The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA BACKUP 01-19-84 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. Consent Calendar 7 1/19/84 I VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN POSITION PAPER General Manager-Chief Engineer TYPE OF ACTION DATE January 19, 1984 SUBJECT AUTHORIZATION FOR P.A. 84-2 and 84-3 (DANVILLE AREA) TO BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE FORMAL ANNEXATION TO THE DISTRICT SUBMITTED BY Dennis Hall Parcel No. 84-2 Area Danvi lIe 84-3 Danville Accept for Processing INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction & Services Division Owner Address Parcel No. & Acreage R.G. WILSON, etux 292 Smith Road Danville, CA 94526 196-092-02 (1.0 AC) R.N. MABERY, etux 279 Smith Road Danville, CA 94526 196-100-05 (1.03 AC) C.L. TUNISON, etux 293 Smith Road Danville, CA 94526 196-100-06 (1.0 AC) ELAINE P. FEREIRA 180 Oak Road Danville, CA 94526 196-100-007 (.94 AC) M.F. ROACH, etux 199 Oak Road Danville, CA 94526 196-130-07 (1.24 AC) D.M. MOODY, etux 309 Cross Road Danville, CA 94526 196-110-034 (0.48 AC) Remarks Existing homes on poor septic systems. Public sewers are being extended to these properties as pa rt of County Assessment District No. 1 981 -1 . Existing home on poor septic systems. Publ ic Sewers are being extended to these properties as part of County Assessment District No. 1981-1. Lead Agency Contra Cos ta County Contra Costa County Recommendation: Authorize P.A. 84-2 & 84-3 to be included in a future formal annexation. INITIATING DEPT./DIV~ DH REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION 1I;J1. ?1iG G /CHIEF ENG. U/ I - /J <.. II I)' l !f;f/JA JSM RAB RJD ~ '>5 ~)~ n1ctlt ~II ~ '" "8. Y 45 99 ~}~ I Ir""'oo... c?" ~,' ___ ;::::::::.... ~ 17' \, . ~::3. ....:...::: ". ..:::::;tt :.:,;", 5 7 ~:!:: :' '.' ."'Otr~ ~~ 12 II Sill::...... .~~;\:~ "'~ l '" ~ .......................12 CQll ~ tri..:::..... '~ \~:i,~~::i:i~:~~~:J <I. . ~ 7. . 11 :. .......... '::;:::::':A~~:}ltii:~. 179AC 4 m AC J .A" .............}\}.................... ......:........,. ............. · '. . )y\t~r.'\if\:::::;:r...: :::..,..... .:~:{~.~/:: 5.78 AC ,,~~ ,,~fa,;lt ".~ i ~~aJI 1: 24~ S2AC ~ tFJ; L36AC 220 AC 2.08 AC II BISCHOFF 12.90 AC 74 4.612 AC 73 5.9AC ~~... . .... <::->>::!<:> ~ 13lAC 1.l3AC 131 AC II 1.10Ae 6 72 2 350 AC r:': 98li 282AC ~!:1:.i1i!I!IIU~I!IIII!.i.II:I!I:..'~~: '. LOAC L2L~ IM...... ........ ..........d...:::~... .? ~_ "- .:.:.: :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.:.'.:.:.' ":':':':':':':':':'::::':::::::::,' :::fC.: A~\::: I..~ : ::::,":: I I 1 OAC '15 AC o OA IOIAC "~ LOOAC ::::.::.:.:. 215 AC .OAC ::::;:::;:::::::::;::';:;:::::::, ................ .,............................ ;:;" .~ . IOAe ~.:, i> " ~lll ~.. "7fr N I ' cO..... ~.. ( \II"'~ ~ 8~-R:- ~:~\.ii';'\I,I 5 M ~ ir-- "3 SUB .. ,. 4725 i-- I '" 2 f~;;:~i:;. \ B J ~~ :.;.;~ti;IIB \ Ii A ..:}:::~::: o 1 1 15Al :05AC I :::::::::-::::i/ 24AC ::::::}:::~t:,:, ::J 79 '.61-< y/ ~'1 ~l ~'('l II \ \.~ ..0 ~1 ~>I>" HUMPHP!Y I~O. 7e Ae I 1 VALLEY 2.52 AC .:;.;::::.:<.;.:::.;~;:;:;.; J ~ :>\{ " ~: ... ",,,.\1;' ~ L98AC : 19AC " "' 1 29AC ..' tI) OS80RN 32.20 AC ~ ...~<r..~""" " ..... "if:;.: ..~ .,~... .~.. ~ ... ' .....'". ~ ..... ".~ , 1.10 , .~ . . I :: ..... . it ~~ f, ... p- 15 'l"' VI! Ii ID.O .:>>..:(f::!} PSOAC AC + " I . Central Contra Costa Sanitary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. IV. Consent Calendar 8 1/1 /84 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE Janua ry 9, 1984 SUBJECT EXECUTE AGREEMENT RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY WITH EARL E. HOFFMAN, JR., ET UX, JOB 2595, SUB 4498, LOT 6, ALAMO AREA TYPE OF ACTION APPROVE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY Denn is Ha 11 INITIATING DEPT./DIV. Construction & Services Division ISSUE: The property owner wants to install two concrete block retaining walls, with lip I type footings, laterally across a 10-feet-in-width sewer easement. The area behind the walls will be backfilled to increase the usable back yard area and provide landscaping potential. BACKGROUND: CSO has televised the existing sewer and field reviewed the project area and has determined that the proposed improvements will not interfere with the present use of our sewer or any future maintenance operations; however, if the need should arise, the agreement requires the property owner to remove the structure at his expense within 30 days of notice to do so. RECOMMENDATION: Approve and execute "Agreement" and authorize its recording. REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACT/ON INITIATING DEPT./DIV. <<-. %11 DH JSM RAB RJD - ,- ~1 , "~8 /. '"" , II~ ---, , I<~\ I iJ I ~\ J/, ,.': I (' 1- -to ~t\. t~,t4 k I 8 ' ~ 1/' J.1tIlJE,s - ~ ~ ," --'--- lj3AcKFIl.L 7' ,," // 11 D~ I ~~ " rIrA,tfiR./WE/- ~ 3'" 'fEl~F 01<141(/ IIp~ :2- 5LOPE < I I --- " peA CrflvEi. 1q. _ 3" PERF DR./uN e,l"! Slf'l A.. A -z..8 REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT JOB 2595 - ALAMO AREA -----~~~--~ J.J. CARNIATO Counsel for the District Tel. (415) 283-1552 CENTRAL CONTRA COSo. A SANITARY DISTRICT ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer PAUL MORSEN Administrative Department Manager JOYCE E. McMILLAN Secretary of the District !SO I 9 IMHOFF PLACE MARTINEZ. CALIFORNIA 94l5l53 (4115) 689-3890 ROBERT A. BAKER Engineerin~ & Construction Department Manager January 20, 1984 Ms. Diane Longshore, Mayor City of Concord 1950 Parkside Drive Concord, CA 94519 Dear Mayor Longshore: A situation has arisen concerning past sewer service payments by the City of Concord to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) which merits your attention. The City of Concord owns and operates the flow meters which provide the basis for the sewer service charges. Joint meter tests by Concord and CCCSD staff have shown that these sewage flow meters have been providing incorrect readings. CCCSD has expressed our serious concern to your staff and been exchanging correspondence on this matter for several years. In a recent discussion with your staff, it was suggested that the process of resolving this urgent matter could be expedited by direct correspondence between our two agency's governing boards. An investigation by Cu1p, Wesner, and Culp Consulting Engineers (Analysis of City of Concord Wastewater Flows and 0 & M Billings, December, 1983) concludes that the errors in the sewage flow meters have resulted in an underestimation of flow and a consequent underpayment by Concord of several million dollars. As 11m sure you can appreciate, the problem resulting from incorrect sewage metering is large and requires our joint effort to resolve. The agreement between our two agencies concerning the treatment of sewage was executed in September, 1974. Under the terms of this contract,CCCSD has been providing treatment and disposal of wastewater from Concord. As a result of this service, CCCSD has and will continue to incur two kinds of costs; capital and operating. The Agreement provides that CCCSDls operating expenses are to be apportioned between our agencies based on the readings obtained from flowmeters owned and operated by Concord. Capital cost sharing is on the basis of the ratio of Assessed Valuation between our two agencies. The capital cost sharing formula was the subject of a grant condition in a Clean Water Grant between Concord and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The SWRCB is the agency which forced the present contrac- tural arrangement upon two agencies. This grant condition requires a review of the cost sharing formula in the early 1980's with the objective Ms. Diane Longshore Page 2 January 19, 1984 of correcting any imbalance of payments resulting from use of the Ad Va10rum tax formula. Subsequently, the City of Concord raised an issue with this condition. As we understand it, this issue was never resolved. The heart of the problem is that the Concord flow meters have not been pro- ducing reliable flow data. The Cu1p, Wesner, andCu1p (ewC) report shows that flows metered by Concord have averaged about 25% of the CCCSO treatment plant influent flow in recent years while Concord's population is about 33% of CCCSOls total service population. The ewc report provides the results of engineering analysis indicating that Concordls flow contribution should have been in the same ratio as its population, 33%. Furthermore, the capital cost sharing ratio has been averaging around 24%. In recent years, this figure coincided fairly well with the erroneous data from the flow meters. However, when compared with more accurate data, it is clear that the capital cost sharing formula also has resulted in a serious underpayment by Concord. The capital cost and operating expense issues each have both a past and a future aspect to them. The "past" aspect concerns uncollected revenues due CCCSO. This, we believe, should be the topic of negotiations between us in the near future. The "future" issues concern correcting the continu- ing problems connected with the design and calibration of the Concord sewage flow meters and revising the formula for capital cost apportionment. CCCSO staff believes that the Concord sewage flow meters are still not calibrated properly and have serious engineering design problems which require attention. This problem is most urgent because of the great magnitude of the costs which remain in question, and the fact that the sewage flow meters remain out of calibration. A series of steps which CCCSO would recommend to resolve the issues between us can be listed as follows: 1. The wastewater flow from Concord to CCCSO must be determined in an accurate and verifiable manner. The new means of flow determination should, to the degree possible, eliminate the possibility of further difficulties. The required corrections should be agreed upon without further delay and corrective action should be implemented as soon as possible. 2. CCCSO and Concord should revise the terms of the 1974 agreement con- cerning capital cost sharing. The revised agreement should base capital cost sharing on the same accurate flow determination that will form the basis of our operating expense apportionment. The CCCSO position, is simple. If Concord requires 1/3 of new capital expansions, Concord should pay 1/3 of the cost. 3. CCCSO and Concord should begin a joint engineering effort to arrive at as accurate an assessment as possible as to actual historical flows as a basis for negotiation of financial adjustments. Ms. Diane Longshore Page 3 January 19, 1984 4. CCCSD and Concord should then undertake good faith negotiations with the objective of determining the appropriate financial adjustment required. We would like to maintain the productive and cooperative relationship between Concord and CCCSD. I hope that we can meet and jointly resolve these difficult issues which face us. Very truly yours, CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT ~~ William C. Dalton President Board of Directors WCD:RAB:jf cc: R. Dolan B. Stewart itary District BOARD OF DIRECTORS NO. V I. So lid Wa s te 1 1/1 /84 POSITION PAPER VIA: ROGER J. DOLAN General Manager-Chief Engineer DATE SUBJECT January 11, 1984 TYPE OF ACTION RECEIVE THE RESULTS OF A SURVEY OF ORINDA CUSTOMERS TO DETERMINE THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR REFUSE COLLECTION RECEIVE SURVEY RESULTS SUBMITTED BY Walter Funasaki INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. Administrative Department ISSUE: Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. has submitted the results of a survey of Orinda customers to determine whether an increase in refuse collection services is desired. BACKGROUND: At the May 5, 1983 Public Hearing to consider a refuse collection rate increase application by Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc., a representative of the Orinda Association stated that Orinda residents would like an increase in refuse collection service to include one can of trimmings weekly and three seasonal pickups. The Board of Directors indicated that if there were overwhelming community support for such additional service, the request would be considered during the review of the next rate increase application. The Board suggested that the Orinda Association conduct a Publ ic Hearing and/or a poll to ascertain whether Orinda residents desired a change in their level of service. The Orinda Association conducted a poll through its newsletter and advised the Board of Directors that the majority of the respondents were in favor of increased services. At that Board Meeting, George Navone, Vice-President of Orinda-Moraga Disposal, stated that he wished to conduct a survey of each of the 5,504 Orinda customers to obtain a definitive preference. At the Board's request, District staff assisted in developing the survey form which was inserted in customers I quarterly billing statements during October, November and December 1983. A copy of the survey form is attached. The survey results follow: Total Customers Surveyed Total Responses Received Percentage of Responses 5,504 3,570 65% Su rvey Resu Its: Favor Additional Services No Preference Opposed to Additional Services 1 ,833 51% 539 15 1 ,198 34 3,570 100% - REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION WNF INITIATING DEPT.!DIV. ~d-~' PM As shown, 51% of respondents were in favor of the additional service, 15% indicated that they had no preference, and 34% were opposed to increasing the level of service; the inclusion of the 15% of respondents with no preference to those favoring increasing the level of service produces a combined percentage of 66%. It is recommended that this matter be included in the succeeding future Public Hearing to consider requested rate increases by Orinda-Moraga Disposal, and that the projected expenses of providing the additional services be included in the rate increase analysis. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the results of the survey of Orinda customers to determine their level of refuse collection service, and direct District staff to include an analysis of the projected expenses for providing the additional service in the next rate increase appl ication analysis. REVIEWED AHD RECOMMEHDED FOR BOARD ACTlOH INITIATING OEPT./OIV. GEN. MGR./CHIEF ENG. Dear Residential Customer: During the past few months, there has been an expression of interest by Orinda residents for an increase in the level of garbage collection service provided by the Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. The Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, which regulates the garbage rates, has requested the surveying of residents by this company to determine the majority view. If a substantial number of customers indicate a favorable response, the additional services will be considered by the Sanitary District Board of Directors during the next rate increase application review which would normally be conducted in Spring 1984. Please complete the following questionnaire to insure that your preference is included in the survey results. Return the questionnaire by removing it at the perforation and mailing it with your remittance for the enclosed quarterly billing in the self-addressed envelope. Your cooperation in assisting us to provide the level of service desired by our customers in Orinda is sincerely appreciated. Very truly yours, Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. SURVEY OF ORINDA CUSTOMERS TO DETERMINE SERVICE LEVEL FOR REFUSE COLLECTION Question: Should the present refuse collection service provided by Orinda-Moraga Disposal Service, Inc. be increased to include the following services for an additional charge which is estimated to be $1.50 per month? Additional Service: Trimmings Service and Tri-Annual Cleanup Service - This includes one grass/brush can/bag per week to be placed at curbside, plus the tri-annual cleanup in the Spring, Summer, and Fall which includes the removal of any rubbish, junk, cuttings, etc. up to two cubic yards maximum to be placed at curbside. (Two cubic yards is approximately fourteen (14) thirty-two (32) gallon garbage cans.) o o o Yes, the additional services for an additional monthly charge are desired. No. the additional services are not desired. I do not have a preference, for or against. the additional services. Name (Please Print) Address Signature Date