Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06131995 - 1.34 y /310 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: June 13, '1995 SUBJECT: Senate Bill 594 SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: Oppose, unless amended, Senate Bill 594 by Senator Russell. II. Financial lmpai=t: Senate Bill 594 could increase the cost of capitol improvement projects. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: Certain utilities (water, sewer, gas, electricity and telephone) under the Public Utilities Code, have free access to the rights of way of public streets and roads in installing their facilities. In exchange, the utilities are required to relocate their facilities which may be in conflict with proposed modifications of the public streets and roads. This Bill will require cities and counties to pay for relocation costs, if any subsequent relocation is required within 10 years of the first relocation. Since this is state mandated, the cities and counties could be reimbursed by the State. The cost of this mandate will likely be more than $1 million per year, therefore, the reimbursement will be subject to State budget actions. Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: CA, , RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON June 13, 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_x OTHER 160rcuy uurtity that thi3 is a truo and corroct copyOf an action taker,and entered on tho minutes of the Board of Supervi rs on the dgtoeshown. ATTESTED: P A ELOA,Clerk o the,113battl Supe VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ------- ) AYES: _NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MMS:drg g\admin\shiu:BO13.t6 Orig. Div: Public Works(Admin) Contact: Maurice Shiu(313-2251) cc: Smith&Kempton 915 L Street,Suite 1440 Sacramento,CA 95814 Transportation Engineering r SENATE BILL 594 June 13, 1995 Page Two III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background (cont'd): Coordination has been a concern of local agencies and utilities. In most counties, coordination committees have been established to cooridnate the capital programs of both local agencies and utilities to achieve savings for both local agencies and utilities. Staff understands that it is important to minimize the cost of utilities so that cost savings can be passed on to the users. Allowing utilities the free use of public rights of way have already saved the utilities millions of dollars each year. As proposed, Senate Bill 594 will require cities and counties to subordinate their rights to unpaying tenants by being denied the right to use the rights of way for its intended purposes. What this bill will hurt the most are the small safety projects which are typically constructed in phases due to budget constraints. Each increment is constructed and the effect on safety is then monitored. If desirable results are not attained, the next increment is constructed and again monitored until the desirable results are achieved. This bill will require cities and counties to either construct the planned ultimate safety improvements or acquire adequate rights of way to relocate the utilities.so that subsequent relocation will not be required. In either case, the cost implication will be severe and will greatly reduce cities' and counties' ability, to effectively deal with safety issues. Savings to the utilities will be at the expense of cities and counties. The legislature should try to strengthen the coordination through the committees instead of using a punitive appproach to achieve one sided cost savings for the utilities. If opposition of the Bill is not practical or feasible, staff recommends that the bill be amended as follows: 1. Require utilities to relocate their facilities within,90 days of notice by the cities or counties either for a construction project or for safety reasons. 2. Require utilites to pay for all construction contract right of way delays and to assume all liability and hold public agencies harmless for failing to relocate their facilities within 90 days after receiving notice from the cities or counties. 3. Require futilities to submit for review and approval by cities and counties construction plans that clearly show the vertical and horizontal alignments of any new or relocated facilities that they propose to install in public rights of way. Relocation caused by utilities not constructed in accordance with the approved plans will not be reimbursed by the cities and counties. IV. Consequence.-3 of Negative Action: