HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA BACKUP 10-16-86
.
Centr, Contra Costa Sanitar District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 21
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16, 1986
NO.
IV.
HEARINGS
1
SUBJECT
DATE
October 14, 1986
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER CERTIFICATION
OF THE FINAL EIR FOR THE SAN RAMON V ALLEY SEWER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 4224
TYPE OF ACTION
CONDUCT HEARING
PROVIDE DIRECTION
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS
Iw.lIIAJING DEIi'T.lDIIJ.. tm t/
cnglneerlng uepar en
Engineering Division
S~~~i,~B~. Swanson
Principal Engineer
ISSUE: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
District Code, the Final EIR for the San Ramon Valley Sewer Improvement Project
must be certified as being legally adequate before the Board of Directors can
consider approval of the project. Board decisions and direction are necessary on
the proj ect al ternative and impact miti gati on measures.
BACKGROUND: The existing trunk sewer serving the San Ramon Valley is nearing
capaci ty as a resul t of commerci al and resi denti al grOtlth, as well as i ncreasi ng
infiltration during wet weather. The District initiated planning studies in 1984
for a new trunk sewer to supplement the existing sewer which varies in size from
15 to 36 inches. The principal objectives of the studies were to determine the
alignment and size of a new trunk sewer. Based on the planning studies, including
the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and publ ic comments, District staff
recommends that a new trunk sewer rangi ng in size from 48 to 60 inches be
constructed along the former Southern Pacific Rail road ri ght-of-way from Larw in
Pump Station in San Ramon to Rudgear Road in Walnut Creek. The trunk sewer would
be sized according to new wet weather infiltration criteria developed as part of
the District Collection System Master Plan and a projected ultimate population of
115,200 in the San Ramon Valley (GrOtlth Scenario 3 in the EIR). In the 50-foot
wide right-of-way through Danville (13,600 feet), District staff recommends that
the sewer be designed based on an ultimate population of 142,000 (GrOtlth Scenario
4) because of space limitations for constructing a future sewer.
Before the proj ect can be constructed, the Board of Di rectors must take the
following three actions:
1. Certify the adequacy of the Final EIR.
2. Approve the San Ramon Vall ey Sewer Improvement Proj ect.
3. Adopt findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations for the San
Ramon Vall ey Sewer Improvement Proj ect.
Certification of Final EIR
As part of the planning process for any new facil ity which may have a significant
environmental impact, the District must prepare an EIR that conforms to guidelines
J /vt I(
jftB
1302A..9/65
CWS
JMK
RAB
SUBJECT
POSITION PAPER
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER CERTIFICATION
OF THE FINAL EIR FOR THE SAN RAMON V ALLEY SEWER
IMPROVEMENT PROJ ECT, DISTRICT PROJ ECT 4224
PAGE 2
OF 21
DATE
October 14, 1986
established by the District pursuant to GEQA. Before approving a project, the
Board of Directors must first certify that the EIR is legally adequate.
The Final EIR for the project consists of two documents: the Draft EIR dated June
1986 and the Fi nal EIR dated September 1986. Both documents were prepared by
Environmental Science Associates based on GEQA and District EIR guidelines.
The District completed a Draft EIR for the project in June 1986. This Draft EIR
was distributed to state and local government agencies that might be affected by
the project. Draft EIR's were also sent to community or special interest groups
that expressed an interest in the project. Summaries of the EIR were sent to all
local officials and other community groups that were identified during the public
participation portion of the project planning process. A public hearing to
receive comments was held in Danville on July 23, 1986. A transcript was made of
the hearing and is included in the Final EIR. Responses to the comments made at
the heari ng have al so been i ncl uded in the Fi nal EIR. Written comments were
received fran seven agenci es, groups, or ci tizens duri ng the comment peri od for
the Draft EIR. These comments, along with responses, appear in the Final EIR.
Approve Proj ect and Adopt Fi ndi nqs of Fact
Before approval of the project, the Board needs to decide on the project
alternative and measures to mitigate the impacts of the project. Specific issues
regarding the project and the impact mitigation measures are presented in
Attachment 1. The EIR proposes many mitigation measures for project construction
impacts that have become standa rd procedures for the Di stri ct. These "standa rd"
mitigation measures are listed in Attachment 2. Staff proposes to implement these
measures unless otherwise directed by the Board.
A publ ic hearing will be conducted on October 16, 1986, to receive publ ic input
regarding certification of the Final EIR and approval of the project. Following
the hearing it is requested that the Board provide direction to staff on selection
of the project alternative and preparation of the findings of fact regarding the
project. This can be accomplished by approving the recommendations contained in
Attachment 1. After the Board provides direction, the certification of the Final
EIR and a resolution of intent to approve the project subsequent to adoption of
findings are to be considered. The resolutions (Attachments 3 and 4) are attached
for the Board's review.
Staff proposes that the Board consider approval of the project and adoption of the
findings of fact and statement of overriding consideration at a special meeting on
October 28, 1986.
---------..
13028-9/85
SUBJECT
POSITION PAPER
CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER CERTIFICATION
OF THE FINAL EIR FOR THE SAN RAMON V ALLEY SEWER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, DISTRICT PROJECT 4224
PAGE 3
DATE
OF 21
October 14, 1986
RECOMMENDATION:
o Conduct a hearing to receive comments on certification of the EIR and approval
of the proj ect.
o Approve the recommendations contained in Attachment 1 which will provide
direction to staff for selecting the project alternative and preparing the
findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations for the following
maj or proj ect el ements and the impact miti gati on measures:
1. Consider whether to delay certification of EIR.
2. Decide sewer alignment through downtown Danville.
3. Decide sewer sizing.
4. Deci de sewer s i zing th rough Danv ill e.
5. Tunneling and jacking vs. open trench construction under major roads
except for San Ramon Valley Blvd. and Sycamore Valley Road, which will be
tunnel ed.
6. Decide extent of the recreational trail restoration.
7. Decide how the project accommodates hanes that are currently on septic
tanks.
8. Decide the scope of the public information program during design and
constructi on.
9. Decide whether the standard mitigation measures presented in Attachment 2
are acceptabl e.
o Adopt the attached resolutions certifying that the Final EIR is legally
adeq uate and stati ng the Board's intent to approve the proj ect subsequent to
the preparation of findings.
--------..
13026-9/85
ATT ACHr-ENT 1
SAN RAK)N VALLEY SEWER IMPROVE~NT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT ELEMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 1
1. ISSUE: Delay Certification of the EIR
BACKGROUND: Comments were received requesting the District to delay
certification of the EIR (1) to allow coordination with possible
projects being considered by other agencies, and (2) until LAFCO
determi nes the future boundary of the Di strict service area or more
complete growth scenarios are developed by the city and county
general plan process.
Certification of the EIR and approval of the trunk sewer project are
two separate actions that the Board must take. Certification of the
EIR will not preclude the Board from deciding to delay the project
in the future. The EIR is based on a specific project to accomplish
specific objectives. Changing the project to incorporate other
agencies' projects may necessitate an amendment to the EIR or a
completely new EIR, including a public review process.
Delaying the project as a result of delaying certification of the
EIR may result in sewage overflows from the existing trunk sewer
duri ng wet weather or an increase in the cost of the trunk sewer
project due to planned construction of buildings and utilities by
other agencies that will make sewer construction more difficult.
RECOMMENDATION: Certify the EIR.
-4-
ATTACH~NT 1
SAN RAfv()N V ALLEY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT ELE~NTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 2
2. ISSUE: Sewer Alignment Through Downtown Danvil1 e.
BACKGROUND: The preferred alignment for the proposed trunk sewer is
the former Southern Pacific railroad right-Of-way. The District has
taken actions to reserve easements in the ri ght-of-way to all ow for
thi s sewer alignment. For all intents, these easements are
exc1 usive in the sense that other permanent subsurface or surface
structures are not allowed in the easements without District
permission. The District was unable to secure similar easements
through the former railroad station site in downtown Danvi11e
(approximately 1,500 feet in length). In this area, the District
must share the easements for the proposed County transit system.
ALTERNATIVES: Four alternative alignments were evaluated (see
Figure 1). Two of the a1 ternatives, E1 Dorado Street and Hartz
Avenue, are recommendations rejected by staff because of impacts on
businesses and residences as well as higher construction costs. The
two vi ab1 e a1 ternatives are along Rail road Avenue and under the
County transit easement along the westerly 30 feet of the rai 1 road
station site. The construction cost and constraints of these two
alignments are:
Railroad Avenue Alignment
o Construction Cost - $1,300,000 to $1,500,000
o High construction costs because of proximity to EBt.tJD water
main
o Widening and resurfacing of Railroad Avenue will be required
o More utilities with which to contend
o More construction impacts to the community
County Transit Easement Alignment (Southern Pacific Trans. Co.
Right-of-Way)
o Construction cost - $900,000
o Must pass under existing building that will eventually be
removed
o Access to the sewer may be limited if the transit system is
imp1 emented
o Special design considerations to address limited pipe access
RECOMMENDATION: Se1 ect the County transit easement as the trunk
sewer alignment because of lower construction costs and reduced
impacts to the community.
-5-
U SAkATOGA
1i~L.L.E'(
::: ,~~,,,
EI Dorado Ave.
S. P. T. C. (Transit Easement)
Railroad Ave.
Hartz Ave.
APTS.
~.~
L"
I...'
~ :
':'::.
..
..
. .~....
............
.... ......J
~ \, \,,, \\/
Figure 1
\' ,\ \, \\ ~
\\ \\ \\ \\
\ \ \ \ \\
\ \ \ \. .. .
.' ~ ,", ~
../\,_ _~,._. 'h
~ ~.~
, ,
\:G'"
II
'I
II
\
I
l: I;'
'1 II
/" ,I
, I I
\\ ~ ~ /I~//
\ \, I I'
\ \ . I
\' I,'
'I "
I I ,I
\'1 11,1
,\I J '1/1
\1101/,
IICD; I
I t \DIll
I' '
I I
~I
II II
II 'i
II I
I'
II
II
! I
II
II I
Ii! I
II ! I
II II
II II
II~il
113T
11~li
II~i I
I~II
i~
I 11 ~
UJ
J7,
II.
CHARLOTTE WOOD
SCHOOL
..."
.~
10.'
... 10'
,0'
,~,
I.)' t ,..,.
xu "..
AVE
'of
~~ ~I
".oc
410'
"1)' .0
.t/OH '0
'0'
"0
'0
~-----1
t-.-.-.-.-.,
1- - - -~
(:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;:;1
01.'"
uo
..(1
\ ,.'
"
I,
I,
. l
4'
[I]
ATTACHMENT 1
SAN RAp.{)N VALLEY SEWER IMPROVE~NT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT EL EMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 3
3. ISSUE: Sewer Sizing
BACKGROUND: When the Draft EIR was prepared, staff had not yet
determined a recommended sewer size. Staff recommends that the size
of the trunk sewer be based on the most reasonab1 e u1 timate growth
projection for the San Ramon Valley. Staff recommends the proposed
trunk sewer be designed to provide sufficient long-term capacity, on
the order of 50 years, to avoi d the need to construct a para11 e1
trunk sewer in a lesser time frame. Future construction wou1 d be
dffficu1t and expensive because there are few remaining a1 ignments
that are suitab1 e for grav ity sewers. Recommendati on of a sewer
size was deferred until comments were received on the four possib1 e
growth scenarios presented in the Draft EIR.
AL TERNATIV ES: Four popu1 ati on growth scena ri os were developed by
the EIR consultant with input from District staff, County staff,
Danvf11e staff, San Ramon staff, and developers. The EIR growth
scenarios were developed in preference to reliance on general plans
because the current general p1 ans for the area do not correspond
with the 50-year design life. Growth scenarios were developed
based in part on recent court decisions that require an analysis of
the impacts of all "reasonably foreseeab1 e probab1 e future
projects." This has been interpreted to include developer
proposal s, even if no formal appl icati ons have been ffl ed. The
four scenarios are:
GROWTH
SCENARIO
DESCRIPTION
UL TIMATE
POPULATION
SEWER
SIZE
CONSTRUCTION
COST
(MILLIONS)
Current
55,900
1
Ex. Service Area
Area Based on ABH3
89,500
48"
$26 .0
2
No. 1 + Dougherty
V1y. & West Side
104,000
54"
$28.5
3
No. 2 + Gumpert
Ranch
115,000
54"
$28.5
4
No. 3 at Higher
Density
142,200
60"
$31 . 0
- 7 -
The difference between the four growth scenarios is primarily the
assumptions made about growth occurring in the Dougherty Valley areas
(Gale and Gumpert Ranches). This area is currently under the County
General Plan which zones this area as agricultural preserve. The
City of San Ramon has undertaken studies to amend its General Pl an.
These stud1 es assume that the Gal e and Gumpert Ranch areas w 11 1
become part of San Ramon and have estimated popul at10ns for these
areas. Growth scenarios 2 and 3 were based on the City of San Ramon
preliminary population estimates available at the time of preparation
of the Draft EIR. These estimates have and w 11 1 conti nue to change
as San Ramon revises its General Plan; however, these changes will
not affect sewer size in the ranges be1 ng cons1 dered.
Sizing the sewer for growth scenarios 2, 3, or 4 is defined by CEQA
as growth induc1 ng because present city and county general pl ans do
not account for growth in areas of the valley that are included in
these three growth scenarios.
It shoul d be noted that sel ect10n of a part1cul ar growth scenario is
intended to be for facilities planning purposes only. The District
is not a land use planning agency. It is not adopting nor
recommending that planning agencies adopt a particular growth
scenario nor advocating development.
Most of the comments received on the Draft EIR suggested that the
District construct the sewer assuming the highest reasonable
population growth so that impacts from construction of future sewers
can be avoided. The City of Danv1lle commented that the entire sewer
should be designed based on growth scenario 4 and, at the very least,
that the sect 1 on of sewer through downtown Danv1ll e be based on
growth scenario 4. People for Open Space commented that the trunk
sewer should accommodate growth planned by the cities and county and,
therefore, should be sized based on growth scenario 1.
RECOMMENDATION: Select growth scenario 3 as the population basis for
sizing the trunk sewer. Staff believes that within the SO-year
design life of the trunk sewer that development wl1l occur in the
Dougherty Valley areas. The population projections for growth
scenario 3 are more reasonable than those of growth scenario 4.
(Selection of growth scenario 3 is defined as growth inducing by CEQA
because it removes an obstacl e (e. g. trunk sewer capacity) to the
development of the Dougherty Valley. Growth in the Dougherty Valley
is not included in the current general plans for the area.)
-8-
ATT ACHr-ENT 1
SAN RAMON V All EY SEW ER IMPROV EMENT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT EL EMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION r-EASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 4
4. ISSUE: Size of Sewer Through Danvl1 1 e
BACKGROUND: The City of Danvl1 1 e requested that the Di stri ct size
the proposed trunk sewer through Danville based on growth scenario 4,
the highest population projection. Danvl1le's objective is to avoid
the traffic disruption and other problems associated with
constructi on of another trunk sewer through thei r commun ity. The
City contends that the possible growth inducing impacts of oversizing
the sewer are more acceptabl e than the construction impacts of a
possibl e future trunk sewer. Since future upstream and downstream
parall el sewers woul d have to be constructed for the additional
capacity of the proposed scenario 4 sewer in Danvl1le to be real ized,
future decision makers will have the opportunity to decide whether or
not to take advantage of the increased capacity in the Danvl1 1 e
segment of the San Ramon trunk sewer.
ALTERNATIVES: Basing the sewer design on growth scenario 4 would
increase the size of the sewer by one pipe size over that required
for growth scenario 3 (60-inch pipe instead of 54-inch). The
additi onal cost of increasi ng the pi pe size is $35 per foot. The
capacity of a 60-inch sewer is 23 percent greater than a 54-inch
sewer. There are two secti ons of the sewer al ignment where it mi ght
be desirable to increase the pipe size because of future construction
difficulties. These sections and the related costs are:
DESCRIPTION
LENGllI
INCREMENTAL
COST
San Ramon Valley Blvd. to Love Lane -
bypasses the business district of
Danvl1 1 e
3,500 ft.
$200,000
San Ramon Valley Blvd. to Stone Valley
Road - the 50-foot-wide section of the
railroad rioht-of-wav
13 ,600 ft.
$600,000
RECOMtJENDATION: Staff recommends that the sewer be sized for growth
scenari 0 4 for the enti re 50-foot-wide secti on of the ral1 road
right-of-way <13,600 feet). This recommendation is based on the
difficulty of trying to construct a future trunk sewer in the
remaining portion of this narrow right-of-way. The incremental cost
of $600,000 is approximately 2 percent of the $28.5 million
construction cost.
-9-
ATTACH~NT 1
SAN RAKlN VALLEY SEWER IMPROVEt.'CNT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT ELEMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION ~ASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 5
5. ISSUE: Tunnel ing or Jacking vs. Open Trenching Across Roadways
BACKGROUND: Use of the tunnel ing construction technique to cross
Sycamore Valley Road and San Ramon Valley Blvd. is specified in the
EIR. All other street crossings are specified for the open trenching
construction technique.
The City of San Ramon has formally requested tunnel ing under all of
its streets. The District plans to hire a traffic consultant during
the design phase of the project to evaluate the traffic level of
service designation which will result on the major street crossings
as a result of using the open trenching method. The traffic
consultant will also determine if detours are feasible. If the
traffic level of service analysis shows that the traffic impacts of a
sewer trench construction would be unacceptable or if detours are not
feasible, the consultant can recommend the use of the tunneling or
jacking method in lieu of the open trenching method specified for
some additional roadways.
Staff has prepared the following cost estimate which shows the
additional cost to use the tunnel ing method over the open trenching
method at the following road crossings:
S1REET
LENGTH
COST
-
Danville at Rudgear Road
Crow Canyon
Norri s Canyon
Boll inger Canyon
Fostori a
Montevideo
Hemme
Del Ami go
1 10ft.
140 ft.
1 10ft.
1 10ft.
70 ft.
100 ft.
70 ft.
70 ft.
$100,000
$125,000
$100,000
$100,000
$ 70,000
$ 92,000
$ 70,000
$ 70,000
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the decision whether or not to
tunnel and jack under the streets 1 isted above be deferred pending
the outcome of a traffic study.
-10-
ATTACHMENT 1
SAN RAK>N V AlLEY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT EL EMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 6
6. ISSUE: Recreational Trail Along Right-of-Way
BACKGROUND: Several commenters asked the District to provide a
hardtop trail from Rudgear Road south to the Danville railroad
station after construction. The commenters stated that providing the
hardtop trail could be considered a mitigation measure for the dust,
noise, and general inconvenience during construction.
The trail between Rudgear Road and the Danvill e rail road station is
approximately six mil es. Many local resi dents use the trail as an
alternate means of going to downtown Danville. In addition, two
miles of the right-of-way south of Danville between San Ramon Valley
Road and San Ramon Creek are used as a trail by local resi dents and
school children.
At the present time, five mil es of the trail is covered with gravel
only, left over from Southern Pacific operations, and the remaining
three miles of the trail in this area was covered with road oil and
gravel by EBp.uD.
Staff has prepared the following range of cost estimates to provide a
road and oil or a hardtop trail from Rudgear Road south to St. James
Court. Thi s area corresponds with the fi rst two phases of the
proposed project. The estimated cost ranges are as follows:
SECTION 1
PROSPECT AVE.-
STONE V ALLEY
SECTION 2
STONE VALLEY RD.-
RJDGEAR RD.
ROAD OIL & GRAVa
$ 72,000-$109,000
HARDTOP TRAIL
$145,000-$290,000
DISTANCE
2.8 mil es
$ 62,500-$ 94,000
$125,000-$250,000
2.4 mil es
SECTION 3
ST. JAMES CT.-
PROSPECT AV E.
$ 55,000-$ 83,000
$110,000-$220,000
2.1 miles
TOTAL
$189,500-$386,000
$380,000-$760,000
7.3 mil es
RECOMMENDATION: Staff's standard operating procedure is to recommend
in-kind replacement. The Board may wish to consider upgrading the
trafl as a mftfgatfon measure. Staff would recommend that the trafl
only be upgraded if the County or some other public agency agrees to
accept responsibility for operation and maintenance of the trail.
-11-
ATT ACHP-ENT 1
SAN RAMON VALLEY SEWER IMPROVE~NT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT ELEMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION ~ASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 7
7. ISSUE: Septic Tank Accommodation
BACKGROUND: District staff received several inquiries from residents
1 iving near the right-of-way who are currently serviced by septic
tanks as to how they coul d be connected to the new sewer pipe. In
addition, commenters at the publ ic hearing asked the District to
contact septic tank service resi dents to inform them on a means to
connect to the sewer.
Staff estimates that approximately 460 househol ds in the vicinity of
the ri ght-of-way are currently serviced by septic tanks. A Local
Improvement District (LID) could be formed to connect the households
currently serviced by septic tanks to the District's sewerage system.
As a mitigation measure, the District could modify the design of the
trunk sewer to facil itate future connection by househol ds currently
served by septic tanks. These modifications would involve special
placement of manholes and the construction of short pipe stub outs to
accommodate future main line connections. The cost for these
modifications would be approximately $45,000.
RECOMMENDATION: Modify trunk sewer design to facilitate future
connection by adj acent houses currently served by septic tanks.
Conduct a notification program to communicate these measures to the
appropriate residents.
-12-
ATTACH~NT 1
SAN RAK>N VALLEY SEWER IMPROVE~NT PROJ ECT
PROJ ECT ELEMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 8
8. ISSUE: Public Information Program During Construction
BACKGROUND: A maj or concern expressed by c1t1 es, the bus 1 ness
community, and local residents was the need for an effective public
information program during construction. Almost everyone staff met
was extremely sensitive to public sector construction after the1 r
recent experience with previous utility construction in the area.
The following elements of a public information program have been
suggested:
o Notify all business and property owners (commercial and
residential> in advance of construction schedules.
o Notify resi dents along right-of-way as to when they can expect
project construction activities.
o Provide advance notice of construction to residents, schools,
offices, and commercial/retail establishments located within
several hundred fee of the right-of-way.
o Notify all properties in advance if any trees on the1 r property
or overhanging their property must be removed or pruned.
o Provide adequate public notification of construction activity,
including any applicable detour routing.
o Notify neighborhoods in advance of upcoming construction, both
via direct contact (e.g. mail notice> and signs posted in public
areas along the construction route.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funds be included in the San Ramon
trunk project to conduct an effective public information program
during the design and construction phases of the project. An
approximate cost for the recommended publ ic information program is
$40,000.
-13-
ATT ACHfJENT 1
SAN RAmN VAlLEY SEWER IMPROVE~NT PROJECT
PROJECT ELEMENTS AND IMPACT MITIGATION fJEASURES
FOR WHICH BOARD DIRECTION IS REQUESTED
BOARD DECISION NO. 9
9. ISSUE: Inclusion of "Standard" Mitigation Measures in the Project.
BACKGROUND: The EIR proposed many mitigation measures for
construction impacts that are standard procedures for District
projects. These measures are listed in Attachment 2.
RECOMMENDATION: No action required. Staff will include the
mitigation measures listed in Attachment 2 unless otherwise directed
by the Board.
-14-
Attachment 2
STANDARD MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE INCORPORATED
INTO SAN RAK>N V ALLEY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJ ECT
The EIR for the San Ramon Valley Sewer Improvanent Project identified the
miti gati on measures that are proposed to be impl anented as part of the
project. The EIR also suggested additional possible measures to mitigate
constructi on impacts. Many of these miti gati on measures are standard
procedures on District construction projects. The District will
implanent the following mitigation measures as part of the project unless
otherwise directed by the Board of Directors and subject to the Board
adopting findings.
CCCSD Proj ect Oversi Qht
CCCSD w 11 1 negoti ate encroachment perm i t req ui ranents with ci ty
representatives (pl anni ng depar"bnent and publ ic works depar"bnent
staff).
CCCSD will assign inspectors to the construction site to ensure
contractor compliance with construction contract specifications.
Traffic Impact MitiQation
Traffic control plans will be prepared for each street crossing in
each phase of construction.
The District will consult with local jurisdictions regarding
possible scheduling of night or weekend work in commercial areas or
busy streets.
The Contractor will provide adequate off-street parking for
anployees at all times and arrange ridesharing when possible to
reduce the worker auto trips.
Transport of heavy construction equipment will be limited to
off-peak peri ods, with maximum use of on-site storage and stagi ng
areas.
The Di stri ct w ill tunnel or jack and bore under San Ramon Vall ey
Boul evard and Sycamore Vall ey Road.
The District will use construction techniques that maintain access
on affected local streets and requi re the contractor to prepare
traffic control plans to show specific methods for maintaining
access. Techniques to maintain access include: (1) Use of flaggers
to mai ntai n al ternati ng one-way traffic; (2) pl acement of steel
plates over the open trench during non-working hours; (3) paving a
tanporary additional travel lane when sufficient width exists; (4)
use of advance construction signs and other public notices to alert
drivers of activ ity in the area; and (5) use of "positive gui dance"
detour signing on alternate access streets.
-15-
Work on street crossings (except when boring pits are used) would be
limited to one location at a time. Scheduling of work would be such
that alternate access routes to be used by affected traffic are not
blocked by concurrent construction.
Trenches
The amount of trench open at anyone time w ill be 1 imited to
approximately 400 linear feet at anyone location. During non-work
hours, all open trenches within streets should be covered with steel
plates or temporary backfill and pavement.
The contractor will be required to sign all streets fran both
directions, visible day and night, to mark street construction.
Within the RON, trenches will be barricaded. The RON will be
temporarily closed to the public during construction and signed with
approximate closure and reopen dates.
CCCSD will consult with the traffic coordination/control staff at
appropri ate pol ice/sheriff departments pri or to constructi on and
arrange for any necessary traffic control assistance.
CCCSD w ill notify appropri ate emergency serv ice agenci es of
construction locations and schedules.
Haulinq Trucks
Project haul trucks will not be overfilled. Hauling distances will
be minimized by thorough consideration of available dumping sites.
Hauling trucks will maintain safe, slOll speeds, reducing potential
safety hazards and dust generation. Haul trucks will be cleaned off
(hosed off) before entering publ ic streets, if necessary. Any
accidental spill of material will be cleaned up within a reasonable
time.
Construction Equipment
The general contractor will be required to maintain and operate
construction equipment in such a way as to minimize exhaust
emissions, e.g. truck idling kept to a minimum.
Equipment will be stored on the RON or designated staging site,
properly parked and locked during non-work hours.
Construction equipment will be fitted with the best available noise
suppression devices.
Construction Activities
The District proposes construction during the dry season (May to
October). However, if any construction does occur during the winter
season (November to April), stockpiles of fill and soil at the
project site will be covered and surrounded by a berm (or other
barrier) to prevent washing away of sediment. Silt fences will also
-16-
be install ed between the constructi on area and creeks to trap
sediment.
Project grading will avoid filling drainage ditches within the RCl'I.
Silt fences will be placed across ditches draining the RCl'I if rain
is forecast. Stockpiles of soil and fill will not be placed near
catch basi ns.
Maximum use will be made of excavated material for backfill ing of
trenches. All materi al not used for refill ing trenches w ill be
disposed of at proper sites.
Groundwater pumped fran trenches duri ng dewateri ng w ill either be
stored in temporary detention basins for reinfiltration into the
ground or diverted to appropriate local storm drainage facilities.
To reduce dust generati on, all di sturbed porti ons of the RCl'I that
have been cl eared of vegetati on and all pil es of excavated and
bedding material will be watered (at least two times per day).
Construction near residential neighborhoods will commence no earlier
than 7:30 a.m. to reduce the chances for interrupting the sleep of
most residents 1 iving near the RCl'I. Local jurisdictions may impose
other restrictions on construction times, as specified in
encroachment perm its.
If archaeol ogi calor hi stori c sites are di scovered duri ng
construction, a qual ified archaeologist or local representative of
the Native American Community will be consulted in the formulation
of mitigation measures.
RCl'I Condi ti on
Vegetation clearing within the RCl'I will be limited to the immediate
trench excavation area. Equipment and material storage sites will
be chosen to minimize the need for removal of significant vegetation
(e. g. 1 arge sh rubs, trees, densel y vegetated areas) . Where
appropri ate, the RCl'I w ill be revegetated after constructi on. Any
major trees or major shrubs removed will be replaced by young plants
of the same kind or another kind agreed upon between CCCSD and the
adj acent property ow ner in consul tati on with the County, and, if
appropriate, EBRPD.
Removal of mature trees will be avoided wherever possible. An
arborist (tree specialist) will be retained by the District to
survey the entire construction alignment.
CCCSD has agreed in its easement contract with the County, to return
the RCl'I to its original or otherwise acceptable condition after
construction as determined in conjunction with the County and
cities. The District will document existing conditions prior to
construction. The ROW will be restored to original ground contours
and drainage patterns, and revegetated as appropriate.
-17-
The construction site will be kept tidy, free of litter, with
equipment and materials stored in designated areas when not in use.
Safety
The District will circulate final construction plans to all
appropriate utility agencies and discuss with them final
arrangements for relocation or construction around existing lines.
The District will be responsible for notifying local custaners
should any utilities need to be temporarily shut off during
constructi on.
To reduce exposure of school ch il dren to potenti al constructi on
hazards CCCSD will consider; 1) scheduling construction past school
sites during summer vacation months (June - August); 2) hiring
private security to patrol the construction site during the day near
school s.
Local emergency response agencies (police, fire, ambulance) will be
notified of construction schedules and locations.
Reduci ng the speeds of haul trucks as they travel on the RON and
away fran the construction site on local streets will reduce any
widespread noise.
Access to Properties
Access to residential and business properties will be maintained
throughout proj ect constructi on.
Access to businesses on or proximate to the ROW will be maintained
during business hours.
CCCSD will carefully survey the approved pipeline and construction
easement and noti fy any property owners of potenti al use conflicts
(unoffici al private uses on the R()I such as sheds, fences,
driveways) well in advance of any construction activity.
-18-
Attachment 3
RESQUTION NO.
RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENV IRON MEN TAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR lHE SAN RAMON V ALLEY
TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJ ECT
WHEREAS the Central
identified a need for
wastewater fran current
Ramon Vall ey; and
Contra Costa Sanitary District, in 1984,
additional trunk sewer capacity to collect
and future residents and businesses in the San
WHEREAS the Di strict has undertaken pl anni ng activiti es rel ated to
the San Ramon Vall ey Trunk Sewer Improvement Proj ect cul mi nati ng in the
following reports:
Draft Env i ronmental Impact Report, San Ramon Vall ey Trunk Sewer
Improvement Proj ect, dated June 1986
Final Environmental Impact Report, San Ramon Valley Sewer
Improvement Proj ect, dated September 1986
San Ramon Valley Sewer Master Plan, dated December 1984
Watershed 33 Trunk Sewer Pipeline Predesign Report, dated June 1985
Draft Collection System Master Plan, dated May 1986
WHEREAS the Di stri ct has di stri buted the Draft and
Environmental Impact Reports to the appropriate federal, state, and
government agencies for review, and made all of the reports listed
available for public review; and
F1 na 1
1 oca 1
above
WHEREAS the District distributed a Notice of Preparation of
Environmental Impact Report, dated December 11, 1985, to affected state,
regi onal, and local government agenci es, and to interested communi ty
groups and citizens; and
WHEREAS the Di strict conducted a meeti ng with local government
officials on December 11, 1985, and a public meeting on December 11,
1985, for the purpose of receiving comments on the specific impacts of
the project that should be analyzed in the EIR; and
WHEREAS the District conducted a public meeting on March 12, 1986,
for the purpose of reporti ng the status of the preparati on of the Draft
EIR and to receive public input before completion of the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS the District conducted an "open house" on July 10, 11, and
19, 1986, for the purpose of describing the project to and answering
Questions fran the public; and
-19-
WHEREAS the District conducted a public hearing to receive oral and
written comments about the Draft EIR on July 23, 1986; and
WHEREAS written comments about the Draft ErR were received by the
District prior to and subsequent to the public hearing; and
WHEREAS the District Board of Directors has reviewed the Draft EIR,
all comments about this report, and responses to these comments that are
included as part of the Final EIR;
N()I, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District does hereby find and certify that
the Fi nal EIR for the San Ramon Vall ey Trunk Sewer Improvement Proj ect is
legally adequate.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary Di stri ct
Board of Directors this 16th day of October, 1986, 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
COU NTER S IG NED:
Secretary of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra
Costa, State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James L. Hazard, District Counsel
-20-
ATTACH~NT 4
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO APPROVE 1l-IE
SAN RAKlN VALLEY TRUNK SEWER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the District Board of Directors have certified the Final EIR for
the San Ramon Valley Trunk Sewer Improvement Project as being legally
adequate; and
WHEREAS, the District Board of Directors have provided direction to staff
on sel ecti on of the proj ect al ternative and preparati on of the fi ndi ngs
of fact regarding the project;
NOW, 1l-IEREFORE, be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the Central
Contra Costa Sanitary Di strict does hereby intend to approve the San
Ramon Valley Trunk Sewer Improvement Project subject to the adoption of
project findings on October 28, 1986.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Board of
Directors this 16th of October, 1986, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
AS SENT:
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 Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District, County of Contra Costa,
State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James L. Hazard, District Counsel
-21-
.
Centr.. Contra Costa Sanital.. District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 4
SUBJECT
NO.
v. BIDS AND AWARDS 1
DATE
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
AUTHORIZE AWAAD OF CONlRACT TO WINTON JONES FOR THE
a.E~ING OF ALUM SLUDGE BASIN II AND AUTHORIZE $68,000
IN SEWER CONSlRUCTION FUNDS
TYPE OF ACTION
JUTHORIZE FUNDS
SUBMITTED BY
J ames Bel cher
Associate En ineer
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Plant Operations Department/
Maintenance En ineerin
ISSUE: On October 7, 1986, sealed bids for the cleaning of Alllll Sludge Basin II
which is located at the District's Wastewater Treatment Plant were opened. The
Board of Directors must award a contract or reject proposals within 30 days of the
opening of bids.
BACKGRCXJND: The Di stri ct conti nues to treat al lIII sl udge generated by the Contra
Costa Water District through the use of settling/drying basins on the Plant site
until the current agreement expi res on July 1, 1987. Presently, Al lIII Basi n II is
full and dried and requires cleaning. This dried alllll sludge was deposited on the
District's property prior to April 1, 1986. After this date, the Contra Costa Water
District w1l1 be required to pay for the removal and disposal of alllll sludge. Alllll
Sludge Basin II was last cleaned in 1984. The bids were submitted on a unit price
basis. Therefore, payment to the contractor will be calculated by multiplying the
vollllle of alum removed fran the basin times the bid unit price. Approximately 2,600
cubic yards of dried alum sludge will be hauled offsite to Acne Fill Corporation.
The District will directly pay to Acne Fill Corporation the dumping fee not to
exceed $12.50 per cubic yard. Hauling the alum sludge to Acne Fill Corporation
assures the disposal of the alum sludge in a manner acceptable to the District.
Richmond Landfill, the disposal site last year, will no longer accept the alllll
sludge as a result of stricter regulations pranulgated by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
This project was publically advertised on September 27 and October 2, 1986. Two
bids were received. The low bid was $9.95 per cubic yard, and the high bid was
$13.50 per cubic yard for estimated totals of $25,870 and $35,100 respectively. The
lowest responsible bidder was Winton Jones.
RECOM~NDATION: Authorize award of the contract for the cl eani ng of Al lIII Sl udge
Basin II to Winton Jones at a unit price of $9.95 per cubic yard, and authorize
$68,000 in Sewer Construction Funds for this project.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Cw6
CWB
ATTAa-IMENT A
PREOONSlRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Maintenance Labor
Winton Jones - 2,600 yds x $9.95/yd
Acne - 2,600 yds x $12.50/yd
Constr ucti on
C1 er i ca 1
10 Percent Contingency
$ 1,500
25,870
32,500
1,000
1,000
$61, 870
6,130
$68,000
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
October 9, 1986
TO:
JAMES BELCHER, PLANT OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT ASSOCIATE ENGINEER
PAT O'CONNOR, SENIOR BUYER P&e /O...q
FROM:
SUBJECT: BID REQUEST T0287P, PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, AND MATERIAL
TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 2,600 CUBIC YARDS OF ALUM SLUDGE FROM
BASIN NUMBER II.
Formal bidding commenced with publ ication of Notice to Contractors on
September 25 and October 1, 1986. Four contractors compl eted the site
inspection, as required, and were given their formal bid package upon
completion of the inspection.
Bids were publicly opened and read on Tuesday, October 7, 1986.
CONTRACTOR
BID AMOUNT
EXCEPTIONS
Winton Jones
Gradex
Heim Bros.
Gallagher & Burke
$25,870.00
35,100.00
No Bid
No Bid
None
None
No Bid
No Bid
A technical and commercial evaluation was conducted by the Plant
Operations Department Associate Engineer and Purchasing (see Attachment
1) which shows that Winton Jones is the lowest responsible bidder. Since
1946, Winton Jones has performed contract work for the District and
demonstrated that they can fulfill all of the requirements of a contract.
Purchasing, therefore, recommends that you prepare the Position Paper to
the Board of Directors recommending the award to Winton Jones for
providing all labor, equipment, and material to remove approximately
2,600 cubic yards of alum sludge from Basin II at a unit cost basis,
which is a price of $25,870.00.
POC/bbm
cc: C. Batts
K. Laverty
.-.
.
o
Z
I-
Z
W
~
:::r:
U
<C
l-
I-
<C
,-,
~]I
'~
I
I
I
~
'""
c.. ~
@ ><:l5
N ..--t
::: ~-g
& ~ 0
~
U
~~
..--t
E~5
i a:;::1
N
E~
;::;
s..
~
"'"
c
~~
c:l
..::>
I-u
ffio
~55 b
....... ..
~.N""'" .
e>-.......~~
...Jzl-a-o
~~~~~
SX::E
00
...J 0::: 0:::
Ci! ~ u.. I~
<cw I~
W t.!:l '-
e ~ ~ """rr-;
:> O...J :",I~
b~Vl 0
~w u
c.. O::::E: ;2 l::
::> 0
10...J3~
I-<C
...J u..
<CO
.......
0::: Vl
IWCl
I- 0:::
<C<C
I~>-
~
~ ~
;::~
-
~I~
't:l
CU
~I~
;::I~
f-
CUIC
1:51..-
i ~ I
~ B ~:! ...
ill:l~..J
~ 8 ci ~
.. c ... 0
c::: I a. =
I; a
~
.12
.~
()
..
a
ii
...
o
z~
Oz
-0
~~
::1"'-
.0
cc~
... .......
3:
I
!;...
~
LL
ex
v
~
v
I~
It:
I~
I......
I-
I
c
~~
o~
....
..~
!~
~~
..\.!
ef
Cl
.......
t:ii~
~f
~~
..\.!
~ f Cl
......
c:l
o
.. ~ z
I~
~..
I~
II":
:~
o
~g ~
..... 0
~
..
LO
I: ~ M
Z\.! ~
~f
~.. 0
.. ~ 0
e.. a
I~
I~
,~
..
LO
1:" N
zW ~
~f
I~
~!!-g
i~Bi~
s = ~
.....
s..
u
Vl
cu
Cl
-
..
~
o
,.....
to
.....
s..
cu
I 12
.:..
..
cu
>
o
..Cl
<C
Vl
ex:
I-
l~ ~
-+:
~~
11
! .. ":-
is Ei..--t
I .
.
Centra' -~ontra Costa SanitarY-"istrict
dOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16
1986
NO.
VI.
CONSENT CALENDAR 8
SUBJECT
DATE
ADV ISE lHE BOARD OF THE CLOSEOUT OF THE V IA ROBLE PUMP
STATION. ffiOJECf IN LAFAYETTE CDISlRICf PROJECf 4014) AND
RETURN $2,985 TO THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND
October 8, 1986
TYPE OF ACTION
INFORMATION,4l
SUBMITTED BY
INITIA TING DEPT.lDIV.
Thomas Tri ce,
./Construction Div.
ISSUE: All work has been completed on the Via Roble residential pump station
project in Lafayette, and this project can now be closed.
BACKGROUND: This pump station project was designed to correct a long-term problem
with sewage overflowing in the yard of the residence at 1064 Via Roble in
Lafayette. The contract work included the installation of a residential pump
station, 80 feet of four-inch pressure pipe into an existing manhole in Via Roble,
replacement of the property owner's four-inch side sewer into the new pump
station, installation of a special bolt down 1 id on an existing manhole behind
1062 Via Roble, partial driveway restoration, and other miscellaneous site work.
The contractor, ~M .Construction Co., commenced work on July 16, 1986, and
finished the work as scheduled on August 8, 1986. The project was accepted by
the Board on August 21, 1986.
The Engineer's estimate for the construction project was $39,500. M3M's
constructi on contract was for $42,850. There were no change orders issued on the
project. The total budget for the project was $76,800. The total completed
project cost is $73,815, which is $2,985 less than the budget. Staff is closing
out the proj ect, whi ch will resul tin $2,985 bei ng returned to the Sewer
Construction Fund.
RECOMMENDATION: This item is presented to the Board of Directors for information
only. No action is necessary.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
1Sl
AJfj
7/l/
1302...9165 T AT
RSK
JSM
RAB
~NG.
.
Centra -:ontra Costa Sanitar~ ..listrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16
1986
NO.
VI.
CONSENT CALENDAR 9
SUBJECT
ADVISE lHE BOARD OF lHE O-OSEOUT OF THE PLANNING
DIVISION OFFICE SPACE IMPROVE~NT PROJ ECT
<DISTRICT PROJ ECT 20033) AND RETURN $124
TO lHE SEWER OONSTRUCTION FUND
DATE
Oc ober 13 1 86
TYPE OF ACTION
INFORMATIONAL
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Tom Trice, Engineering Assistant
Div.
ISSUE: All work has been completed on the Planning Division Office Space
Improvement Proj ect and th i s proj ect can now be closed.
,
BACKGROUND: This project converted the 2,100 square foot vacant area located in
the east half of the first floor of the District Office Building to offices for
the Planning Division staff. The work on this project consisted of constructing
full height permanent walls for three offices, installing electrical and telephone
services, painting, and installing various District-furnished material.
The contract was awarded December 6, 1985 to John DeRespini Construction Company
of Pleasant Hill, and the Notice to Proceed was issued January 2, 1986. The
contractor compl eted work on February 18, 1986, two weeks ahead of the schedul ed
contract completion date. The Planning Division occupied their new quarters on
February 24, 1986. The Board accepted the work by the contractor at its March 20,
1986 Board meeting.
The Engineer's construction cost estimate was $25,000. The contractor's
construction contract was for $18,677. The total contract price was $19,170 for
the construction project. This price included two Change Orders that were additions to
the work as requested by the Planning Division during construction for a total of
$493. The cost of the material which the District furnished for the project
totaled $10,564 which included doors, carpeting, and miscellaneous equipment.
The total budget for the project was $49,888. The total funds expended on the
project was $49,764 which is $124 less than the budget. Staff is closing out the
project which will result in $124 being returned to the Sewer Construction Fund.
RECOMMENDATION: This item is presented to the Board of Directors for information.
No action is necessary.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
RAB
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
13021'.9/85
TT
RSK
YJfJ
~
.
Centra :ontra Costa Sanitar~ Jistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF
NO.
VI.
CONSENT CALENDAR
10
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
SUBJECT
DATE
AUTHORIZE $3,500 FROM THE SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND FOR
THE RJRa-tASE OF AN ISCO PORTABLE SAMPLER
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE FUNDS
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
Plant Operations Department/
o e a ions
ISSUE: Board approval is requested for authorization of $3,500 from the Sewer
Construction Fund for the purchase of an ISCO portable sampler.
BACKGROUND: The portabl e sampl er used by Pl ant Operati ons Department Laboratory
personnel to collect the waste activated sludge composite samples is presently out
of service and is beyond economical repair. This sampler is essential to Plant
operation and is used continuously. It is recommended that the sampler be replaced
with a new ISCO portable sampler at a cost of $3,500.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize $3,500 from the Sewer Construction Fund for the purchase
of an ISCO portable sampler.
1302A.9/85
WEB
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
fArEl3
.
Centra'c~ontra Costa Sanitar!4istrict
dOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 1
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16, 1986
NO.
VI.
CONSENT CALENDAR
11
SUBJECT
AUlHORIZE THE SUBSTITUTION OF NORTH COAST STEEL
BUILDING, INC., lHE LISTED SUBCONTRACTOR, WITH
DELCON DEVELOPMENT, INC., A NEW SUBCONTRACTOR, FOR
STEEL ERECTION WCRK ON lHE t-EOiANICAL MAINTENANCE
AND MATERIALS CONTROl BUILDING (D. P. 20027)
DATE
October 3, 1986
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE
SUB STITUTION OF
SUBCONTRACTOR
SUBM~T.TED BY
Munawar Husain, Associate Engineer
INITtA TINGtDEPTct.lDJV.
~ons ru 10n Div./Engineering Dept.
ISSUE: The General Contractor (West Coast Contractors, Inc.lW. A. Thanas Co.,
Inc.) has requested substitution of a subcontractor 1 isted on the bid proposal
because the listed subcontractor will not execute a subcontract agreement. Board
authorization is required for the substitution.
BACKGROUND: West Coast Contractors 1 isted North Coast Steel Building, Inc. as the
subcontractor for steel erection work on its bid proposal to the District for the
Mechani cal Mai ntenance and Materi al s Control Buil di ng. Thi s subcontractor will
not execute a contract agreement with West Coast Contractors because of its work
load. Under these ci rcumstances West Coast Contractors now seeks approval to use
Del con Development, Inc. for the performance of the same work.
Under Cal iforni a Government Code Secti on 4107, subst i tuti on of a listed
subcontractor is permitted only in certain situations; one of which is when the
listed subcontractor fails to execute a written contract with the prime
contractor. The awarding authority must consent to the substitution to effect the
change. In the present instance, consent by the District is appropriate.
The proposed substitution will not result in any additional cost to the District
or result in a delay in the project completion.
RECO~NDATION: Authorize the substituti on of the listed subcontractor, North
Coast Steel Buil di ng, Inc., with a new subcontractor, Del con Development, Inc.,
for steel erecti on work on Di stri ct Proj ect 20027.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
1302....9/65
MH
RSK
JSM
RAB
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
J/I
.j&t,
~~
.
Centra =ontra Costa Sanitar~ .Jistrict
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 9
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16, 1986
NO.
VIr.
ENGINEERING
1
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE n-tE GM-CE TO EXECUTE PGREEMENTS WITH JOHN
CAROllO ENGINEERS, CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, AND URBAN ALTERNATIVES AND AUTHORIZE
$1,057,000 IN SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR n-tE CONTRA
COSTA BOULEVARD AND "A" lINE FACILITIES PlAN
DATE
October 10, 1986
TYPE OF ACTION
AUTHORIZE FUNDS
AUTHORIZE AGREEMENTS
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Joye l. Kurasaki, Associate Engineer
Engineering Department/Planning Div.
ISSUE: Boa rd of Di rectors' authorizati on is requi red for the General
Manager-Chief Engineer to execute consulting engineering and professional service
agreements and to expend sewer construction funds.
BACKGROUND: The Contra Costa Boul evard and "A" line trunk sewers transport 94
percent of the District's wastewater to the treatment plant. last winter, several
overflows occurred along the upstream sections of the Contra Costa Boulevard trunk
1 i ne as sh ow n on A tta chment A.
The experience gained during last year's winter storms has been confirmed by the
computerized hydraulic analysis in the Collection System Master Plan. The Master
Plan has identified critical hydraul ic deficiencies along major sections of the
Contra Costa Boul evard and "A" line trunk sewer. Sections which are currently
over capacity and sections which will be over capacity within the next ten years
are shown in Attachment A. The proposed project for the improvement of the Contra
Costa Boulevard and "A" line sewers will address this trunk sewer capacity issue.
This project has been assigned a top priority in the Engineering Department work
schedule because of its magnitude and complexity.
The Facilities Plan is the first phase in this project to alleviate the capacity
limitation in sections of the Contra Costa Boulevard and "A" line trunk lines.
The Facilities Plan tasks will include wet weather flow monitoring to obtain data
to be used as a basis to compute the design flows for the trunk line improvements,
the computation of the design flows, the identification of the approximate pipe
sizes required for relief of the trunk lines, a TV inspection of selected sections
of the existing trunk 1 ines to establ ish thei r current condition, the
identification and eval uation of various al ternative routes for the new pipe, a
preliminary soils investigation to determine the adequacy of the soil in areas of
concern identified along the more viable alternative routes, the selection of the
most vi abl e al ternative route, an aeri al survey to produce a map to be used for
planning and design activities, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
to address the environmental impacts of the project, and a citizen participation
program to solicit comments from the people who may be impacted by the project. A
more detailed description of these components is included in Attachment B.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
JMK.
J
P#ft\
R
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZ E THE Gf.+.CE TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH JOHN
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, AND URBAN ALTERNATIVES AND AUTHORIZE
$1,057,000 IN SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE CONTRA
COSTA BOULEVARD AND "A" LINE FACIL ITIES PLAN
POSITION PAPER
PAGE 2 OF 9
DATE
October 10, 1986
The total estimated cost of this Facilities Plan is $1,057,000. A bre{l.kdown of
this cost, which includes engineering and professional services and related force
account, is summarized in Attachment C. Camp, Dresser & McKee Engineers (CDM) was
selected to perform the design flow computations and to identify the pipe
diameters required for relief because of their work on the Collection System
Master P1 an. The computer model developed for the Co11 ecti on System Master P1 an
will be used to perform the design flow computations. In addition, a new computer
program will be developed to perform hydraulic computations specific to the Contra
Costa Bou1 evard and "A" Line system. The CDM contract w ill be of the "Di rect
Labor Plus a Mu1tip1 ier with a Cost Ceiling" method contract type.
John Carollo Engineers (JCE) was selected to perform the routing study because of
thei r current, ongoi ng work on the Wa1 nut Creek Bypass Project and the Interim
Treatment P1 ant Hydrau1 ic Project. These two projects will set the upstream and
downstream hydrau1 ic control s for the Contra Costa Bou1 evard and "A" Line trunk
sewer improvements. Utilization of JCE would consolidate these three projects and
ensure that the Facilities P1 an will match the conditions set by the upstream and
downstream projects. The JCE contract will be of the "Direct Labor P1 us a Mu1tip1 ier
with a Cost Ceil i ng Method" contract type.
This Facilities Plan will also include an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and
citizens participation program. An EIR must be prepared which comp1 ies with the
California Environmental Quality Act and District environmental review
regulations. A citizen participation program has been included since this project
has a potenti a1 for considerab1 e busi ness and resi denti a1 impacts. Concerns
raised during the public participation program will be addressed as part of the
draft EIR. This will reduce the effort on the final EIR. Environmental Science
Associates (ESA) and Urban Alternatives (UA) were selected to prepare the EIR and
to conduct the public participation program, respectively, because of their
experi ence and excell ent past performance on the San Ramon Vall ey Proj ect. Since
San Ramon is included in the service area of this Facilities Plan, the contacts
made and the information obtained by ESA and UA during that project will be useful
in interfacing with the pub1 ic on this project. The ESA portion of the contract
for the draft ErR w ill be a "L ump Sum Cost" contract type. The ESA porti on of the
contract for the final ErR will be a "Cost Reimbursement with a Not to Exceed
Ceil ing" contract type. The UA contract for pub1 ic participation will be of the
"Direct Labor Plus a Multiplier With A Cost Ceiling Method" contract type.
This Facilities Plan will set the stage for a construction project which is
estimated to cost from $30 to $50 mill ion to improve the Contra Costa Bou1 evard
and "A" line trunk sewers. These improvements will provide sufficient capacity in
these trunk sewers to prov i de for u1 timate Di stri ct development. Thi s proj ect is
i ncl uded in the Capital Improvement Pl an under the Pri ority B, "Coll ecti on System
....------.
13028-9/85
SUBJECT
POSITION PAPER
AUTHORIZE TIlE Gt4-CE TO EXECUTE JlGREEMENTS WITH JOHN
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, CAMP, DRESSER & MCKEE, ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, AND URBAN ALTERNATIVES AND AUTIlORIZE
$1,057,000 IN SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR TIlE CONTRA
COSTA BOULEVARD AND "A" LINE FACILITIES PLAN
PAGE 3
OF
9
DATE
October 10, 1986
.
Improvements Project." The Contra Costa Boulevard and "A" Line trunk sewer
improvements were schedul ed to occur after fi scal year 1995/96. However, because
of the findings of the Collection System Master Plan, it has been reassigned a top
priority for the next ten-year period.
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the General Manager-Chief Engi neer to execute
agreements with John Carollo Engineers, Camp, Dresser & McKee Engineers,
Environmental Science Associ ates, and Urban Alternatives. Authorize $1,057,000
from the Sewer Construction Fund to prepare the Contra Costa Boul evard and "A"
Line Facilities Plan.
'-------.
13028-9,85
o
cr:
..J
..J
i
l-
Z
~
<(
1.1.1
..J
~
N
W
z
i=
a:
<
:E
,/
AVE.
~
>-
~
J:
Q::!
Q::!
Cl.,"
o
c
a:
o
(J
z
o
(J
..J
..J
-
J:
....
Z
<
tJ)
<
W
..J
Q.
o
o
~
a::
c(
a:i
e
o
~
W
w
a:
(J
....
:;:)
Z
..J
~
I-
l-~cnU
::::lwcnw
ZwcC..,
..Ja:Q..O
cCU>-a:
~ alQ..
S'
cr:
o
t-
en
cr:>
>t-
lb-
-0
C ~~
Z 0<
W io
C) :2~
W 0)-
..J .....0..
en
Cl
W
W
o
X
W
~o.
~-{
'-Ill-\.\':
C,O
-{G~l>'
-
w
Z
-
..J
(
,
i
~
~
..
..
c(C/')
:: ....
oa~
.~
Ow
>>
..JO
ma:
c(~
t-~
tna:
O,W
o ~ I
c:(i.i.i
a:C/')
t-
Z
o
o
en
Cl
W
W
o
X
W
S'>
cr:t-
0-
t-U
en~
0:<
>0
lbZ
-C!)
~-
Oen
-,W
u..Cl
LOW
0)0..
0)-
.....0..
<
W
cr:
<
~
o
-'
u..
cr:
W
>
o
je 5 of 9 Pages
ATT ACH r.E NT B
FACIL !TIES PLAN FOR lHE IMPROVEMENTS
OF THE roNTRA roSTA BClJLEV ARD AND "A" LINE SEWERS
PROJ ECT DESCRIPTION
The Contra Costa Boul evard and "A" Line trunk sewer Facilities Pl an is the first
phase in the project to alleviate the over capacity problem in sections of these
trunk sewers. The Contra Costa Boul evard trunk sewer (which varies from 33 to 39
inches in diameter) serves the Pleasant Hill area west of Contra Costa Boulevard
It discharges into the "A" Line just south of the Highway 680/Highway 4
interchange. The "A" Line (which varies from 66 to 90 inches in diameter)
transports wastewater from the Contra Costa Boul evard trunk sewer and the anti re
District's service area (with the exception of Martinez and the North Concord and
Clyde area) to the treatment plant. This Facilities Plan will address the Contra
Costa Boul evard trunk sewer improvements from Oak Park Boul evard to the "A" Line
and the "A" Line improvements from Ygnacio Vall ey Road to the treatment pl ant.
The work will be divided into several components:
FL()I ANALYSIS AND MASTER PLANS INTERFACE
Camp, Dresser & McKee (CDM) will coordinate the interface between the Collection
System Master Pl an, the Treatment Pl ant Master Pl an, and th i s Faciliti es Pl an.
They will perform additional research on the correlation between historic rainfall
data and treatment plant influent flow. This information will be used to update
the collection system computer model and use it to generate the 20-year event,
design flows for the Contra Costa Boul evard and "A" Line trunk sewers. In
addition, COM will utilize a new "Sewer Flow Routing" computer program to perform
hydraulic computations and to model the proposed relief solution developed by John
Carollo Engineers during their Routing Study. This will allow District staff to
test the proposed relief solution and insure that it does provide for adequate
relief.
ROUTING AND PROJ ECT PH AS ING
John Carollo Engineers (JCE) will conduct the routing study, which is the central
work of the Facilities Plan. They will identify locations for wet weather flow
monitori ng; develop and eval uate the al ternative sewer relief routes for Contra
Costa Boul evard and the "A" Line; identify route constrai nts such as ri ght-of-way
avail ability, utility conflicts, route access, and hydraulics; eval uate
alternative construction methods and pipe material; and recommend the most viable
route. JCE will take the design flows generated by CDM and develop the pipe
design criteria. They will also investigate the potential for sewer overflow
problems associated with numerous existing springline connections along the
exi sti ng "A" Line and the possi bility of a common relief sewer for both trunk
sewers. Finally, they will evaluate various project phasing options which will
all ow for a short-term proj ect to correct the current over-capacity situati on and
a long-term project to correct future capacity problems and also to interface with
the Caltrans proposed Highway 680 improvements.
Page 6 of 9
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental Science Associates will prepare the project's Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). The study area for the EIR will include the entire District's
service area with the exception of Martinez and the North Concord and Clyde area.
This study area coincides with the area that is served by the "A" Line trunk sewer
and includes the San Ramon Valley.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Urban Alternatives will identify the various political bodies, associations,
cities, and individuals who will be interested in or impacted by the project, with
special emphasis given to businesses and homes along the alternative routes. They
will hold project meetings which may include open houses and route alternatives
screening workshops, arrange for publ ic notification of all meetings, and provide
project meeting feedback reports to the District staff.
AERIAL SURVEY
An aerial survey firm will be retained to conduct a survey of the project area.
District survey staff will interface by providing the ground survey controls.
Based on this survey, an aerial photograph and a topographic map will be produced
which will be used for the routing study, the environmental impact report, and the
final project design.
FL Oil t.{)N ITORIt(]
Additional wet weather flow monitoring will be performed on selected smaller
sewers tributary to Contra Costa Boul evard . Thi s fl ow monitori ng data wil 1 be used
as a basis to develop the design flow for the trunk sewer improvements.
TELEVISION INSPECTION
A TV inspection of selected sections of the existing Contra Costa Boulevard and
"A" Line trunk sewers will be conducted. The TV inspection will identify any
corrosion probl ems and will establ ish the current condition of these trunk sewers.
This information will be used to evaluate whether the existing trunk sewer
can remain in operation and a parallel sewer line be installed to relieve the
over-capacity situation or whether an entirely new trunk sewer is required
for future capacity.
SOILS INVESTIGATION
A soils consultant will be retained to conduct a few soils borings along some
of the more vi abl e al ternative routes. Some of the routes w 111 i nvol ve
crossing of Grayson Creek and/or the Walnut Creek Channel. It is
beneficial to do some preliminary soils work in these areas in order to
determ1 ne the su1tab11 ity of the soil for a 1 arge d1 ameter trunk sewer
installation. (So11s conditions can have a profound impact on construction
cost and route selection.)
Page 7 of 9
The Facilities Plan will result in improvements which will provide sufficient
capacity in these trunk sewers for u1 timate Di strict development. The
construction of about 15 mil es of trunk sewer is estimated to cost from $30
to $50 million <1986 doll ars) to improve the Contra Costa Bou1 evard sewer
system and the "A" Line. Note that these costs are order-of-magnitude
project costs). The costs include an estimate for right-of-way acquisition
costs and p1 anni ng, engi neeri ng, and contract admi ni strati on costs.
Construction of the Contra Costa Boulevard improvement project is expected to
begin in 1988; construction of the "A" Line improvement project will follow
at a later date. District staff will also investigate the potential for a
project which will provide short-term capacity relief that would start
construction during 1987.
ATT ACHt.E:NT C
COST B RE AKD OW N
DESCRIPTION
A. Consultant Contracts
1.
2.
3.
4.
John Carollo Engineers
Camp, Dresser & McKee
Environmental Science Associates
Urban Alternatives
Subtotal
B. Technical Contracts
1. Aerial Survey
2 . F1 ow Mon i tor i ng
3. TV Inspection
4. Soils Investigation
Subtotal
C. Other Sources
1. Mail Service
2. Real Estate Appraiser
3 . New spa per
4. Associated Public Partici-
pat i on Cost s
5. legal
Subtota 1
D. Force Account
1. Planning Division
2. Engineering Division -
Review and As-Bul1 t infor.
3. Construction Div.-surveying
4. Plant Operations Dept.
5. Printing
6. Right-of-Way Acquisition
Committee
Subtotal
$266,000
87,000
100,000
33,000
$ 83,000
50,000
25,000
15,000
$ 8,000
20,000
3,000
5,000
25.000
$167,000
13 ,000
50,000
5,000
21,000
15,000
Page 8 of 9
FUNDS REQUESTED
$486,000
$173,000
$ 61,000
$271,000
Page 9 of 9
E.
Contingency (10% of Consultant and
Technical Contracts)
$ 66.000*
F.
Total Funds Requested
$1,057,00
*If necessary, staff will use this contingency for additional force
account effort or to issue contract change orders to the consultants to
expand their scope of work.
.
Centrar... Contra Costa Sanitar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 18
POSITION PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16, 1986
NO.
VI!.
ENGINEERING 2
SUBJECT
DATE
October 14, 1986
CONSIDERATION OF FIXTURE FEES FOR ROSSMOOR
TYPE OF ACTION
RATES AND CHARGES
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
ROGER J. DOLAN
GENERAL MANAGER-CHIEF ENGINEER
ISSUE: Consideration of fixture fees for Rossmoor was continued to October 16,
1986.
BACKGROUND: On August 21, 1986, the Board of Directors conducted a public hearing
to consider the proposed 1986-1987 Schedule of Fees. The decision concerning
the proposed fixture fees for Rossmoor was continued to September 4, 1986, to
allow the representative of the Rossmoor developer, UDC Homes, to submit their
comments in writing. At the September 4, 1986 meeting, the Board of Directors
granted the petition of UDC Homes to defer action on this matter pending further
negotiation between the developer and the District. Excerpts from the August 21,
1986 position paper concerning Rossmoor fixture fees and related correspondence
are attached hereto.
RECOMMENDATION: Adjourn to closed session pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b) to consider an appropriate course of action.
REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT.lDIV.
1302A.9/85
(UDe)
/ 1717 IWssmoor Parkway
PO. Box 2220
Walnut Creek, California 945.95
(415) 932-3900
lIDC Homes
Limited Partnership
September 2, 1986
Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553-4392
Re: Proposed Rossmoor Fixture Fees
Dear Board Members:
At its August 21 meeting, The Board deferred action on the proposed
Rossmoor fee increase until September 4. UDC Homes was thereby given
an opportunity to present background and facts which, in our opinion,
strongly support our position of opposition to the proposed fee
increase.
Attached to this letter is a letter from our attorney, Allan Berland,
which outlines the history of the 1963 Agreement between Rossmoor
Corporation and The District, the 1965 Supplemental Agreement, and
several subsequent events. Since Mr. Berland's letter is in some
detail, I will not repeat its points. However, it strongly underscores
our position that the proposed fee increase is not consistent with
the 1963 Agreement and that the Agreement is enforceable.
Although we believe our position would be supported in any legal
action, we recognize that there is a wide and long-standing
disagreement between the parties. We believe, therefore, that it
is in both our interests to resolve this through negotiation rather
than the courts. Specifically, we propose that UDC Homes and The
District enter into negotiations as follows:
1.
The Board defer action on the
a minimum of 90 days. Although we
we believe at least 90 days are
increase will not include our
which is now being graded.
proposed fee increase for
want this resolved quickly,
needed. Further, that the
72 unit Mutual 53 project
2. The fee for Mutual 53 would be consistent with the 1963
Agreement. Since each unit in Mutual 53 will have two baths,
we would be agreeable, on this interim basis, to using the
appropriate 1963 two bath rate, adjusted for Rossmoor's
Listed on the New York Stock Exchange
Board of Directors
September 2, 1986
Page 2
current occupancy rate of approximately 1.49.
UDC Homes is committed to resolving this issue through negotiation,
and will make the time available to accomplish it. In addition,
we are prepared to negotiate a new agreement if it provides long-term
protection of any new agreed upon fee structure.
We appreciate your support of this interim means to resolve our
differences.
u~
S. Comegys
Manager
LSC: jmb
Enclosure
cc: Allan Berland, Esq.
James Hazard, Esq.
Jim Kelley
~ , \!-c{).. c. ,t
'y:,'-' -1
~
( Tv:
,
-.
\ .
~ .....-
\!,..;
\,.{ _'...~._ --\ {-....~ ''-,~.A_'.
LAW OFFICES OF
ALLAN M. BERLAND
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING
601 CALIFORNIA STREET
SAN FRANCISCO 94108
TELEPHONE EXBROOI'I, 7-6711
AREA CODE 415
August 29, 1986
Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, California 94453-4392
Re: Rossmoor, Walnut Creek
Dear Members of the Board:
Larry Comegys has asked me to write to you on behalf
of UDC Homes Limited Partnership in view of the feelings
expressed by some Directors at the August 21, 1986 Board
meeting concerning the Rossmoor Agreement.
In order to understand the Rossmoor situation today,
we believe that it would be helpful to review some of the
history of the project and the District's Agreement with the
Rossmoor community.
I am familiar with the history of
Rossmoor, having represented the Golden Rain Foundation
of Walnut Creek and the Mutual Corporations, the Rossmoor
homeowners' associations, from 1965 to 1968, and Terra Cali-
fornia, the developer, from 1968 to 1984. Since that time
I have represented UDC Homes Limited Partnership.
The Dollar Ranch was acquired by Rossmoor Corporation
in 1963, and masterplanned as an adult retirement community
of 10,000 moderate income dwelling units under Section 213
of the National Housing Act, as amended. In order to
Board of Directors
Page Two
August 29, 1986
satisfy the project's lenders and the Federal Housing
Administration (now the Department of Housing and Urban
Development), which was to insure the mortgages, certain
development requirements and costs had to be established
prior to the initiation of development. Accordingly,
Rossmoor Corporation entered into the 1963 Agreement for
the purpose of establishing the District's development
criteria to annex the Dollar Ranch into the District, and
to fix the development costs for sewage services for the planned
Rossmoor dwelling units.
The Agreement provided for the Dollar Ranch to be
annexed into the District, thereby increasing the District's
rate base, and Rossmoor Corporation was to construct the major
sewage facilities. All fees for connecting Rossmoor dwelling
units into the District's sewage system were based upon a formula
using the District's standard connection charge and the occupancy
ratio for the Rossmoor units. The Agreement covers the entire
development of the Dollar Ranch. Nowhere in the Agreement is
any time frame set forth in connection with this development.
e.g. see paragraphs 4(a) and 5(a) and (b). Indeed, the developer
was given the discretion to determine when the components
of the overall sewage system were to be completed in conjunction
with its development of the Dollar Ranch. See paragraphs 2(b)
Board of Directors
Page Three
August 29, 1986
and 6(a).
Because the connection fees and other costs set forth
in the agreement ultimately impacted upon the entire Rossmoor
community, the Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek and
all the Mutual Corporations were expressly made third party
beneficiaries of the District's Agreement with Rossmoor. See
paragraph lO(a)(iii).
In 1965, the District and Rossmoor executed a "Supplemental
Agreement Establishing the Time at Which Connection Rates Shall
be Determined." This Supplemental Agreement clarified the
intention of the parties under the 1963 Agreement concerning
whether connection rates for future Rossmoor dwelling units were
subject to change. The parties provided as follows:
"The connections charges provided for in the agreement
between the District and Rossmoor of September 5,
1963, referred to herein, shall be computed on the
basis of the rate schedule for connection charges
in effect at the time of the execution of said agree-
ment, namely September 5, 1963, and any changes in said
rate schedule subsequent to that time shall have no
effect on the amount of the connection charges made
pursuant to the agreement of September 5, 1963."
The purpose of the 1963 Agreement and 1965 Supplemental
Agreement, which were both drafted by the District, was to
establish the development requirements and costs for sewage
services for the planned 10,000 to 12,000 Rossmoor dwelling
units.
Board of Directors
Page Four
August 29, 1986
In 1980, the District affirmed the Rossmoor Agreement
in a Contra Costa Superior Court Action involving the District
and Terra California (Higby vs. Terra California, Central
Contra Costa Sanitary District et al., and Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District vs. Terra California et ale (No. 210228).
We realize that the District's costs have increased
since the Agreement was entered into, but a bargain was
struck between the District and Rossmoor to annex the
Dollar Ranch into the District and to have Rossmoor construct
the major sewage facilities to enable Rossmoor to pin down
its sewage costs for the dwelling units over the development
period. Utility districts have much the same situation when
they are faced with a need to pin down their supply costs, such
as for oil and gas. Sometimes, the shoe is on the other foot.
You may recall several years ago, the situation involving a
number of utilities who had entered into long-term supply
contracts with Westinghouse Electric Corporation for uranium
to be used for their power plants. The price of uranium sky-
rocketed in the 1970's, and Westinghouse found itself unable
to supply the uranium at the prices fixed by the agreements
without disastrous economic consequences. Accordingly, it
failed to fulfill the agreements. In spite of the extraordinary
and unexpected price increases, the agreements were upheld and
Board of Directors
Page Five
August 29, 1986
Westinghouse was obliged to pay hundreds of millions of dollars
to the utility companies and to deliver uranium at favorable
prices.
Our situation is more similar to a 1980 case (Robinson
v. Nevada Irrigation District, (1980) 101 CA3d 760) which
involved a water District that had entered into an agreement
in 1918 to supply water from a certain water source to a
user at $6 per acre. In 1972, 54 years later, the District
refused to supply the water at the $6 per acre rates and instead
supplied it at $30, its then current water rate for other users
in the District. In upholding the requirements of the 1918
agreement, the District Court of Appeals stated:
"It will no doubt be felt by some (certainly including
the District) that the result of this case is inequitable.
The short answer is that we are dealing with the
solemn and formal obligations of contract law.
The contract involved in this case is an excellent
illustration of the economic and legal hazards of
binding oneself, and especially one's heirs and
assigns, to a long-term binding agreement involving
the delivery of goods or services without inserting
provisions for adjustments due to inflationary or
deflationary economic cycles." Page 773.
The connection fees for Rossmoor units 5000-5999, using the
formula set forth in the Agreement, and the then existing
occupancy ratio of 1.49 occupants per unit,is $38.31 per unit.
See attached letter of David B. Wood. As of August 4, 1986
there were 5,598 occupied units with 7,862 occupants, for an
occupancy ratio of 1.40. Based upon this trend, it is antici-
pated that the connection fees for units 6000-6999 will be
Board of Directors
Page Six
August 29, 1986
$32-33 per dwelling unit.
The approximate 1000% increase proposed by the District
would have a substantial impact on the development of the
Rossmoor community.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act and case
law, an environmental impact report is required to address the
potential adverse effects of the proposed fee increase upon
the construction and sale of affordable housing, in particular
the regional housing needs of the elderly (Rossmoor is the
major retirement community in the Bay Area), and the substantial
public controversy involving the 7,862 residents of the
Rossmoor community.
Although I represent the developer of Rossmoor, I am also
representing the interests of the Rossmoor community, the
Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek, and the Mutual Corpo-
rations, who were specifically made third party beneficiaries
under the Rossmoor Agreement because of their substantial
interest. The Rossmoor residents are solely dependent upon
the sales of new units:
(1) To retire the multi-million debt for existing
community facilities;
(2) To provide funds for the necessary additional com-
munity facilities;
Board of Directors
Page Seven
August 29, 1986
(3) To increase the resident base to share the substantial
fixed costs of operating the community.
Subjecting Rossmoor to an approximate 1000% increase in
connection fees would have a substantial adverse effect upon the
sales of new units in Rossmoor and, therefore, the pocketbooks
of the 7,862 Rossmoor residents.
In such event, we would be obliged to seek the enforcement
of the District's Agreement with the Rossmoor community along
with the Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut creek, under the
joint defense provisions of a 1973 Agreement between Terra
California and Golden Rain Foundation of Walnut Creek, which
provides for the initiation and maintenance of appropriate
legal action, with both the developer and Golden Rain
Foundation of Walnut Creek as parties, whenever any action of
a governmental authority or utility company adversely effects
the planned development of Rossmoor.
We believe that it would not be in the interests of either
the District or UDC to become embroiled in a prolonged battle
between the District and the Rossmoor community.
The District has consistently regarded the Rossmoor
development as unique because of its planning and scope and,
on behalf of the Rossmooor developer, the Golden Rain Foundation
of Walnut Creek, the Walnut Creek Mutual Corporations and
Board of Directors
Page Eight
August 29, 1986
the 7,862 Rossmoor residents, we urge the Board to stand by
the Agreement it made with the Rossmoor community.
Very truly yours,
AMB/js
cc: Roger Dolan
James Kelly
James Hazard, Esq.
1_, CI l' p ~
--,--)-) ,-" )
. t 1 1. a · (1. 1.1. C) I YJ 1 El
s",....OMC...
~
Building America's Finest Adult Communities
October 30, 1980
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
P.O. Box 5266
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Re: CCCSD Agreement for
Rossmoor, Walnut Creek
Gentlem(~n :
This is to confirm the prior convers~tions between our
attorneys advising the District that the actual average
tenancy ratio of the Rossmoor, Walnut Creek project
("Dollar Ranch"), commencing with unit number 5000 is 1.49.
In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 7(b) of the
Agreement for the project, any and all charges relating to
the addition or connection of a Rossmoor unit to the District's
sewage system, excluding the inspection and per acre annexa-
tion charges provided by the Agreement, should be computed
as follows:
$90 $38.31
3 . 5 - 1 .49
$38.31 = connection charge
We would ask that you notify your billing department of the
proper charges immediately to expedite the processing for
the addition of new units in the project.
In addition, we would appreciate your responding to our
request for a rebate of the prior excess charges the
District made in connection with the development of the
Rossmoor, Walnut Creek project.
Sincerely,
TEpF~1
tz;.d B. Wood
President
DBW: la
cc: Allan Berland, Esq.~
Please respond to:
o P.O. BOX 2220, WALNUT CREEK, CALIF, 94595 (415) 932.3900
02500 VILLAGES PARKWAY, SAN JOSE, CALIF. 95135 (408) 274-2871
Golden Rain Foundation
RO~A~ID~gr
.1>' .t:t r;': '1":'7 :, ,"'~. _.::~~' ~'Cj::
AUG 2 s 1986
ClX.:,1J
~!:'/';~:i:ii;IW OF THE c;:;;I':T
Augus t 29, 1986
Board of Directors
Contra Costa County Central Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, California 94553-4392
Mr. President and Members of the Board:
We have been advised that the District has proposed a substantial
increase in the fixture fee charged for new homes in Rossmoor. We believe
that this level of increase, approximately five times those fees now paid,
is unwarranted, and potentially will have an impact on the sales rate of
new homes. Rossmoor's 7,800 residents rely on funds from new home sales to
1.) retire a several million dollar debt on existing community facilities,
2.) provide funds for essential new facilities, and 3.) increase the
resident base that shares fixed operating costs. We must be assured that
our responsibility to Rossmoor's residents will not be imperiled by the fee
increase.
We support the position of UDC Homes, and believe the provisions of
the 1963 Agreement between the District and Rossmoor Corporation are enforce-
able. The Golden Rain Foundation would be obligated, under joint defense
provisions outlined in an existing agreement between the Foundation and UDC,
to support any legal action on this issue. We hope no such action will be
necessary.
We recommend that the Board defer action on the increase in the Rossmoor
fixture fees. We recommend that the Board establish a six-month period in
which the District and UDC Homes negotiate a permanent solution to the long-
standing impasse on fees. We would support the negotiation of a new agree-
ment if it protected Rossmoor's interests and provided an agreed fee structure
for the approximately 1,200 units that remain to be built. In the interim,
we believe strongly that the existing fee structure should remain in place.
Since it is our understanding that only one project, the 72-unit Mutual 53,
will need permits in that period, we believe that to be a fair request.
RRM:ea
cc: General Manager
Bell, Rosenberg and Hughes
UDC Homes Limited Partnership
P.O. BOX 2070, DOLLAR RANCH STATION, WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94595 - 415 - 939-1211
EXCERPTS FROM THE AUGUST 21,1986 POSITION PAPER
CONCERNING
ROSSMOOR DEVELOPMENT ARE ATTACHED
9. At this time. no change is being recommended in the septage disposal fees. As
part of the currAnt work to revise septage disposal procedures. new fees will
be developed. Recommendations are anticipated in October.
10. New residential living units within the Rossmoor development have been paying a
reduced fixture fee based upon a lower than District-wide occupancy rate and
fixture fees established in 1965. It is proposed to raise these fees by basing
them on the current District-wide fixture fees and current occupancy rates.
A-2
Act t'i. i tv
--
---
Current
1985-1986
FeeL___
Recommended
1986-1987
~.e~
( H) UXTURE FEES FOR R9-.S..S.~OR
(1+-1> living Units*
- 1 Bath Unit
- 2 Bath Unit
- 2-1/2 Bath Unit
$66.34
$88.43
$99.49
$281.25
$375.00
$412.50
*Assumes kitchen and laundry facilities
A-6
PART VIII
ROSSMOOR FIXTURE FEES (1)
A. DEFINITION
A fixture fee is the ilIIOunt that a new user of the District's
sewerage facilities must pay for the privilege of using the available
treatment and disposal facilities owned an operated by the District.
The amount charged represents a prorated share of the average cost of
the capacity replacement. Plumbing fixtures are used to detennine
their fee because each fixture represents a potential flow and load
on the sewerage facilities.
B. DISCUSSION
District-wide fixture fees were last revised in 1974, prior to the
startup of the Stage 5A project. Fixture fees IlUst be based on
future Plant expansion costs. A prel i.inary analysis of current
fixture fee revenue and the cost of the future Stage 6 expansion
i nd i cates a 451 fee increase would be requ i red to recover the cost
of the expansion (see calculation below).
Stage 6 U5 to) expansion) = 143,450,000 if
Cost per gallon per day = 143,450,000/15,000,000 gal./day
= $2.90
Typical single f~11y residence contributes 225 gal/day
Fixture fee required = $2.90 per gal/day x 225 gal/day
= $652.50
Current Fixture fee for 2 bath units = 1450.00
Fee increase required = $652.50 - 1450.00 (100) = 451
1450.00
if Does not include any outfall work
Further analysis of District-wide fixture fees is beyond the scope
of this rates and charges study but will be included in a forthcoming
analysis.
The scope of this part is to adjust RosSllOOr's fixture fees to
current District-wide fees (prorated based on occupancy factors).
New residential living units within the Rossmoor development have
been paying a reduced fixture fee based on lower than District-wide
occupancy rates and fixture fees first established in a 1963
contract. It is proposed to raise these fees by basing them on the
current District-wide fixture fees and current occupancy rates.
(1) Bold face type indicates revision to August 4, 1986, report of
1986-87 Rates and Charges.
C-23
B. RECOMMENDATION
The following fixture fees are recommended for Rossmoor.
TABLE 9
ROSSKlOR FIXTURE FEES
Current Recomend. Current
Occupancy Di stri ct-Wi de Rossmoor Rossmoor
- - - Factor* Fee Fee F.e.e
Fixtures
Kitchen 1.5/1.8 x $112.50 = $ 93.75 $21.62
Toil ets 1.5/1.8 x $ 22.50 = $ 18.75 $ 5.53
Lavatories 1.5/1.8 x $ 22.50 = $ 18.75 $ 5.53
Bathtubs & Showers 1.5/1.8 x $ 67.50 = $ 56 .25 $" . 03
Laundry Out1 ets 1.5/1.8 x $112.50 = $ 93.75 $22.63
Wet Bar, laundry Tray 1.5/1.8 x $ 22.50 = $ 18.75 $ 3.69
livi ng Unit**
1 Bath Unit 1.5/1.8 x $337.50 = $281.25 $66.34
2 Bath Unit 1.5/1.8 x $450.00 = $375.00 $88.43
2-1/2 Bath Unit 1.5/1.8 x $495.00 = $412.50 $99.49
* Current Rossmoor occupancy/Di stri ct-w ide occupancy for similar living
units
** Assumes kitchen and laundry facilities
C-24
.
Centrb. Contra Costa Sanitar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 2
POSITION
PAPER
BOARD MEETING OF
October 16, 1986
NO.
VII 1. BUDGET AND FINANCE 2
SUBJECT
RECEIVE THE DISTRICT'S AUDIT REPORT FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1986
DATE
October 8, 1986
TYPE OF ACTION
RECEIVE AUDIT
REPORT
SUBMITTED BY
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Walter Funasaki, Finance Officer
Administrative/Finance and Accounting
ISSUE: The District's audited financial statements and auditors' opinion thereon, and
management letter report, are being submitted to the Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND: Hood and Strong, Certi fied Publ ic Accountants, have comp1 eted thei r
examination of the District's financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30,
1986, and prepared their auditors' opinion thereon. The additional management letter
report which provides recommendations, if any, to improve the system of internal
accounti ng control s based on observati ons during the examinati on of the financi al
statements is submitted as Attachment 1. The financi a1 statements and accompanying
auditors' opinion were submitted in draft form to the Board's Budget and Finance
Committee for review.
All state and local governments receiving federal financial assistance of $100,000 or
more annually became subject to the requirements of the Single Audit Act of 1984 for
fiscal years beginning after December 31, 1984. Accordingly, the District's Clean
Water Grant projects for which grant proceeds received in the fiscal year ended June
30, 1986 exceeded $100,000 were subject to the Act's requirements. The Act requires
recipients of federal assistance to arrange for annual independent audits to inc1 ude
an audit of the financial statements, and a compliance audit to determine compliance
with funding program requirements. Federal agencies are required to rely upon the
audits, and any additional audit work considered necessary by any agency is to build
upon the work previously completed.
In addition to the customary examination of the District's financial statements, Hood
and Strong's scope of audit was expanded to include the requirements of the Single
Audit Act. Consequently, a separate single audit report will be submitted at the
November 6, 1986 Board Meeting.
The Board has followed the practice of rotating the District's auditors after three or
four years. With the completion of the 1985-1986 audit, Hood and Strong will have been
the District's auditors for four years. However, in order that the District may
receive continued benefit of Hood and Strong's extensive process of fami1 iarization
with the unique requirements of the Single Audit Act as they relate to the District's
5B Project, which will extend into the next fiscal year, it is recommended that Hood
and Strong continue as the District's auditors for at least an additional year.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the audited financial statements, accompanying auditors'
opinion, and the management letter report, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1986,
and affirm that Hood and Strong is to continue as auditors for at least an additional
ea r. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
gr~--4./.
1302.....9/85 WF PM
Attachment I
Hood
and
Strong
certified public
accountants
Telephone (415) 781-0793
101 California Street. Suite 1500 . San Francisco, CA 94111
October 10, 1986
Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
In connection with our examination of the financial statements of the Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District for the year ended June 30, 1986, we have made a study and evaluation of the
District's system of internal accounting control to the extent we considered necessary to
determine the nature, timing, and extent of our auditing procedures. Since such a study and
evaluation would not necessarily disclose all material weaknesses, we do not express an opinion
on the District's system of internal accounting control. However, our study and evaluation
disclosed no condition that we believe is a material weakness in internal accounting control.
Over the last few years we have had the opportunity to observe many aspects of the District's
operations. We would like to commend the Board of Directors and management of the District for
their concern with management and administrative controls. The importance placed on the
controls is apparent throughout the organization.
In addition to the emphasis on controls, we have been impressed by the District's general
approach to new projects, policies, etc. New projects are well-planned and documented. Outside
consultants are used in their respective area of expertise to give advice. Projects or policies
are not implemented without this planning process which, in turn, enhances the control
environment.
The result of the above is a District which operates in an efficient and effective manner. Again,
we would like to commend the District on their operation.
We would also like to extend our appreciation to Walter Funasaki, Steve Elsberry and the
accounting staff for their assistance during the audit.
~~
Associated Worldwide with Dearden Farrow International
.
Centrl... Contra Costa Sanitar) District
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
PAGE 1 OF 3
POSITION PAPER BOARD MEETI~g€bber 16, 1986
sU~~9HORIZE EXECUTION OF A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY TO LEASE THE UPPER PORTION OF THE
WALNUT CREEK OFFICE FACILITY, AND AUTHORIZE $13,000 FROM
SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE INITIAL REMODELING COSTS
WP 20047)
NO.
IX. REAL PROPERTY 1
DAO~tober 9, 1986
TY'Ailt'h~1,Tt~~ Lease
Authorize Funds
SUBMITTED BY
Paul Morsen, Deputy General Manager
INITIATING DEPT./DIV.
Administrative Department
ISSUE: Board approval is required to lease certain real property in accordance with
District Ordinance No. 154.
BACKGROUND: The District's Property Team has been actively invol ved in attempting
to lease the upper portion of the Walnut Creek office facility since December 1985.
Grubb & Ellis Company, the real estate brokerage firm hired by the District to find
an acceptable tenant, proposed the American Cancer Society, Contra Costa County Unit
of the California Division, Inc. (ACS).
The District Property Team and ACS have reached agreement on both the lease terms
and constructi on modificati ons to the facil ity to meet ACS's requi rements. Costs
for tenant-requested improvements were part of the negoti ati ons and have been
factored into the lease rate. ACS will pay $1.15 per square foot for approximately
4,700 square feet of lease space per month ($5,405/month) for a minimum of five (5)
years ($324,300), with an option for an additional five (5) years. The estimated
pay back period to the District for all project costs will be approximately two
years. ACS has other lease obl igations until April 1, 1987; therefore, the five
year term of the lease shall run from April 1, 1987, through March 31, 1992. The
agreement has been reviewed by District Counsel. ACS has signed the agreement and
District staff will execute the agreement upon receiving Board approval.
Upon execution of the lease agreement, the District is required to pay Grubb & Ellis
Company a fee of 25% of the first year's base lease amount, which is $16,215. The
fee will be paid in two payments - half when the lease is executed and the balance
when the tenant moves. The fee will be recorded as an offset against the lease
rental revenue received from ACS.
An architect and a heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC)/electrical
consultant have been hired under a General Manager-Chief Engineer authorization to
perform design services for the remodel ing work which is requi red to accompl ish
tenant-requested improvements, and to compl ete the necessary HVAC and el ectrical
work identified in the design phase of the original Collection System Operations
Department remodel ing project. The required HVAC and electrical work, which was
then identified, was postponed until a prospective tenant's modifications could be
inCluded in the scope of work, thus allowing both design and remodeling work to be
performed only once.
SUBJECT
AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY TO LEASE THE UPPER PORTION OF THE
WALNUT CREEK OFFICE FACILITY, AND AUTHORIZE $13,000 FROM
SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR INITIAL REMODELING COSTS
<DP 20047>
POSITION
PAPER
PAGE 2 OF
DATE
~
October 9, 1986
The major improvements requested by tenant include interior repainting, carpeting,
removal of map cabinets, and separating one large room into two offices.
The HVAC and electrical modifications to the office building are necessary to
increase electrical service from 300 amps to 500 amps, to install HVAC duct work for
air balancing in both upper and lower portions of the building, and to install
District-owned HVAC (pre-purchased) units on the roof.
The actual construction work will be publicly advertised for bid and staff will
request funding of the construction project at a future Board meeting. The prelim-
inary cost estimate for all proj ect work desi gn, constructi on, force account, and
contingency is $120,000. The prel iminary design phase portion is estimated at
$23,000, including District force account work and General Manager-Chief Engineer
authorization. At this time, we are requesting $13,000 from the Sewer Construction
Fund. A breakdown of costs for preliminary design is included in Attachment I.
This project is exempt from CECA per local guideline 18.2 (State Guideline Section
15301> .
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Deputy General Manager to execute the lease with the
American Cancer Society for the upper portion of the Walnut Creek office facility;
and authorize $13,000 from the Sewer Construction Fund for the initial phase of the
remodel project.
---------
13028-9/85
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT I
WALtiJT CREEK REMODELING LEASE PROPERTY
<DP 20047)
COST SUMMARY FOR PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Haviland Associates Architects
$ 6,000
Lars Fagarstrom (HVAC/Electrical)
12,000
Force Account
5,000
TOTAL
$23,000
Less GM-CE Authorization
<10,000>
FUNDS REQUESTED
$13,000