Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10301990 - 2.1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on October 30, 1990 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBJECT: Utilities Undergrounding Policy The Board received the attached report dated October 30, 1990 from the Public Works Director relative to clarification of the County' s policy regarding undergrounding of utilities. Supervisor Tom Torlakson urged the Board to adopt the clarified policy. He advised that in many of the unincorporated communities major projects are being built without the undergrounding of utilities. He noted that there is an existing ordinance that does require undergrounding but it is not being enforced. Supervisor Torlakson referred to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) undergrounding fund, and recommended that the County contact the PUC relative to an increase in the County' s allocation. Guy Bjerke, 1280 Boulevard Way, Suite 211, Walnut Creek 94596, representing the Building Industry Association (BIA) , advised that the members of his organization had not had time to discuss the impacts of the proposed policy. He requested that the Board defer action to allow the BIA members additional time to review the policy. Supervisor Sunne McPeak expressed her support for the undergrounding policy, but noted that discussions with the builders would help assure quality planning in the East County area. She recommended deferring decision on the policy until November 27, 1990. Supervisor Torlakson agreed that there was a need for dialogue with the developers. However, he noted that there are projects in progress at this time and inquired whether the County would have the ability to impose the undergrounding policy on those projects. J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director, responded that that is a legal question that should be determined by County Counsel. He advised, however, that there is an existing undergrounding ordinance but that sometime in the mid 1970 ' s the Board of Supervisors directed his department to cancel the requirement for undergrounding. He noted that since that time compliance with the ordinance has not been enforced. Supervisor McPeak recommended that County Counsel and the Public Works Director draft language to be included in the policy that would reserve the County' s ability to impose the policy on any projects approved prior to adoption of the policy. 1 2 001 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: October 30, 1990 SUBJECT: Clarification of Policy Regarding Undergrounding of Utilities SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: Direct the Public Works Director to strictly enforce the provisions of Chapter 96-10, Under- grounding Utilities, of the County Ordinance Code, and to allow exceptions from actual undergrounding of utilities: 1. If the Public Works Director determines that undergrounding is not feasible at this time, and the applicant contributes a fair share toward future undergrounding of the utilities. 2. The Public Works Director determines that undergrounding in the project area is not foreseeable in the future and it is appropriate to defer the undergrounding and construction of frontage improvements to a future date. 3. The Public Works Director determines that the utility facility is a major transmission line requiring special installation and the fronting land use does not warrant the high expenditure for undergrounding. 4. The subdivision' creates rural residential or agricultural parcels greater that two acres in size. II. Financial Impact: No financial impact to the County. However, applicants will be required to finance and to install Continued on Attachment: x SIGNATURE: 040A, _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): CTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SJW:kd C:B030.tl O Orig.Div: Public Works (Road Engineering) County Administrator Community Development M. Kubicek, Deputy P.W. Director R. Gilchrist, Accounting J. Causey, Engrg.,Svcs. CLARIFICATION OF POLICY REGARDING UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES October 30, 1990 Page 2 the underground utilities, or, if specifically allowed by the County Public Works Department, to contribute a fair share toward the future undergrounding of those facilities. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: Chapter 96-10, Underground Utilities, specifically requires undergrounding of utilities. However, the cost of undergrounding utilities may be very costly for small developments. The informal undergrounding policy has not resulted in undergrounding of utilities along existing roadways with existing overhead distribution lines. Requiring strict compliance as recommended will provide undergrounding in newly developed areas or at least a contribution to undergrounding in the future where the extent of the proposed work is not feasible (determination by the Public works Director) for a small development. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: Continuance with the current informal policy will result in overhead utilities along the frontage of many new developments. The only feasible way of undergrounding these utilities in the future will be by undergrounding by individual property owners or petitioning the Board to form special undergrounding districts.