The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 05-03-90 . Central .;ontra Costa Sanitary istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER SUBJECTCONSIDER RELI E INC., AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO MANUAL c. JARDIM, AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES M. MONTGOMERY ENGINEERS, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THOMAS ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE MARTINEZ SEWER REHABILITATION SUBBASIN 5L PROJECT, DP 4611 PAGE 1 OF 6 NO. 3. BI S DATE April 30, 1990 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AWARD AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Paul A. Sciuto Junior Engineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department Engineering Division ISSUE: The Board of Directors must decide whether or not to grant a relief of bi d request. The Board of Di rectors must authori ze award of a construction contract or reject bids within 60 days after the opening of the bids. Authorization by the Board is required to execute consulting engineering agreements for amounts greater than $50,000. BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors authorized preparation of a facilities plan for upgrading the Martinez portion of the District system in 1987. The faciliti es pl anni ng effort recommended that one area of the Martinez system, Subbasin 5L, be renovated to correct numerous structural problems and reduce maintenance. The area of the renovation is generally bounded by Berrellesa, Estudillo, Brown, Ward, Soto, Ferry, and Las Juntas streets. The project contains approximately 800 feet of 27-inch sewers, 775 feet of 18-inch sewers. 3,300 feet of 12-inch sewers, 4,300 feet of 8-inch sewers, and 44 manholes. A 1 so, lower 1 atera 1 s wi 11 be replaced to near the property 1 i ne and wi 11 be fitted with a new 2-way cleanout. Installation of the 27- and 18-inch sewers was added to the scope of the project after initiation of design. These sewers will relieve flows through downtown Martinez and reduce wet weather overflows. In addition, replacement of approximately 500 feet of deteriorated 6-inch sewer on Estudillo Street near the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks is included in this project. Plans and specifications for the project were completed by James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. and the project was advertised on February 26, 1990, and March 5, 1990. Eight bids ranging from $1,245,000 to $1,685,608 were received and opened on April 11, 1990. A summary of bids is shown in Attachment 1. On April 16, 1990, the District received a request for relief of bid from the apparent low bidder, Fee Construction, Inc. (Attachment 2). The request cites two reasons for relief: an arithmetic error in preparing the bid in the amount of $147,062, and failure to list a paving contractor as part of the bid proposal. Under California Public Contract Code (Section 5103), a bidder may request relief of bid within five days of bid opening in the event of a clerical or arithmetic error in preparing the bid proposal. The law is stringent with regard to relief from bids and allows relief to be granted by the awarding authority only under specific circumstances. Specifically, the law states that: REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION PT./DIV. (} p.~ AJ~ CWS DRW RAB --------..-.-..- .""-"-'~-~"---_. .-.... _..~'--~~--"~''"._."--_._,-,---_._.__.~---,.,..'""-,."'.--_.,..~,~_.._-..."....,....,...,_..,.,.,. .. - ...._,,~_.__._-~.~------_._._,--- SUBJECT INC., AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO MANUAL C. JARDIM, AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES M. MONTGOMERY ENGINEERS, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THOMAS ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE MARTINEZ SEWER REHABILITATION SUBBASIN 5L PROJECT, DP 4611 POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 6 DAlpril 30, 1990 "The bidder shall establish to the satisfaction of the court that: (a) A mistake was made. (b) He or she gave the public entity written notice within five days after the openi ng of the bi ds of the mi stake, specifyi ng in the notice in detail how the mistake occurred. (c) The mistake made the bid materially different than he or she intended it to be. (d) The mistake was made in filling out the bid and not due to error in judgment or to carelessness in inspecting the site of the work, or in reading the plans or specifications." The arithmetic error claimed by Fee Construction is the omission of costs for off-hauling of trench spoil. According to Fee Construction representatives, the error was made on the internal work sheets used to compile construction costs for transfer to the formal bid proposal form that was submitted to the District. Fee Construction uses a computer spreadsheet program to prepare its bids. The computer program calculates the trench section and quantity of pipe bedding, backfill, and trench spoil. For trench spoil disposal, the computer program determines the number of trucks required and the length of time these trucks would be needed. In addition to trench spoil disposal, the computer spreadsheet lists all other construction activities or tasks related to construction of a sewer. For each activity or task, the length of time is listed along with the costs such as labor, equipment, materials, gravel, and subcontractors. Unit costs and quantities are listed for each activity based on which the program computes a total cost. District staff reviewed Fee Construction's spreadsheet program and the spreadsheets used for preparation of the bid submitted by Fee Construction on April 11, 1990. The spreadsheets list a total of 9,512 cy of trench spoil to be removed by three semi-trucks over 92.67 days. The unit cost for this activity is listed as SO/truck/day on the spreadsheets. In estimating trench spoil disposal costs, Fee Construction's practice is to use the minimum trucking rate set by the California Public Utilities Commission rather than seeking bids from trucking firms. This practice is the usual practice used by contractors. The PUC rate is currently $460/day/semi-truck. Multiplying this unit cost by 278 truck-days and adding a 15 percent markup results in a total cost of $147,062 for trench spoil off-hauling. The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of the bids and concluded that, in the event that Fee Construction is relieved of its bid, the second low bidder, Manual C. Jardim, is the lowest responsible bidder for the bid amount of $1,375,404. The Engineer's estimate for construction is $1,406,112. The funds required to complete this project are as shown in Attachment 3. The total project cost is anticipated to be $2,238,969. 13028-9/85 .-----.-----------... ,,-~-,...."_.._------~_._----,._._-_._-'.-""'~--.-----"-,..--..- - ,,_._,-,. .- SUBJEC I\[.L.l[.r vr D.lU ~rL.L. ..un kNc., AUTHORIZE AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO MANUAL t. JARDIM, AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES H. MONTGOMERY ENGINEERS, AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF AN GREEMENT WITH THOMAS ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE ARTINEZ SEWER REHABILITATION SUBBASIN 5L PROJECT, DP 4611 POSITION PAPER PAGE 3 OF 6 DA,t\pril 30, 1990 District staff will administer the contract and provide inspection services. Resident engineering and office engineering services, including shop drawing review, will be provided by James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. (JMM). A cost reimbursement agreement has been negotiated with JMM Engineers with a cost ceiling of $147,924. The project construction area consists of numerous old and unreinforced masonry- type structures. Due to concern of potential damage claims, District staff recommends a preconstruction damage survey of the immediate construction vicinity to record the existing condition to a reasonable extent. A cost reimbursement agreement has been negot i ated wi th Thomas Anderson and Company wi th a cost ceiling of $75,000. The Martinez Sewer Rehabilitation, Subbasin 5L Project is included in the 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget (pages CS-85 through CS-87). The 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget est imated total project cost is $1,229,000. Thi s budget estimate does not include costs for design and construction of the 27- and 18- inch trunk sewers and the 500 feet of 8-inch sewer along lower Estudillo Street. The revised total project cost, including these additional project elements, is $2,238,969. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the Cal ifornia Environmental Qual ity Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidel ines Section 15302 since it involves replacement or reconstruction of existing sewer facilities. A Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk on March 6, 1989. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Consider the relief of bid request from Fee Construction, Inc. including return of the bid bond. 2. If Fee Construction is relieved of its bid, authorize award of the contract for the amount of $1,375,404 for construction of the Martinez Sewer Rehabilitation, Subbasin 5L Project, District Project No. 4611, to Manual C. Jardim, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder. 3. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a cost reimbursement agreement with a cost ceiling of $147,924 with James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. 4. Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a cost reimbursement agreement with a cost ceil ing of $75,000 with Thomas Anderson and Company. 1302B-9/85 ATTACHt1ENT 1 CentraL-Contra Costa Sani~ry District 8UMMARY OF .10. PROJECT NO. 4611 Martinez Sewer Renovation Subbasin 5L DATE 4/11/90 ENGR. EST. $ 1,406,112 LOCATION Marti nez It ~ .IDDIER (Name, telephone & address) BID PRle. 1 Fee Construction. Inc. ( ) $ P.O. Box 2167, Livermore, CA 94550 1,245,000 - t~anual C. Jardim ( ) $ 2 1,375,404 P.O. Box 677, Union City, CA 94587 ~ 3 Ranger Pipelines. Inc. ( ) $ 1296 Armstrong Ave., San Francisco 94124 1,410,096 P&J Utility ( ) $ 4 5739 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94112 1,485,700 Valley Enqineers, Inc. ( ) $ 5 P.O. Box 12227, Fresno, CA 93777 1,536,510 ....-- Mountain Cascade ( ) $ 6 P.O. Box 116, San Ramon, CA 94583 1,567,000 Bay Pacific Pipelines, Inc. ( ) $ 7 1,629,874 2601 22nd Ave., San Francisco, CA 94116 8 Hogue Construction ( ) $ 3939 S. Moorland Ave., Santa Rosa, CA 95407 1,685,608 ( ) $ ( ) $ - ( ) $ ( ) $ PREPARED BY Paul A. Sciuto DATE 4/11/90 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 2501-11/84 ATTACHMENT 2 ,..""'" ..... f"l'O-:".".-:. t~=" ~., . ~~. pt;;.~~;,.. t'~~:..<~' ,oi f.'ec CoMt~fit)C\~ me. Underground Pipeline Contractor IltelEOWlEID APR 1 6 1990 CCCSo ENG'NEJ:~'NG 415/373.0900 FAX 415/373-0907 CONSTRUCTION, INC. April 16, 1990 Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Martinez, CA 94553 Attn: Curtis W. Swanson, Principal Engineer Re: Proposal for Construction of Martinez Sub-Basin 5-Lower Sewer Renovation Project. Gentlemen: This Letter is to notify you of two clerical errors made in our proposal to you for the above referenced job. Due to the magnitude of these errors, we must request to be relieved from our bid. Specifications Section 15 'Relief of Bidders' allows 5 calendar days after the bid date to submit written notification per Public Contract Code, Section 5103. Also your letter dated April 13, 1990 also quotes the same section. 1. Dollars for trucking left out (see enclosed) of bid. Note .~ on 3 estimate worksheets, trucks are shown but no dollars for them were typed in causing a $147,062.00 error. 2. Failure to list paving subcontractor for $110,000.00 We regret magnitude company. questions. having to request relief of our bid but due to the of these errors it would put an undo hardship on our Please feel free to give me a call if you have any ~~. C. L. Muth Vice President CLM/tj Enclosures GC.204 Mailing Address: 2021 Las Positas Court, Suite 127 Livermore, CA 94550 lIcense No. 310117 ATTACHMENT 3 MARTINEZ BASIN 5L SEWER RENOVATION DISTRICT PROJECT 4611 SUMMARY OF FUNDS ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL 1 2 Construction Contract Contingency at 15% $1,375,404 206,265 Subtota 1 1,581,669 3 Force Account Project Management/ Administration District Inspection Surveying Public Contact District Engineering CSO Field Office Misc. Lega 1 Subtota 1 21,000 63,000 12,000 4,500 5,000 10,000 2,000 2,000 119,500 4 Consultants/Contractor JMM Resident Engineer JMM Engineering Support Geotechnical Services Test Lab Preconstruction Survey Survey 94,000 54,000 15,000 9,000 75,000 Subtota 1 247,000 290,800 5 Prebid Expenditures (Design) Total Project Cost 2,238,969 290,800 6 7 8 Funds Previously Authorized Total Funds Required to Complete Project $1. 948.169 % OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT COSTS 87 13 100 1.3 4.0 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.1 0.1 7.5 5.9 3.4 0.9 0.5 4.7 15.6 18.4 142 18.4 123 . Central ~ontra Costa Sanitary __istrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 5 SUBJECT COMPANY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS PHASE II, DP 4654; AUTHORIZE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS; AUTHORIZE BOARD PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO SIGN A UTILITIES AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS BOARD MEETING OF May 3, 1990 NO. 3. BIDS AND AWARDS b. DATE April 27, 1990 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AWARD AUTHORIZE AGREEMENTS POSITION PAPER SUBMITTED BY Tad J. Pil ecki Senior Engineer INITIATIt::lG D~PT./DIV. tnglneerlng Department Engineering Division ISSUE: The Board must authorize award of the contract or reject bids within 60 days of the opening of the proposals. Board authorization is required for the Board President and Secretary to sign a util ities agreement with Caltrans. Consulting agreements in excess of $50,000 require Board approval. BACKGROUND: On March 28, 1990, sealed proposals were received and opened for the construction of District Project No. 4654, I680/SR24 Sewer Relocations Phase II. Plans and specifications for the project were completed by John Carollo Engineers, and the project was advertised on February 21 and 28, 1990. Five bids-ranging from $2,942,894 to $4,268,111 were received on March 28, 1990. A tabulation of the bids is shown in Attachment 1. The Engineering Department conducted a technical and commercial evaluation of the bids and concluded that the lowest responsible bidder is Dalton Construction Company of Hayward with a bid price of $2,942,894. The Engineer's Estimate for construction is $4,500,740. The variation between the low bid and the Engineer's Estimate is primarily due to a $1,000,000 difference (Contractor's Bid $700,000, Engineer's Estimate $1,700,000) in the construction cost for Site 7, Olympic Boulevard. This significant difference was brought to the attention of Dalton Construction Company who indicated that they would stand behind their bid and comply with the contract. The budget to complete this project is $3,962,000 as shown in Attachment 2. The total project cost is anticipated to be $4,562,000. The 1989/90 Capital Improvement Budget estimated the total project cost for Phase II at $1,170,000. Since the preparation of the CIB, Caltrans doubled the number of relocations and tripled the overall length of sewer to be relocated. In addition, the District is taking advantage of the Caltrans project to upsize the Olympic line now to avoid future difficult construction and to replace a very deteriorated section of 6-inch main in Ygnacio Valley Road. The total project cost associated with the District's work is estimated at $558,000. To receive reimbursement for costs associated with the planning, design, and construction of the relocation, the District must execute a utilities agreement with Caltrans. The award of the construction contract to Dalton Construction Company is contingent upon receipt of a fully-executed utilities agreement from Caltrans. The construction project will require the contractor to work on several sites concurrently. In addition, two sites will require night construction. District Engineering staff will administer the construction contract and provide some of 1302A-9/85 DRW ;1f? RAB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ~RIU ,...- -. ,...-.. SUBJECT I"\U ur 1"\ "UIl, n"", I V "vn..., nu" I J,vn COMPANY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS PHASE II, DP 4654; AUTHORIZE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JOHN CAROLLO ENGINEERS; AUTHORIZE BOARD PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO SIGN A UTILITIES AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS POSITION PAPER PAGE 2 OF 5 DAWpril 27, 1990 the field inspection. Engineering and inspection services, including shop drawing review and providing a resident engineer and construction inspectors are covered in the John Carollo Engineers' scope. A cost reimbursement contract with an upper limit of $320,500 has been negotiated with JCE. All costs associated with Caltrans' portion of the project will be reimbursed. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Statute Section 21080.21, since it involves construction of pipelines less than one mile in length in public rights of way. A Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize award of contract for construction of District Project No. 4654 to Dalton Construction Company as the lowest responsible bidder contingent upon receipt of a fully-executed utilities agreement from Caltrans on or before May 11, 1990, authorize the Board President and Secretary to sign a utilities agreement, and authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute an agreement with John Carollo Engineers. 13026-9/85 ATTACHMENT 1 Centra"--~ontra Costa Sani'- ry District SUMMARY OF BIDB PROJECT NO. 4654 - I680jSR24 Sewer Reloc. Phase II DATE March 28. 1990 ENGR. EST. $ 4.500.740.00 LOCATION 15 Sites in Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill a: ~ .IDDER (Name, telephone & address) BID PRle. ~ Dalton Construction ( ) 786-9426 $ 1 27577 Industrial Blvd., Hayward, CA 94545 2,965,394 I-- Bay Pacific Pipelines ( ) 548-9794 $ 2 2601 22nd Ave., San Francisco, CA 94116 3,168,769 .....- Mountain Cascade ( ) 837-1101 $ 3 P.O. Box 116, San Ramon, CA 94583 3,780,726 - Western Utility Contractors ( 801 ) 785-3401 $ 4 8005 Main St.. Pleasant Grove. UT 84062 3,993,256 Stacy & Witbeck ( ) 285-7570 $ P.O. Box 11642, San Francisco, CA 94101-7642 4,247,469 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) $ Original Signed By PREPARED BY Joyce ~1d~i 11 an DATE SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 2501-11!84 ATTACHMENT 2 I680/SR24 SEWER RELOCATIONS PHASE II (DP 4654) POST BID PRECONSTRUCT ION ESTIMATE Percent of Construction Item Description Total Contract Costs 1 Construction Contract $2,942,894 2 Contingency @ 15%1 442.106 Subtota 1 3,385,000 100 3 Construction Management - District Forces Administration/Inspection 111 ,000 Surveying 30,000 Lega 1 3,000 Secretarial/Field Office/Utilities 18,000 Engineering 20.000 Subtota 1 182,000 5.4 4 Consultants/Contractors Geotechnical (DCM/Joyal) 15,000 Resident Engineer (JCE) 117,500 Inspectors (2 from JCE) 103,000 Engineering Support for Construction (JCE) 100,000 Contingency1 33,500 Material Testing 15.000 Subtota 1 384,000 11.4 5 Miscellaneous Collection System Operations 2,000 Public Information 10,000 VCR Camcorder 2.000 Subtota 1 14,000 .4 6 Prebid Expenditure 597,000 17 .6 7 Total Project Cost 4,562,000 134.8 8 Funds Authorized to Date 600,000 9 Total Project Costs Required to Complete Project 3,962,000 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY TO EXECUTE UTILITIES AGREEMENT NO. DISTRICT PROJECT NO. 4564 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Di rectors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District as follows: THAT, the President and Secretary respectively of this District are authorized and directed to execute Utilities Agreement , District Project No. 4654, for and on behalf of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. PASSED AND ADOPTED this by the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Members: Members: Members: President of the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: Secretary of the District Board of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa, State of California Approved as to Form: District Counsel Kenton L. Alm . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR c. SUBJECT DATE QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO STEVEN VARNER, JOB 4290, WALNUT CREEK AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: Mr. Steven Varner, owner of Parcels A and C of parcel map, Book 118, page 33, has requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: The subject easement was dedicated for a future sewer main at no cost to the District in 1985 when the parcel map was filed. Subsequently, the future sewer alignment was revised. A new easement was granted to the District in August 1987 for the future realigned sewer. The SUbject sewer easement is no longer required and should be quitclaimed. The property owner has paid the District's processing fee. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to Mr. Steven Varner, Job 4290, 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. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB M R~NG. INITIATING DEPT./DIV. /Qr /Iii f?t1F ~ ~ ~--~ o~'D .~ ~____ PUBLIC SEWER MAIN ./ REPLACEMENT EASEMENT off ~ cP- ~ I L.1.. cj," . i/~~ - ~ ~ to fp" ~~~ ~~ ~ ,,(,I Yo \" HI f~WY 24 ,f:~Wy ~BO VICINITY MAE -' NO SCAL€ QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT JOB 4290 WALNUT CREEK AREA I . Central Contra Costa Sanitary Oistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR d. SUBJECT DATE QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT TO THE LOCKWOOD FAMILY TRUST, ET AL, JOB 3169, PORTION OF PARCEL 2B, PLEASANT HILL AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE QUITCLAIM OF SEWER EASEMENT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Construction ISSUE: The Lockwoods have requested the District to quitclaim the subject easement. BACKGROUND: The subject easement was granted to this District at no cost in 1979. It was created to serve parcels located to the south of the Lockwood property. District staff has determined that the property located south of the subject easement can be served more effectively using different alignments. Therefore, the subject easement can now be quitclaimed. The property owner has paid the District's quitclaim processing fee. This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Quitclaim Deed to Lockwood Family Trust, et al, Job 3169, 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. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION JSM RAB ./CHIEF ENG. ~ 1302A-9/85 DH ~ INITIATING D~lIV. K0..40 :~ . I I~_-~ /cJ-.J .!-UN ~5 j.,JrJI,/'//).J (7,41 /57) C/TY Or PLE: - (9/75oK I I I ~ I- I I If) '- ,~-<:> ~ ~ & ~ \) \I) ~ . '- ~ ~ \)~ ", \:\~\\) " ~ ~~~ ~~'-i \J~ ~ \\~~ ;-1 ~ I ~I ~I~ ~~ . '- ~ QUITCLAIM 10. SEWER EASEMENT I ~ 'C)" ~~ ~'---'.--1 -) ~ '-l I ~~~ l...J~~ u~~ I ~ /0' ___}1 I., I.:.:.:.: .4.l ::::::::~ ~:::~ I;:;::::~ J....~ ~ ~ ,.U 890 dJ --- /50' ~ -r.E'r-1 j) tJ.JV,5 (6504 OR 333) rz.O QUITCLAIM SEWER EASEMENT JOB 3169 PTN. PAR. 28 PLEASANT HILL AREA . Central Contra Costa Sanitary Oistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR e. SUBJECT DATE APPROVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH EDWARD W. BECK, ET UX, JOB 1798, ORINDA AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE REAL PROPERrY AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Associate En ineer INITIATING DEPT/DIV Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: The property owner has proposed the construction of a concrete pool deck over a District easement. BACKGROUND: The proposed pool deck will be cantilevered over a portion of the existing 10 feet wide sewer easement within the Beck's property. The encroachment will taper from 0 to 5 feet maximum over a distance of 45 feet. The vertical clearance from the bottom of the deck to the ground will be a minimum of 8-1/2 feet. The existing eight-inch sewer pipe, which was constructed in 1972, is approximately eight feet deep. The property owner has cooperated with District staff by providing construction drawings of the pool deck and has paid the District's fee for processing the subject agreement. Staff has determined that the improvements will not interfere with the present use of our sewer; however, if the need should arise, the agreement requires the property owner to move the pool deck at his/her expense within 30 days of notice to do so. This project (the proposed agreement) has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 18.6, since it involves a minor alteration in land use limitations. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Agreement relating to Real Property with Edward W. Beck, et ux, Job 1798, 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 1302A-9/85 DH JSM RAB JAL INITIA TIN~T.lDIV. fJJY e/'{/ -t"l... ~'- .,- 0:::.:.. H .._ _ '_d___ ___ p~. :: -.------- .-- .-.. -'-.- ------....- ..- --- --- --- . p-- -,. '1<' ~~ ENCROACHMENT .,,, ~, ~ ~ -. >: ~ \ . "s ~L ~_~_: r L 11I .,(.. " 1"V'q..j T~ro.~e .............. :so ..- -~ 1l!S I .-";--; . . . t....., t ( " .' J: ~~L:- - :. . I ,t. ~1 : . ~ . t- ~- - . ff; . ~'. ... x , f- . ....~ t_~- ~-I ; ',X-i,- .~ POOL' ".. ~ . - ~_ _.--:." t . ;" c - 'i" ". . ,~...r l~ f-" --.. ~ .. 0"'. 1l ~ " ... -< 'iE ~., ; . "~n _::~~ - - .. r<:~ ....".. ~ .,.~ - k"", I I --r- - - -=- ----1/' T._.MO"UtS ."......... 7SftIrl.... ..; p' PXL- T;~;ITFY-l:~'F'~":u,--~- . 't-.,.- ,......" ......._ .'~'4"" .."... ...... fl. POOL DECK CANTILEVERED OVER EASEMENT 'W o z 01( a:: 01( w ~ o -- ft.'t'L. . ~Z iD:! .'-. ....1- ~. .....J .... . '.' ...;.. ,;:. .....,.., .0",;,. . SECTION j,....~iii. I REAL PROPERTY AGREEMEHT JOB 1798 ORINDA AREA . Centra ~ontra Costa Sanitar} .Jistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF 990 NO. 4 . cc:.NSENT CALENDAR f. SUBJECT DATE A ril 27 1990 Accept the Contract Work for the Larwin Pumping TYPE OF ACTION station Upgrade Project, District Project No. 10057 and Authorize Filing of Notice of Accept Contract Work Completion SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT./DIV. David J. Reindl Assistant En ineer Plant Operations Department ISSUE: All work has been completed on District Project No. 10057, Larwin Pumping station Upgrade, and the work is now ready for acceptance. BACKGROUND: On October 19, 1989, the Board of Directors authorized the award of contract for the upgrade of Larwin Pumping station to Classic Electric and Data. The work included the installation of two prepurchased 100-horsepower pumping units and variable frequency drives. The new equipment replaced two smaller Flygt dry pit pumps and the associated Autocon variable frequency drives. The original 18-horsepower Flygt pumps were replaced with larger 100-horsepower units rated at 2.5 MGD. The firm capacity of the pumping station has been increased from 2.64 MGD to 5.3 MGD (with the largest unit out of service) and will provide capacity for growth in the area until approximately the year 2010. The contract with Classic Electric and Data was signed on November 6, 1989, and work was completed on February 8, 1990. The contractor was unable to complete the work on schedule because of problems experienced with the pump assemblies during startup. After being installed, both pumping units had to be sent out to the local service representative, Power Machine Company in Emeryville, for inspection and readjustment of the bearings preload. Change orders to the contract were processed to electrical and instrumentation systems and to contaminated material. There was one credit change deleted calibration of the new MAG flow meters. accounting of the project costs will be provided to the time of project closeout. upgrade the dispose of order, which A detailed the Board at RECOMMENDATION: Accept the contract work for District Project No. 10057, Larwin Pumping station Upgrade, and authorize the filing of Notice of Completion. 1JJf:PT./DIV 1302A-9/65 . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR g. SUBJECT DATE ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSE OUT OF THE WASTE- WATER TREATMENT PLANT CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEM TYPE OF ACTION PHASE 2 PROJECT (DISTRICT PROJECT 20055) and M-2 INFORMATIONAL FORCE MAIN CATHODIC PROTECTION PROJECT (DISTRICT PROJECT 4015) SUBMITTED BY Kenneth Clark Assistant En ineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Construction Division ISSUE: All work has been completed on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Cathodic Protection System Phase 2 proj ect and the M-2 Force Main Cathodic Protection Project and these projects can now be closed out. BACKGROUND: The two projects were designed as two separate projects but were combined just prior to construction and built under one construction contract. The contract work included the installation of 12 individual cathodic protection systems at numerous widely separated treatment plant locations and at the Maltby Pump station. Smith and Dennison, Inc., was issued a Notice to Proceed on June 19, 1987. The original contract completion date was October 27, 1987. All work was completed and the District was able to take beneficial use on December 10, 1987. Time extensions were granted to establish a new contract completion date of December 10, 1987. Smith and Dennison, Inc.'s contract was for $328,161.00. There were eight Change Orders issued on the project totaling $17,068.72, resulting in a total paYment of $345,229.72 to smith and Dennison, Inc. The total budget for the combined projects was $663,648. The total completed project cost is $579,970 which is $83,678 less than the budget. Staff is closing out the project which will result in $83,678 being returned to the Treatment Plant Program. RECOMMENDATION: This item is presented to the Board for information. No action is necessary. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~c, '~k [;1' flA H 'lZsK ~/ mw INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. 1302A-9/85 KC MH RSK JSM RAB . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER PAGE 1 OF 1 NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR h. SUBJECT DATE ESTABLISH MAY 17, 1990, AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHING EQUALIZATION CHARGES FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 56 LA CASA VIA TYPE OF ACTION INFORMATIONAL SUBMITTED BY Jay S. McCoy Construction Division Mana e INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Engineering Department/ Const u . 0 ... ISSUE: The Board of Directors must conduct a public hearing to establish equalization charges. BACKGROUND: Local Improvement District (LID) No. 56 included 22 separate properties. Most of these properties were assigned one unit of assessment. six of these properties were assigned more than one unit of assessment because the zoning at that time permitted more than one building site on these six properties. A total of 29 assessments were placed on the 22 properties. Presently some properties which were assigned only one assessment are being subdivided. In these cases, District staff recommends that an equalization charge be collected from the owner of these new lots. Equalization charges are intended to equalize the investment in, and fairly and equitably distribute the cost of capital improvements among all properties which benefit from the improvements. After equalization charges are collected, the money will be credited against the outstanding balance of assessments on each property. This crediting will be accomplished by reducing the next yearly assessment which appears on the tax bill for each of the then current owners of the properties included in LID 56. Section 6.16.020 of the District Code provides for the Board establishing equalization charges after conducting a properly noticed public hearing. One of the 22 original properties is now being subdivided and the new lot which is being created through the subdivision process was not assessed in the LID. Hence, the collection of an equalization charge is appropriate and a public hearing is required. Equalization charges will be proposed for this new lot and subsequent new lots which were not originally assessed in LID 56. Since equalization charges for all future lots will be considered at the proposed public hearing, no additional public hearings will be required. RECOMMENDATION: Establish May 17, 1990, as the date for a public hearing to consider establishing equalization charges for LID 56. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~EF ENG. ROGER J. DOLAN ~ 1302A-9/85 JSM RAB . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF May 3, 1990 NO. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR i. SUBJECT DATE April 24, 1990 SET PUBLIC HEARINGS ON JUNE 8, 1990 TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHMENT OF THE 1990-1991 SEWER SERVICE CHARGE RATES, AND THE COLLECTION OF SUCH CHARGES AND PRIOR YEAR DELINQUENT CHARGES ON THE COUNTY TAX ROLLS TYPE OF ACTION SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE SUBMITTED BY Walter Funasaki INITIATING DEPT/DIV Administrative/Finance and ISSUE: The District Code and State law require holding public hearings for the establishment of the 1990-1991 Sewer Service Charge rates, and for placing such charges and prior year delinquent charges on the County tax rolls for collection. BACKGROUND: The 1990-1991 Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Budget will be submitted for initial review by the Board of Directors at the specially scheduled Board workshop on May 31, 1990. Approval of the 1990-1991 O&M Budget is scheduled for the June 8, 1990 Board Meeting. It is customary to hold public hearings to receive public comment on establishing the Sewer Service Charge rates, and collecting such charges and prior year delinquent charges on the County tax rolls, during the Board Meeting at which the O&M Budget is presented for approval. The Board has directed that the Board workshop, in addition to the public hearings, be publicly noticed. Because the interval between the May 17, 1990 Board Meeting and the May 31, 1990 Board workshop date is insufficient for proper notice, it is necessary to set the Board workshop and public hearings at the May 3, 1990 Board Meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Set a Board workshop on May 31, 1990 and public hearings on June 8, 1990 to receive public comment on the establishment of the 1990-1991 Sewer Service Charge rates and the collection of such charges, and prior year delinquent charges, on the County tax rolls. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION ~7;':: ROGER J. DOLAN INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. ~ &~~dL~ 1302A-9/85 WN F Pt1 . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 5 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF NO. 5. SOLID WAS'IE a. April 27, 1990 May 3, 1990 SUBJECCONSIDER SUGGESTIONS BY A CUSTOMER OF ORINDA- MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. FOR SENDING NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING COLLECTION RATES, AND OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED SCHEDULE OF RATES. DATE TYPE OF ACTION CONSIDER SUGGESTION FOR CUSTOMER NOTIFICATION SUBMITTED BY Walter N. Funasaki Finance Officer INITIATING DEPT/DIV Administrative/Finance and Acc ISSUE: The Board of Directors has requested a review by District staf of suggestions made for direct notification of customers of franchise refuse collectors. 1. The refuse collector should be required to send notices to al their affected customers advising them in advance of a publi hearing to set refuse collection rates. BACKGROUND: In a letter received on April 10, 1990, Mr. Gary C Gallaher of 19 Valley Drive, Orinda, a customer of Orinda-Morag Disposal Service, Inc., suggested that the following sequence of action be taken in setting future collection rates. A copy of Mr. Gallaher' letter is appended to this position Paper. 2. Set a future effective date for the new collection rates. 3. The refuse collector should be required to send notices to al their affected customers advising them of the new rates i advance of the effective date of the change so they can make a informed decision about their purchase of the service. In the order of the suggestions stated above, the following provides description of the present procedures, the changes which would b required, and the expense to effect such changes: Notification of Public Hearings The District currently publishes notices of the public hearings, a which adjustments to refuse collection rates are to be considered, in the Contra Costa Times and community newspapers circulate within the three refuse collectors' zones. Addi tional notice often appear in the form of news articles in these newspapers. Th expense of these public notices is $1,000, and represents $.02 pe customer for each refuse collector. Direct notification of each residential and commercial customer can be accomplished by mailing postcard notices which indicate the percentage increase beinq requested, and the date, time and place REVIEWED AND RECOMMENtJED FOR BOARD ACTION -~ INITIATING DEPT/DIV. 1302A-9/85 SUBJEC'"ONSIDER SUGGESTIONS BY A CUSTOMER OF ORINDA- MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. FOR SENDING NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING COLLECTION RATES, AND OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED SCHEDULE OF RATES. POSITION PAPER 2 5 PAGE DATE OF April 27, 1990 of the public hearing. The city of Walnut Creek requires Valley Waste Management to notify residential customers within the city using such a direct mailing. The expense of the direct mailing for each franchised refuse collector and the expense per residential and commercial customer are summarized below: Total Expense Direct Mailinq Per Customer Expense Valley Waste Management Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal $ 6,800 2,500 .21 .24 200 $ $ $ .24 $ 9.500 An alternative means of direct notification of public hearings is provided by obtaining the agreement of the four affected cities to include an article in their quarterly publication to citizens. Set Future Effective Date for New Rates The District customarily sets new collection rates in the month of July to be effective July 1st, and follows a policy of limiting the effective date to be no earlier than the beginning of the month in which the Board action occurs. A retroactive rate increase component may appear on the customers' billing statement because each of the refuse collectors bills residential customers quarterly, in advance. Valley Waste Management and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal bill their residential customers on a calendar quarter basis. Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service bills its residential customers using three progressive quarterly cycles so that one-third of its customers are being billed each month. When the last mid-period rate increase was granted effective February 1, 1990, all of the residential customers of Valley Waste Management and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal and two-thirds of the Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service customers had already been billed for February in their last quarterly bills. Therefore, these customers were billed for the rate increase differential in their following quarterly bill. 13028-9/85 SUBJE<CONSIDER SUGGESTIONS BY A CUSTOMER OF ORINDA- MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. FOR SENDING NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING COLLECTION RATES, AND OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED SCHEDULE OF RATES. POSITION PAPER 3 5 PAGE DATE OF April 27, 1990 The problem of "retroactivity" was aggravated by the unique mid- period rate increase in February 1990. When rates are set with the usual July first effective date, Valley Waste Management and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal typically withhold sending their billing for the July quarter until the new rates are established; however, Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service will always have a retroactive component in two-thirds of its customers' billing statements because of its cycle-billing system. Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service anticipates conversion of its billing system to a computerized system during the next six months. Notification of New Rates in Advance of Effective Date Presently, Valley Waste Management and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal have the means of incorporating the notification of new rates effective July 1st on their computerized quarterly billing for the quarter beginning July. Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service currently prints separate rate charts which are enclosed with the quarterly billing statements. However, because of its cycle-billing system, two-thirds of its customers would receive notification of the new rates one or two months after the effective date of the rate increase. The expense of a direct mailing of the rate charts to all customers in July would be as summarized in the first preceding section. District staff Recommendations District staff recommends the following for the Board's consideration: Notification of Public Hearings In view of the extraordinarily high current collection rates, it is recommended that the refuse collectors not be required to incur direct mailing expenses as an added expense. Direct notification of the majority of customers can be achieved by inserting an article in the cities' newsletters as well as continuing the present public notice procedures. Set Future Effective Date For New Rates Retroactivity would be avoided by requiring Valley Waste Management and Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal to withhold sending the quarterly billing for the quarter beginning July until the new rates are set. If rates are set with an effective date other than July 1st, specific procedures will be established during the rate- 13028-9/85 SUBJEf:bNSIDER SUGGESTIONS BY A CUSTOMER OF ORINDA- MORAGA DISPOSAL SERVICE, INC. FOR SENDING NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING COLLECTION RATES, AND OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED SCHEDULE OF RATES. POSITION PAPER 4 5 PAGE DATE OF April 27, 1990 setting process so as to avoid a retroactive adjustment on customer billing statements. Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service should be required to convert its cycle-billing system to a common calendar quarter billing system when it automates its system during the next six months. Notification of New Rates in Advance of Effective Date Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service should be required to design the capability of including its rate schedule on its billing statement when conversion to an automated billing system occurs. At that time, it should be able to provide customers with the new rates on its July billing statement, as the other two collectors are now able to. RECOMMENDATION: Consider the information provided regarding suggestions made for direct notification to customers and provide District staff with comments and guidance. 1302B-9/85 19 Valley Drivt;; Orinda, CA, 94563 April 9, 1990 Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA, 94553 liilECfEUY!EID APR 10 1990 eCCSD C'~..~H!ty"'O:'" ", ~!~":"~e'f ~.........",. . Dear Board Members: This is to protest your approval of the most recent increase in the rates charged by the Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service. I have two complaints about your action. One, following a 25% increase last July, this the second increase in eight months. That is excessive. Two, it was done retroactively. That is my main complaint. On March 31, I received a notice that on February 22 you had authorized a rate increase effective February 1. That is totally inappropriate! How can you do that? How would you feel if, on March 31, a restaurant sent you a bill telling you that on February 22 they had raised the price on the dinner you had on February 1, so you owed them more money? That is just what you have done to your constituents. I suggest the following sequence for any future rate increases: 1. When you set a date for a Public Hearing for discussion of the proposed rate increase, require that the Disposal Company send notices to all their affected customers advising them IN ADVANCE of the Public Hearing. 2. If a you determine a rate increase is justified, set a FUTURE effective date. 3. Require that the Disposal Company send notices to all their affected customers advising them new rates IN ADVANCE OF the effective date of the change so they can make an informed decision about their "purchase" of the service. Thank you for considering my request. I would be very interested in your reaction and your plans for future rate increases. Sincerely, ~67~ Gary G. Gallaher cc: Orinda/Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. . Central Contra Costa Sanitary lJistrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 2 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Ma 3, 1990 NO. 5. SOLID WAS'IE b. SUBJECT DATE CANCEL PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR CONSENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE PLEASANT HILL BAYSHORE DISPOSAL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TO PLEASANT HILL BAYSHORE DISPOSAL, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF BROWNING-FERRIS INDUST A ril 27 1990 TYPE OF ACTION CANCEL PUBLIC HEARING SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Walter N. Funasaki . Administrative/Finance and . ISSUE: Due to non-receipt of information necessary to consider the request for consent to the assignment of the Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal franchise agreement, the public hearing scheduled to be held on April 19, 1990, and continued to May 3, 1990, should be canceled. BACKGROUND: On March 7, 1990, Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, a sole proprietorship, requested the consent of the Board of Directors to the assignment of its franchise agreement to Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc., a California corporation. The majority interest in the new corporation is to be owned by Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. (BFI). Information similar to that which was provided when the assignment of the Valley Disposal Service, Inc., franchise agreement was considered in 1987 was requested to be obtained from Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal by April 4, 1990. A public hearing was set to be held on April 19, 1990 to consider the assignment request. As the requested information was not received by April 4, 1990, District staff contacted Mr. Tom Bruen, attorney for BFI, who indicated that the information would be provided at a later date because certain information needed to be obtained from BFI's home office. At the April 19, 1990 Board Meeting, the scheduled public hearing was continued to May 3, 1990. As the requested information has still not been provided, the continued public hearing should be canceled. Noncompliance with Franchise Agreement After requesting an extension of the March 31, 1990 due date, and obtaining an extension to April 9, 1990 for submission of its refuse collection rate application, Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal did not file an application by the extended due date. Therefore, no rate application for the July 1, 1990 - June 30, 1991 rate year is under consideration by the District. However, under the terms of the franchise agreement, the results of operations of the preceding rate year are required to be reported annually by March 31; such results of INITIATING DEPT./DIV. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1302A-9/B5 WNF PM SUBJECT CANCEL PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR CONSENT TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE PLEASANT HILL BAYSHORE DISPOSAL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TO PLEASANT HILL BAYSHORE DISPOSAL, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES POSITION PAPER PAGE ? OF., DATE April 27, 1990 operations have not been submitted to-date. Addi tionally , the separate operating results of the recycling program during the preceding rate year have also not been submitted to-date. Following the rate increase approved by the Board effective February 1, 1990, District staff has attempted to obtain compliance with the requirement for notification to customers of the new collection rates. Notification to customers of the new commercial rates has been completed; however, notification to residential customers has still not occurred. The foregoing constitute breaches of franchise agreement provisions and have been brought to the refuse collector's attention by certified letter. It is unlikely that the information related to the requested assignment of the franchise agreement will be received in time for consideration at the second Board Meeting in May. In view of the demands on the District's staff time during June involving the District budgets and refuse collection rate hearings, and the anticipated need to review areas of noncompliance, as described above, during the consideration of the requested assignment, District staff recommends consideration of the assignment occur no sooner than the second Board Meeting in July 1990. RECOMMENDATION: Cancel the public hearing which was continued to May 3, 1990 from April 19, 1990 to consider the request of Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, a sole proprietorship, for consent to the assignment of its franchise agreement to Pleasant Hill Bayshore Disposal, Inc. 13028-9/85 . Centrac ':ontra Costa Sanitar) listrict BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Ma 3 1990 NO. 6. ENGINEERING a. SUBJECT AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., FOR SLUDGE DRYER PILOT PROGRAM CONSULTING SERVICES (DP 20104) DATE A ril 27, 1990 TYPE OF ACTION AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Bert Michalczyk Senior Engineer INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. Engineering Department/ Planning Division ISSUE: Board authorization is required for the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a consulting services agreement for more than $50,000. BACKGROUND: The Solids Handling Facilities Plan recently completed by James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc./Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. (JMM/CDM), recommended that two-incinerator operation remains as the long-term primary means of solids handling. The Facilities Plan also recommended that emergency sludge disposal backup be provided in the event of the failure or planned maintenance of one incinerator. (A staff presentation on the Solids Handling Facilities Plan will be made at the Board meeting). Sludge disposal backup could be provided by a thermal drying system. Thermal drying appears to be the District's most attractive alternative for future solids handling. This is based on the possibility that thermal drying could be used either as emergency back- up or as an ongoing or seasonal operation to produce a fertilizer product. Thermal drying would be used to increase the sludge solids content to above 50 percent for emergency disposal at a landfill. While thermal drying is in widespread use in Europe and Japan, there has been little experience with this technology in the united states until very recently. Consequently, there are many questions concerning its practicality. For example, it is not known whether the temperature and the detention time inside the dryer are adequate to achieve the pathogen kill requirements. Other important concerns include developing design parameters for CCCSD's sludge, evaluating the dryers on waste-activated sludge to determine if a marketable fertilizer product can be produced, and whether or not dust or odors will be a problem. To resolve these concerns, a pilot study is recommended. If the thermal drying technology does not prove to be applicable, the District could be forced to rely on lime stabilization of sludge as the only backup in the case of incinerator failure. Lime stabilization may not remain an adequate sludge stabilization technology in the future. If lime stabilization proves to be nonviable, then the District would probably be forced to abandon incineration and go to anaerobic digestion coupled with sludge reuse (composting or land application). The anaerobic digestion/reuse alternative is the most expensive future RAB REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIATING DEPT.lDIV. 1302A-::;S /' BM JAL JMK !fJf> J;,tK SUBJECT POSITION PAPER AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., FOR SLUDGE DRYER PILOT PROGRAM CONSULTING SERVICES (DP 20104) PAGE 2 DATE April 27, 1990 OF 4 solids handling alternative, hence staff's desire to assess the viability of thermal drying as a back-up process to incineration. District staff has negotiated a contract with James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. (JMM) to plan and conduct the sludge dryer pilot study. JMM is recommended for this project because of their previous experience on a similar project with the City of Los Angeles, Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant and their satisfactory work on the Solids Handling Facilities Plan. The scope of this project consists of four distinct phases: (I) pilot Program Design and Preparation, (II) Evaluation of Alternative Sludge Drying Equipment, (III) pilot Testing, and (IV) Evaluation of Results. The estimated cost of Phases I and II is $100,000, including a contract with JMM for $90,000 (see Attachment A), with a scheduled completion date of June 18, 1990. Upon completion of Phases I and II, Phases III and IV would begin with a scheduled completion date of March, 1991. The overall cost of this project including consultant fee, pilot equipment rental, District project management, and pilot study is estimated to be $300,000 (see Attachment B). Funds are available in the FY 1989-90 Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) under project title, "Solids Treatment Facilities Improvements" (pages TP-33 through TP-35). This project has been evaluated by staff and determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under District CEQA Guidelines Section 17.3, since it involves a feasibility study for possible future actions. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engineer to execute a consulting Services Agreement with James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc., to initiate pilot testing of Sludge Dryers. --------- 13028-9/85 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT SLUDGE DRYER PROJECT ATTACHMENT A - ESTIMATED COSTS FOR PHASES I , II ESTIMATED COSTS FOR PHASES I & II ITEM PHASE COST Consultant - pilot Program Design & Preparation I $55,000 Consultant - Alternative Drying Equipment Evaluation II 35.000 Consultant Subtotal: District Force Account I & II 10.000 Estimated Total Cost: I & II Page 3 of 4 TOTAL $ .90,000 10.000 $100,000 Page 4 of 4 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT SLUDGE DRYER PROJECT ATTACHMENT B - ESTIMATED OVERALL PROJECT COST ESTIMATED OVERALL PROJECT COST PHASE I and II ITEM COST TOTAL pilot Program Design & Evaluation of Alternative Sludge Drying Equipment Consultant Fee $ 90,000 Project Management 10.000 SUB-TOTAL $100,000 Pilot Testing Consultant Fee $ 45,000 pilot Equipment Rental 45,000 Analytical Costs 20,000 District Force Acct. 35.000 SUB-TOTAL $145,000 Evaluation of Results Consultant Fee $ 45,000 Dist. Force Account 10.000 SUB-TOTAL $ 55.000 ESTIMATED TOTAL COST $300.000 III IV I THRU IV _.,......._-~'----_._--_..,._.,...._-----_._._-".._-_.," --,.-..---.'.-..-.-......------.-----., 0'_' .---....- -,-,-..<..._._' __ _,' __."___.__._._.._.._......_....___._ _.___,,,_,.,,__,.._~_._____ ..,.,_~___,w.,. ,,_,_ .,~_'__'_..'"_W____'__.~..__.._._"._'______,_..____ . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 4 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETIN~y 3, 1990 NO. 6. ENGINEERING b. DATE April 27, 1990 SUBJECT ADOPT RESOLUTIONS WHICH DECLARE THAT THE DISTRICT HAS RIGHTS TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE EXISTING SEWER PIPELINES ACROSS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 271-150-002, 271-150-003, AND 271-150-004 TYPE OF ACTION PROTECT DISTRICT EASEMENT RIGHTS SUBMITTED BY Jay McCoy INITIATING DEPT/DIV. Engineeri~g De~a:t~ent/ ISSUE: The District can further establish its easement rights by recording easement declarations. BACKGROUND: A landslide damaged an existing public sewer located off Donna Maria Way in Orinda in 1983. The District installed a temporary sewer pipeline immediately after the landslide and has been maintaining that temporary pipeline since that time. In the evaluation of the damaged sewer, District staff determined that the District does not have a recorded sewer easement for the sewer pipeline in question. However, staff has been in contact with the owners of the subject properties since 1983 for the purpose of discussing al ternati ve repair or rerouting proj ects. The current owners have been well aware of the existence of a sewer pipeline easement since 1983. Therefore, the District contends that it has established prescriptive easement rights over this sanitary sewer pipeline. District staff has discussed, since 1983, various sewer repair alternatives with Mr. Herschel Claxton, owner of the property where the landslide occurred. Staff has been unable to reach an agreement with Mr. Claxton to mutually resolve the problem. Sometime in 1986, the District was made aware that Mr. Claxton had proposed a subdivision of his property. The City of Orinda was notified in writing that sewer service to Mr. Claxton's property is not guaranteed and, therefore, the District will look unfavorably on the development of this property with respect to sewer service availabili ty . Mr. Claxton is still attempting to subdivide the property. District Counsel has advised that the District can further perfect its easement rights by giving legal notice to potential purchasers of land where the pipeline is located. This fact is especially important because Mr. Claxton may sell his property before or after the subdivision process is completed. / REVIEWED AND RiCOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION RAB ~ SUBJECT ADOPT RESOLUTIONS WHICH DECLARE THAT THE DISTRICT HAS RIGHTS TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE EXISTING SEWER PIPELINES ACROSS ASSESSOR's PARCEL NOS. 271-150-002, 271-150-003, AND 271-150-004 POSITION PAPER PAGE DATE 2 OF 4 April 27, 1990 The District has given notice to potential purchasers in the past by recording an easement declaration. This previous declaration was a two page document which identif ied the properties where sewers existed wi th no formally recorded easements. It further gave a general location of the pipelines and stated that the District had rights to maintain and operate the pipelines. If a future easement declaration is recorded, title companies will note the existence of the declaration in their title searches. The declaration will appear in the title reports which are furnished to purchasers of property. The purchasers will be thus given notice of the District's pipelines and rights to maintain and operate said pipelines. It is proposed that the District file easement declarations on each of the three properties along Donna Maria Way in which the existing pipeline is located. Through this process, the District will be assured that any new owner will take ownership with notice of the District's easement rights. Moreover, staff will continue to work with the City of Orinda to establish easement rights through the subdivision map approval process if Mr. Claxton continues to pursue the sUbdividing of his property. Staff has notified the three property owners by letter that the Board will be considering the proposed action on May 3. Mr. Claxton has responded to this notice. His response is attached. No other responses have been received to date. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolutions which declare that the District has rights to maintain and operate existing sanitary sewer pipelines in and across Accessor's Parcel Nos. 271-150-002, 271-150-003, and 271-150-004. 13028-9/85 HARRIS 271-150-004 -; / ..SABARESE 271-150-003 -~ '" '" "'=-- ""'=......~:::::-... "'=-- ~~ ~"'- REY SCHOOL =-- -- DEL CLAXTON 271-150-002 / Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ~ EASEMENT DECLARATIONS 2523-9/88 H. D. Claxton 24 Adobe LaneOrinda, California 94563 March 25, 1990 Mr. Jay S. McCOy, Construction DMsion Manager Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, California 94553-4392 Dear Mr. McCoy Thank You for your letter dated April 19, 1990 which I received on April 24, 1990 concerning the district's contemplated action of adopting a resolution to record an easement across my property near Donna Maria Way and your prompt return call today. This letter is to confirm my comments to you during that telephone conversation. At different times in the past the district has made proposals concerning relocating sewer service provided to the houses adjacent to my parcel, but no satisfactory resolution of any proposal has been reached. I have suggested that sewer service might be more effectively provided to these residences and in addition allowance made for future development of the parcels on both sides of the Donna Maria Cul-de+sacs by locating the service in a different manner. As the property owner of the parcels on both sides of Donna Maria Way, I have a direct interest in effective provision of service to these parcels and I feel that the District has a financial interest in providing effective efficient service at the lowest possible overall cost. Consequently I feel a cooperative approach will be most beneficial. I am opposed to the district recording the proposed easement at this time because i1 appears to impose limitations on any development of the property, but I have not fully assessed the impact of such an easement, nor do I have adequate information with which to address any proposed alternatives. Perhaps some exchange of information between your office and me could be mutually beneficial. Cordially. Herschel D. Claxton Telephone (415)376-8067 FAX (415)376-3345 . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS PAGE 1 OF 1 POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETING OF Ma 3, 1990 NO. 9. BUOOEI' AND FINANCE a. SUBJECT DATE RECEIVE THE 1990-1991 EQUIPMENT BUDGET FOR REVIEW A ril 27 1990 TYPE OF ACTION RECEIVE EQUIPMENT BUDGET SUBMITTED BY INITIATING DEPT IDIV Administrative/Finance and . Walter N. Funasaki ISSUE: The 1990-1991 Equipment Budget is submitted for review. BACKGROUND: The 1990-1991 Equipment Budget is transmitted herewith. A list of all equipment items requested by each department, categorized by functional classification, is supported by a descriptive sheet which provides justification for each item. A comparative summary of the Equipment Budget by department for the 1990-1991 and four prior fiscal years is provided. The Equipment Budget was reviewed by the Board Capital Projects Committee on April 20, 1990. As a result of discussion between the Committee and District staff, the following changes were made to the budget document: 1. The justification for the purchase of the Wellness Program equipment at an estimated cost of $25,000 was expanded to include the proviso that the Board will be advised of the specific equipment recommended by the program provider before acquisition. 2. A 35mm camera and accessory equipment, at a cost of $552, were removed from the equipment budget. The 1990-1991 Equipment Budget is submitted for initial review by the full Board at this time, and is scheduled for approval at the next Board Meeting on May 17, 1990. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the 1990-1991 Equipment Budget for review, and provide District staff with comments and guidance. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV. ~-~. 1302A-9/85 WNF PM