Interest rates were lower than projected in the CIB. Facilities Caoacitv Fees Facilities Capacity Fees collected during the fiscal year totaled $4,079,000, which represented 113 percent of the $3,600,000 estimated Facilities Capacity Fee revenue for the entire year. Unbudgeted proceeds associated with Mello-Roos financing of redevelopment housing in Pleasant Hill provided the additional revenue. Pumoed Zone Fees Pumped Zone Fees collected during the fiscal year totaled $23,000, which represented 29 percent of the $79,000 projected Pumped Zone Fee revenue for the entire year. A slower than projected development rate in the Pumped Zone is responsible. Page 4 of 8 Annexation Charaes Annexation Charges collected during the fiscal year totaled $133,000, which represented 42 percent of the $316,000 projected Annexation Charge revenue for the entire year. This unfavorable variance reflected a lower than anticipated rate of connection in areas not previously annexed to the District. Ad Valorem Taxes Tax revenue for the fiscal year totaled $7,919,000, which represented 99 percent of the $7,972,000 projected Ad Valorem Tax revenue for the entire year. Funds From Government Aaencies This revenue category is comprised of funds received from the City of Concord, Caltrans, and Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority. These are addressed separately below. Citv of Concord The city has paid $1,737,000 for its contribution to the fiscal year 1991-92 CIP. The billed amount represented 41 percent of the $4,274,000 projected revenue for the entire year. The variance was due to the net effect of lower than projected expenditures in the Treatment Plant Program. Caltrans Payment of $3,628,000 has been received from Caltrans this fiscal year for the 1-680/SR-24 Relocations Project necessitated by freeway widening in Walnut Creek. This represented 196 percent of the $1,854,000 projected revenue for the year. Caltrans is now being invoiced monthly for the District's reimbursable work. Tri-Vallev Wastewater Authoritv Joint studies have been undertaken to determine the feasibility of the District accepting discharge from Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority for treatment. This $95,000 reimbursement was not projected in the CIS. Miscellaneous Income Income received in this category includes mainly reimbursements from self-insurance and fees from developers for inspection and plan review. Miscellaneous Income for the fiscal year totals $170,000, which represents 117 percent of the $146,000 revenue estimated for the year. This difference is due to the unanticipated receipt of the types of reimbursements listed above. Page 5 of 8 EXPENDITURES FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS District expenditures for capital improvement projects for the fiscal year total $16,553,000 which represents 53 percent of the $30,942,000 projected expenditures for the entire year. Lower than estimated expenditures in the Headworks Facility Improvements, 1-680/SR-24 Relocation - Ph 3 and Country Gardens/3rd Avenue-Design projects alone accounted for about $6.8 million of the under-expenditure. (Expenditures for particular projects are presented in the Capital Improvement Budget Status Reports provided to the Board in the FMIS financial statements.) A summary of this information for each Budget Program is presented in Table 2. AllOCATIONS TO PROJECTS FROM PROGRAM BUDGETS Allocations of funds from program budgets to specific capital improvement projects during the fiscal year total $45,097,000, which represents 169 percent of the $26,620,000 authorized by the Board. A summary of this information for each Budget Program is presented in Table 3. A list of major projects which incurred unanticipated delays in receiving allocations from program budgets is included below Table 3. A total of $3,388,000 in Program Contingency funds were allocated during the fiscal year to fund unanticipated new projects and construction overruns. (A listing of all Program Contingency allocations is presented in the FMIS year-end financial statements.) SUMMARY Actual FY 1991-92 capital improvement revenues collected were within 3 percent of the projection. Actual expenditures amounted to 53 percent of those projected. The Sewer Construction Fund (SCF) balance at the start of FY 1991-92 was $66,267,000. The SCF balance at the close of FY 1991-92 was $68,176,000, which is $6,377,000 more than projected in the CIB. This difference is mainly because revenues exceeded expenditures by $5,363,000. Page 6 of 8 TABLE 1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE SUMMARY Note: All amounts in thousands CIB ESTIMATED REVENUE FY ACTUAL REVENUE ACTUAL PERCENT 1990-91 FY 1990-91 OF CIB ESTIMATE INTEREST $ 4,455 $ 4,132 93 FACILITIES CAP. 3,600 4,079 113 FEES PUMPED ZONE FEES 79 23 29 ANNEXATION 316 133 42 TAXES 7,972 7,919 99 OTHER CONCORD 4,274 1,737 41 CAL TRANS 1,854 3,628 196 TWA 0 95 MISCELLANEOUS 146 170 117 TOTALS $22,696 $21,916 97 Page 7 of 8 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BY PROGRAM Note: All amounts in thousands CIB ESTIMATED ACTUAL ACTUAL AS EXPENDITURES FY EXPENDITURES FY PERCENT OF CIB 1991-92 1991-92 ESTIMATE TREATMENT $11,670 $ 4,369 37 PLANT COLLECTION 14,681 8,834 60 SYSTEM GENERAL 4,591 3,350 73 IMPROVEMENTS TOTALS $30,942 $16,553 53 Page 8 of 8 TABLE 3 MAJOR ALLOCATIONS BY PROGRAM CIB ESTIMATED ACTUAL ALLOCATIONS ALLOCATIONS FY 1991-92 FY 1991-92 TREATMENT PLANT HEADWORKS FACILITY $ 3,300,000 $24,178,082* IMPROVEMENTS SECONDARY CLARIFIER 10,000 698,000* IMPROVEMENTS COGENERATION 475,000 670,000 ALL OTHER PROJECTS 6,345,000 1,876,904 TOTALS 10,130,000 27,422,986 COLLECTION SYSTEM MARTINEZ RENOV A TION- TRUNK 1,567,000 2,202,323 100 PHASE W2/ARREBA PLEASANT HILL INTERCEPTOR 500,000 1,900,000 DESIGN CL YDE/FAIRVIEW/MAL TBY PUMP 1,220,000 1,698,000 STATION IMPROVEMENTS CSO SEWER RENOVATION - 1,000,000 1,235,000* 1991-92 PIPE REPLACEMENT M-4 PARALLEL FORCE MAIN 0 1,827,300 ALL OTHER PROJECTS 7,899,000 3,741,565 TOTALS 12,186,000 12,604,188 GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS OFFICE SPACE STUDY AND 0 1 ,404,000 REMODEL PROPERTY ACQUISITION - 1,450,000 786,000* 4797 IMHOFF ALL OTHER PROJECTS 2,854,000 2,879,350 TOTALS 4,304,000 5,069,350 GRAND TOTALS $26,620,000 $45,096,524 * Includes multiple allocations during fiscal year.