Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 12, 1992L, A G E N D A ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY 12o 1992 5:30 P.M. ROLL CALL: 'Councilmen Ciraulo, Harbicht, Lojeski, - Margett and Fasching All Present ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Approval of establishment of new job classification - Management Consultant (unclassified /part - time); Appointment of George J.'.Watts to that position and approval of Employment Agreement with George J. Watts. Approved as amended 2. Review and selection of proposed Charter revisions for proposed consolidated election School Approved with District. STUDY SESSION ITEMS 3. Financial Report 4. Prioritize major capital facilities (Police Woolard - Get background Station, Library, City Hall, Auditorium) material on Civic Center Master Plan 5. Soundwalls - Lopez contact Soundwall Committee re: formation of Soundwall District 6. Transportation System 7. Expanding Commissions ,= Guidelines to remain as is. 8. Relations with School District 9. Council Member Expense Policy - Liaisons to poll commissions re: expansion 10. Architectural Review Boards for those areas of the City that don't currently have them - Woolard to review formation of citizen committee; Miller report re: legal aspects of architectural design review boards. 11. Lighting Districts _ Lopez report re: lighting package including cost and time involved 12. Undergrounding Utilities 13. Possible ARA Issues - Study Session to be after June 10. 14. Other Items 15, Matters from Staff 16. Matters from Elected Officials 17. ADJOURN to 4:30 p.m., Monday, May 18, for a Closed Session followed by a Budget Study Session Alford - Obtain Council handbook from other cities. Planning Department - Initiate Code Enforcement Text Amendment. TO MAY 5 1992 COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1992 5:30 P.M. 1. Prioritize major capital facilities (Police Station, Library, City Hall, Auditorium) 2. Expanding Commissions 3. Architectural Review Boards for those areas of the City that don't currently have them 4. Relations with School District 5. Financial Report 6. Lighting Districts 7. Undergrounding Utilities 8. Soundwalls 9. Transportation System y 61 %.r CITY OF ARCADIA MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Gary W. Rogers, Administrative Assistant�g� Date: May 12, 1992 Subject: MEDICAL SERVICES 0z.z0 —G4 A' ed, ca f Cr iii es The City of Arcadia utilizes professional medical services for pre - employment physical examinations, annual and biennial employee physical examinations, and work related injuries and illnesses (workers' compensation). The current budget for medical services is as follows: annual and biennial employee physical examinations $ 55,810; pre - employment physical examinations $ 30,000; and workers' compensation medical expenses $ 273,000. This past year, City staff experienced a number of difficulties with the annual physical examination process at Methodist Hospital. Accordingly, staff investigated the possibility of conducting the annual and biennial physical examinations with other medical providers. At the same time, other medical service expenses of the City were evaluated. Costs, proximity to City facilities, administrative ease, and timeliness of medical reporting were considered in the evaluation. The findings are presented below. ANNUAL PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS Currently, the City's sworn Police and Fire employees, age 40 years and older rep: _rive an annual physical evaluation. Sworn Police and Fire employees under 40 years of age and management employees receive a biennial physical evaluation. The procedures conducted in each examination vary depending on classification and age. Bids for the annual and biennial physical examination were solicited from four medical providers: Foothill Medical Center of Irwindale, Methodist Hospital of Arcadia, Dr. Scott Nelson of Arcadia, and San Gabriel Valley Medical Group of South Arcadia. A comparison of the fee schedules of each provider has been made and is attached (Exhibit A). LASER EDF� E3 Mayor & Members of the City Council May 12, 1992 Page 2 The actual number and type of physical examinations for FY 1991 -92 were applied to the proposed fee schedules and are presented in Exhibit A. A summary of what the FY 1991 -92 employee physical evaluation costs would have been, as applied to each proposed fee schedule, is as follows: Foothill Methodist Dr. Nelson San Gabriel TOTAL COSTS $ 35,691 $ 49,255 $ 49,924 $26,689 San Gabriel Valley Medical Group presented the most competitive bid. Under the proposed fee schedules, San Gabriel Valley Medical Group is 25.23% less costly than Foothill Medical Center the next lowest bidder. Distance from City work sites and driving time to facilities was also considered in the evaluation. The San Gabriel Valley Medical Center is located on Live Oak Avenue in southern Arcadia. Public Works employees reporting to the City Yard on Goldring Avenue would save considerable time by seeking medical attention at the San Gabriel Valley Medical Group. Other City employees would only have to drive to the southern section of Arcadia to receive medical care at the San Gabriel Valley Medical Group. Due to the difficulties experienced in the past two years, the amount of time it would take to provide written results of the medical examination to City employees was considered. Written physical exam results would be provided to employees as identified below: Foothill Medical Center Within 1 day Methodist Hospital Within 21 days Dr. Scott Nelson Within 14 days San Gabriel Medical Group Within 3 days LASE' �►1�D r) � j 'v 1�awe N40001 Mayor & Members of the City Council May 12, 1992 Page 3 The San Gabriel Valley Medical Group submitted the lowest bid for the annual and biennial physical examinations. Their facility is located within reasonable distance to City employees, and medical reports will be provided to City employees within three days. Administratively, procedures can be established that will insure accountability, and effective scheduling and processing PRE- EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL Pre - employment physical examinations are currently conducted by Foothill Medical Center in Irwindale. The City has been sending new hires to for pre - employment screening since 1980. The medical testing conducted at pre - employment physicals is determined by the activities and requirements of the position to which a prospective employee is applying. The actual FY 1991 -92 pre - employment exam experience (to date) was applied to the proposed fee schedules from each medical service provider. The results are listed in Exhibit B. A summary of the total costs at each facility is presented below. Foothill Dr. Nelson San Gabriel TOTAL COSTS $ 5,058 $ 8,198 $ 4,123 Proximity to City facilities is not as crucial for pre - employment physicals because the individuals receiving the medical examination are not currently employed by the City, and therefore are not being taken away from City work. Timeliness of the reports is very important for this type of physical because employees often start as soon as the City receives confirmation that they are fit to work. The proposals and follow -up discussions with the medical providers indicate that medical results would be provided as follows: Foothill Medical Center Within 1 day Dr. Scott Nelson Within 1 day San Gabriel Medical Center Within 3 days LJER !AAAGED 7 `*4r _400 Mayor & Members of the City Council May 12, 1992 Page 4 The City has experienced an excellent working relationship with Foothill Medical Center in the past. San Gabriel Valley Medical Group is less costly, however given the timeliness of the reporting and the excellent working relationship with Foothill Medical Center, staff would recommend continuing pre - employment physicals at Foothill Medical Center. WORKERS' COMPENSATION Employees who suffer on- the -job injury and illness obtain medical attention from the Emergency Room of Methodist Hospital. Follow -up workers' compensation related medical treatment may be provided by specialists and other designated physicians. Follow -up treatment is usually coordinated by Colen & Lee, the City's workers' compensation administrator. Considering the cost differences for annual /biennial physical examinations, workers' compensation costs may be lower at the San Gabriel Valley Medical Group and /or the Foothill Medical Center, than at Methodist Hospital. It is difficult to quantify workers' compensation costs because the circumstances in each case are unique. The physician group in the Methodist Hospital Emergency Room completes and processes the required workers' compensation paperwork in a timely manner. Colen & Lee have worked on workers' compensation cases with Foothill Medical Center for another client, and indicate that their handling of workers' compensation cases is satisfactory. Colen & Lee have toured the San Gabriel Medical Group facilities, evaluated their documentation procedures and determined that the operation meets their administrative needs. They have also indicated that a transition to San Gabriel Valley Medical Group may improve the administration of workers' compensation claims because the facility uses a managed care approach to open cases, and the physicians may be more readily available to respond to inquires. Methodist Hospital emergency room is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Foothill Medical Center in Irwindale is open from 7:30 am to Midnight, Monday through Friday, and 8:00 am to 8:00 pm Saturday and Sunday. San Gabriel Valley Medical Group's facility is open from 8:00 am to 10:00 pm, seven days a week. If the City uses the San Gabriel Valley Medical Group as the workers' compensation provider, injuries or illnesses requiring medical attention between the hours of 10:00 pm and 8:00 am would need to be treated at either Methodist Hospital or Foothill Medical Center's El Monte facility. LASER IMAGED 72 Mayor & Members of the City Council May 12, 1992 Page 5 RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon the findings of this report it is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: 1). Direct staff to prepare a contract with San Gabriel Valley Medical Group to conduct the FY 1992 -93 annual and biennial physical examinations, and be the City's authorized workers' compensation treating facility between the hours of 8:00 am and 10:00 pm. 2). Direct staff to utilize Methodist Hospital for workers' compensation injuries between the hours of 10:00 pm and 8:00 am. 3). Direct staff to prepare a contract for FY 1992 -93 with Foothill Medical Center to conduct pre - employment physical examinations. APPROVED: City Manager Pro -Tem GWR /kf LASER IMAGED V r- G7 r`� 1 v G7 M C7 CITY OF ARCADIA - ANNUAL PHYSICAL EXAMS PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULES EXAM TYPE Police Police (40 -44) Police (45 A over) Fire Fire (40 -44) Fire (45 & over) Management Management (40 -44) Management (45 A over) EXAM TYPE Police Police (40 -44) Police (45 & over) Fire Fire (40 -44) Fire (45 & over) Management Management (40 -44) Management (45 & over) TOTAL COSTS a:annphys.a FOOTHILL METHODIST NELSON SAN GABRIEL SAN GABRIEL $177.30 $215.00 $232.00 $99.25 210.8' 215.00 272.00 139.95 304.35 375.00 422.00 274.95 186.50 285.00 261.00 105.60 220.05 285.00 301.00 146.30 313.55 445.00 451.00 281.30 120.85 240.00 187.00 74.25 154.40 240.00 227.00 114.95 247.90 400.00 377.00 249.95 FY 1991 -92 EXPERIENCE APPLIED TO PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULES No. of Emps. FOOTHILL METHODIST NELSON SAN GABRIEL 43 $7,623.90 $9,245.00 $9,976.00 $4,267.75 11 2319.35 2365.00 2992.00 1539.45 19 5782.65 7125.00 8018.00 5224.05 32 5968.00 9120.00 8352.00 3379.20 10 2200.50 2850.00 3010.00 1463.00 14 4389.70 6230.00 6314.00 393820 9 1087.65 2160.00 4 617.60 960.00 23 5701.70 9200.00 $35,691.05 $49,255.00 1683.00 668.25 908.00 459.80 8671.00 5748.85 $49,924.00 $26,688.55 Exhibit A LR 3 PRE— EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMINATION COSTS PHYSICALTYPE P -1 — Clerk /Dispatcher P -2 — Inspector /Custodian P -3 — Maintenance Worker P -4 — Police /Fire PHYSICALTYPE FOOTHILL NELSON SAN GABRIEL $76.25 $164.00 $54.25 130.95 270.00 99.25 238.05 396.00 178.05 402.70 576.00 348.05 ACTUAL FY '91 -92 (TO DATE) PRE— EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL EXAMS APPLIED TO THE PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE P -1 — Clerk /Dispatcher P -2 — Inspector /Custodian P -3 — Maintenance Worker P -4 — Police /Fire TOTAL COSTS r ?a cn M rT1 Cj t xpreemp.b No. of Exams 13 1 3 8 FOOTHILL NELSON SAN GABRIEL $991.25 $2,132.00 $705.25 130.95 270.00 99.25 714.15 1188.00 534.15 3221.60 4608.00 2784.40 $5,057.95 $8,198.001 $4,123.05 Exhibit B A 3 ,WM all fill iiel FROM: SUBJECT: r Memola"nood"M 5 -12 -92 Date Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Gerald R. Gardner, Fire Chief1 10A ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1991 EDITION It-is recommended that the Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition, together with the amendments, additions, and appendices be adopted, as herein designated, to constitute the City Fire Code as contained in Article III, of the Arcadia Municipal Code. The State Fire Marshal's Office has adopted the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code and it will become effective in July of this year. Fire and life safety codes are revised at three year intervals and it is necessary that the City adopt the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code at this time to provide up to date code requirements for new processes and technology compatible with current State codes. The Uniform Fire Code is a companion code to the Uniform Building Code currently being introduced for adoption by the Building Division. Both codes have been carefully correlated to ensure that there is no conflict between the two and that each City code compliments the other. The new fire code contains two fire protection amendments, a change in waste oil storage, and a permit fee for special events as follows: 1) The existing code currently requires fire sprinklers in all buildings over 5,000 square feet, in all multiple family occupancies, i.e.; condominiums, apartments, hotels, etc. and in all buildings in the M -1 and M -2 zone. A new section has now been added to require residential type fire sprinklers in all new single family dwellings. Residential sprinklers are designed to provide life safety and to contain the fire until arrival of the fire department. Fire sprinklers are the single most important element of "built in" fire protection and will provide significant safeguards against the loss of life and property in residential occupancies. The United States Fire Administration has conducted extensive testing in developing a low LASER IMAGED I D cost, effective residential fire sprinkler system. The cost of the residential sprinkler system will add approximately it to the total cost of new construction, which is usually less than the cost of carpeting. In most cases, a savings in insurance cost will amortize the cost of the sprinkler system in approximately five years. In addition to low cost, residential sprinklers are unobtrusive, can be flush mounted or concealed; materials are readily available, and new technology utilizes a fast acting sprinkler head requiring minimal domestic water supply. Attached for your information is a listing of forty seven (47) area cities that currently require residential fire sprinklers and a listing of twenty four (24) other communities that are considering residential sprinklers. 2) Fire Sprinkler Retrofit for existing buildings: a new section has also been added to require existing buildings to install fire sprinklers when additions to the structure exceed 5,000 square feet of total floor area, or when alterations or repairs are made to an existing building, 5,000 square feet or larger; exceeding 25% of the assessed valuation of the building as shown in the County Assessor's records, within a 24 month period. This is consistent with the existing code that currently requires fire sprinklers in all commercial buildings exceeding 5,000 square feet, and will clarify sprinkler requirements in existing buildings. Fire sprinklers will not be required in new or existing commercial buildings less than 5,000 square feet and the retroactive requirement will not apply to existing residential buildings less than 5,000 square feet. 3) A new section has been added to permit above ground waste oil tanks not to exceed 500 gallons capacity in certain commercial zones to aid in the proper disposal of petroleum waste products from repair facilities. 4) A new section has been added to require the payment of a $50. permit fee for special events, i.e. carnivals, fairs, special fireworks shows and to erect or operate a tent or other temporary structure, requiring additional fire department resources. Governmental agencies /school districts are exempt from this requirement. LASER E►,A a itu . err The balance of the code changes are basically administrative and housecleaning items to reflect current procedures, consistent with nationally recognized standard practices Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 13143.5, if the City is going to adopt certain standards that are more stringent than those requirements published in the California Building Standards Code, before adoption of the ordinance, certain findings must be made. These findings are to demonstrate that due to local climate, geological, or topographical conditions the more stringent requirements are reasonably necessary. Recommended findings are before the Council for consideration and adoption, prior to action on the ordinance. Recommendation: It is recommended that at the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council adopt the Findings of necessity regarding the Sprinkler provisions and then introduce Ordinance No. 1970. Ge ald R. Gar, ner, Fire Chief Approved: William Woolard, Acting City Manager Attachments LASER RAGED 6 c's. ��D Mentota_ _ slum /I1C!7,77 1);57 le. Wow rt AR AL " o Date: May 12 , 1992 TO: City Council FROM: Joseph R. Lopez , Director of Public Works` SUBJECT: Lighting Districts The City often uses the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 of the California Streets and Highways Code, Section 5000 et. seq. ) to construct street lighting improvements and assess each property owner according to benefit as indicated in the attached copy of a City Newsletter article (Spring 1991) . In accordance with current City policy and subject to availability of funds, the City Council contributes up to 75% of the initial cost of street light installation. As a rough approximation, cost to the residential property owner would be about $300-$500. The installation costs could be paid by either one lump sum or over a ten-year annual payment schedule at 7% , i . e. , $45-$75 per year. The current Lighting and Maintenance District was formed pursuant to the Street Lighting Act of 1919 (Division 14 of the California Streets and Highways Code, Section 18 , 000 et. seq. ) to provide revenue for the cost of power and maintenance. Once the lighting improvements are installed the improved area should be annexed to the appropriate zone of the Street Lighting Maintenance District. The City contributes up to 50% of the power and maintenance costs. The remaining costs are paid for by the property owner from funds derived from the tax rate per $100 of land value. The cost to the property owner would be about $50-$250 per year depending upon the property, lighting zone, and the extent of lighting involved. The City of Arcadia of Arcadia has used the Improvement Act of 1911 and the Street Lighting Act of 1919 since the current Lighting Maintenance District was created in 1970 by a reformation of the previous maintenance district. Most Cities converted to the more flexible Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (for both construction of improvements and power and maintenance costs) after the passing of Proposition 13 . Under the 1972 Act, common practice throughout the State is that all properties within a City pay an assessment for arterial and collector street lighting power and maintenance (in addition to an assessment for local street lighting) regardless of whether a property is located on the arterial or collector that has improved lighting, based on the premise that all properties benefit. LASER IMAGED ( ( Since an assessment for power and maintenance under the 1972 Act is made according to benefit, existing inequities due to land values resulting from Proposition 13 are eliminated, which is to say that comparable properties on the same street pay the same street lighting assessment for power and maintenance. An overview of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 is attached. As always, please contact me if there are any questions. JRL:mlo Attachment LASER IMAGED 3, ' 1'd- 1991 C,t21 /Jews /e/ter • w ■ ■t To fight Up You , Hot Tips For- - Neighborhood' - Summer Pet Care The Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control offers the A new City project has been developed following suggestions and warnings for zzx to help install street lights for the 30%of summer pet care that could save your Arcadia's neighborhoods which are -''=; pet's life. currently without lighting. It has been •```s Every animal must have shelter from shown in many studies that good street the elements and fresh,cool water at all lighting can be a cost effective way to _ .. times. This is essential for your pet's help prevent potential car accidents and wellbeing and is required by state and deter neighborhood crime. � --.._Nl county law. Statistics indicate that about 60% of NEVER leave an animal inside a all auto accidents in this country occur • +—� parked car on a sunny day even in the at night when traffic volumes are only shade.Cars trap heat and temperatures 30%of daytime volumes.On the average, �'∎, can soar to well over 100 degrees. Ani- night time accidents are four times more ' mals can suffer irreversible brain dam- fatal than those during the day.Because age,convulsions,and could die inside a of these statistics,street lights are present . parked car. along all major traveled thoroughfares. $45-$75 per year. The power and Watc:-, `or signs of heat stress.Symp- However, freeways, boulevards and maintenance cost would be paid toms ca:..nclude:heavypanting,glazed other heavily traveled roads cannot be annually. eyes,rapid breathing,dizziness,vomit- compared to residential streets.For the In order to apply for the program, ing, extreme weakness, and/or a deep most part, residential streets are quiet interested persons should first contact brick red or purple tongue.If your ani- and used by only a few people and not a the Engineering Division of the Public mal suffers signs of heat stress,cool the majority.Thisandotherbasicdifferences Works Department. After this initial animal immediately by hosing him off have made the development for a fair contact, City engineers will make field or bathing him in cold water and ap- pro equitable residential street lighting inspections,Compute nestimated ncosts for othe or ice gcream but do not et(him ldrink an program challenging. After careful consideration of costs installation and maintenance of the street unlimited amount of water. Get the and engineering feasibility, a program lights. animal to a veterinarian as soon as has been developed to meet the needs of Upon completion of this work, the possible. the residential streets currently without Public Works Department will send a Think ahead when planning vacations lighting. It is offered on a request basis letter to the individual requesting and holidays. if you plan to take your to these neighborhoods. improvements. This letter will convey pet, provide plenty of food and water. The City will contribute uptoseventy- the following information: (a)The type Make water available at all times. Keep five percent(75%)of the installation cost and tentative location of the proposed a license tag and identification tag firmly and up to fifty percent(50%)of the power street lights; (b)A map of the proposed attached to your pet's collar and let your and maintenance costs depending on area, including boundaries of the pet out in a new area only when on a the lighting zone in which the property "improvement district"; (c) Estimated leash. If you decide to leave your pet at is located.The remaining percentage of costs,including a per property proration home,make arrangements for a trusted, installation, power and maintenance method of payment; (d) A City petition mature adult to take care of him. costs, would be paid by the property form which must be circulated for With little effort and a lot of common owner. As a rough approximation,cost signatures of property owners within sense, you and your pet can enjoy a to the property owner would be about the designated area. happy, healthy and safe summer. $300-$500 for installation and $50-$250 In order to proceed with the program, per year for power and maintenance the petition,signed by at least 60%of the depending upon the property, lighting property owners in the area, must be • zone,andtheextentoflightinginvolved. returned to the Public Works Depart- City ServiceS The installation costs could be paid by ment. The completed petition will then �� ■ either one lump sum or over aten-year be presented to the City Council, and a c Directory`, annual payment schedule at 7%, i.e., date for a public hearing on the matter will be set. After the public hearing is Animal.Control 962-3574 -- r, ''�*,, ' - ,1 SV held, the City Council may order the ' Cable Television `;3 574=7171 e° F 4 4 installation of the street lighting. Chamber of Commerce 447-2159 'Arcaola Cat y vim, If the installation is ordered by the City Hall Offices: 574-5400 - t City Council, the Engineering Division Dial-A-Ride 445-2211 .,� ,Courn ;11 Ai. ` t will prepare all necessary plans and Fire-Business "574-5100 ,',jr s - f 5:: ^ r specifications.Through a bid procedure, Library 446-7111 Charless,Ei Giib »Sa,yrar,:�a�. rMa or ;)-fri 4 }; the appropriate private contractor will 'Methodist Hospital 445=4441 '- Rober fc-il arbichr ,t�Ia 6 1.3 m,, be selected to complete the work. ‘/ Municipal;Court .301-4058 ose uC Cirati7ci� t,Co{�n uemtieil : For more information about the street Jt. P 1 -N �� Police-Business 574-5150'. George Fasching '"Coiincilmember.:= lighting program, please contact Dan Refuse Service 303-3686 Lazo, Assistant Engineer, at 574-5400, Mary B Young i Counciimember extension 206'during regular business School District 446-0131 "K, ,,, , , , ,1 hours Monday through Friday. ILi°i;l .1 ' ? , Page 9 AN OVERVIEW OF THE L1 NDSCAPE & LIGHTING ACT OF 19.L GENERAL AUTHORITY Any local agencywhose annual taxes are carried on the county assessment roll and are collected by the county can initiate and establish a special benefit assessment district for the purpose of installing, constructing, maintaining and/or servicing public lighting facilities and public landscaping. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES The agency may establish an assessment district consisting of all or any part of the territory governed bythe agency, provided those areas that are included within the district benefit from the improvements and services. Areas within the district need not be contiguous, and the boundaries of the special benefit assessment district may extend beyond the territorial limits of the agency, provided extra-territorial jurisdiction is granted. • LEGAL DESCRIPTION A legal description of the district's boundaries can be delineated on anyplan or map which is on file with the clerk countyauditor,orihe county assessor.Resolutions,reports,diagrams,etc.,which establish or revise the boundaries of the district need only refer to the detailed plans or maps of the assessor. ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS Assessments may be levied to cover costs related to the construction, installation and maintenance of district improvements, including incidental expenses. Incidental expenses may include costs associated with establishing the district (preparation of legal documents, engineering reports, plans, and public noticing),as well as those costs that are tied to collecting assessment fees and administering the affairs of the district. • FORMATION PROCEEDINGS Proceedings to establish a special benefit assessment district are initiated by Council resolution. The resolution describes the improvements and/or services to be assessed,the districts proposed boundaries, and orders the preparation of an engineer's report. ENGINEER'S REPORT An engineer's report must be prepared for each fiscal year in which assessments are to be collected for services provided in a special benefit district. The report shall contain the following: • Contents A report shall refer to the assessment district by its disctinctive designation,specify the fiscal year to which the report applies and, with respect to that year, shall contain: (a) Plans and specifications for the improvements. (b) An estimate of the costs of the improvements. (c) A diagram for the assessment district. (d) An assessment of the estimated costs of the improvements. • LASER IMAuED U3J6 1 83SV1 • •s4uewanoidwl woJt 4l;eueq ;o aaJ6ap ewos aye Apo4uol.sgns enlaoai 111M yOILiM AJouna4 Ilo 1o4slsuoo Hogs auoz y•quawanoJdwl woij j jeueq,o saaJ6ap 6upagp anlaOeJ plan soejo snouon ayl 's4uawanoJdwl aLi4 Io 4ua4xa puo 'uo4000l 'aJnlou OLiU u! suo4oupn to uosoai Aq 'aJaym seuoz 4uaJel4lp o4u1 you 4sip4uawssesso uo uly4!M sow sno!JOn/41ssopAow lluawssesso puo w=J6o1p eyl seuoz olul uouo34lss013 • '((i 000 uopoas gum 6upuewwoo) L uolslnla) 1,1,6i. to }Oy l.uewenoJdwl eLil o} 4uonsind epow aq hogs s4uawanOJdwl eq.;woJJ.lieuaq IIIM pond 1o401 040U JO Jaylaynn}O uo4oulwJe4ep ayl•sluewenojdwl aye woi; laoJod Jo 401 Lions yooa Aq penieoej eq 04 s4ilaueq pe.owRRse ay; of uolpodoid ul sieoJodJO S40l algossesso ilo puowo4unowo;au all se4ngi4sipAiJlol yommpoyuaw Jo olnwiojAuo Aq pauo4Joddo aq Aow 4ol•4SIp 4uawssesso uo uigflM spuol uodn pessasso aq o}4unowo;au ayl luewuo4Joddy :4unowy 4 N • •slaoJod Jo SIOI ey} uo4du0sep 6uluJeouoo sllol.ep Ho Jo; wano6 Hogs IIoa;mu asoo Liolyn^ ul 'sleojrod Jo s4o1 aye jo uo4d;JOSap u Jo; 1101 l.uewssesso/4unoo aye ol.JG)OJ Aow 4uewssasso GUI •s4uawanoidwl CLi4 wau leoJod JO 401 Lions yooa Aq penleoai aq 04 supueq pel.owgsa eql olr uolJJodoid U! siaoJOd JO S401 !manes au 6uowo 4unowo;mu 6uluo4JOddo Aq P0!J43110 et-14 u1y41nn puo1 Jo sieoiod Jo s4ol epossesso Ilo uodn 4unowo ;au eq; ssessy (o) 'lo!Jlslp et-11 u1y1!MM puol ;o leoJod Jo lol apossesso yooa equosea (q) ,4014s1p4UeWSSGSSD eq; uly4M spuol elgossesso uodn pessesso eq o44unowo;au 040;s (o) :hogs puo saliddo 4! LPL-1m o}JDaA looslj eql.04 JalaJ Hogs;uewssesso eyl s4ue4uo0 :JOaA loosld 04 eouaJe48d 4uowssess ' • •sleoiod Jo stoi Lions;o suolsuewlp puo scull eyl. 6uiuJeouoo Sllo4ap Ilo Jo4 wan06 HMIs sdow asoy; 'esoo yoN rA ui 'sIeoJod JO 5401 Auo to suolsuewlp puo scull ayl to uo4duosap pajiol.ap o Jo;sdow s)ossesso/4unoo ay;of Jalai Aow woi6oip eq se!Iddo4Jodei eq uLpIgmo4JOaAIoOSileq 104 sdow s,Jossasso/4unooeyl uouMoys °soy;04 wJOJuoO!lays wOJ6Dlp ay;uo uMOLis puoi Jo leoJod J0401 yooa;o suolsuewlp puo scull eyl sdolN s,Jossessy o4 eoueJa;ad pun aOUDwJOJuo3 :SIeDJOd JO 5401 JO suolsuawla puo scull • 'Jeue1 Jo Jagwnu anuou4slp oAq pay4uapl aq Toys leoJod JO 40114003.40 4sip al-14 U!141m puo ;o leOJOd J0401 yooa;o suolsuewlp pun seull eyl (o)puo'p0u4s1p aq4 uiy4itA seuozAuo 4o se;Jopunoq ayl(q)';o 4slp 4UOwssesSD au;;0 se!Jopunoq Jo;Je xe.ay4 °(o)mot's hogs P1.4slp 4U8WSS8SSD UD 104 woJ6Dlp ayl 40f.4sla 4o woJ6ola • •(p)Jo '(s)'(q)uolslnlpgns ul o4 paiJejei slunowo ay;to Auo Aq 'aq Aow • 8SO3 au so'pesoeioap Jo pasoaJoul '(o)uolslnlpgns ul 04 pajielej so'54soo 4uewanoidwl 10404 eLi.6ulaq'.OuJlslpluewssesso au ulyl!M spuoi aigossesso uodn pessesso aq o;l.unowo4au ayl (a) •s4uawilo4sul Ionuuo U! pa4aepoo puo pelnal eq 04 s4uawanoJdw!Auo to 4so3 pa4ow4se au JOI 4UaW SSOSSo uo peJapio soy Apoq an4olsl6al aye eiayM JoaA posit eyl JOJ luewI1ol.su1 Ionuuo au;to '/qua 4! '4unowo ayl (p) .4J0d SILi4 04 4uonsJnd pelnal S4uaUJSSasso uoy4 Jeyuo saoJnos woJJ apow eq 04 suo4ngiJ4uoo Auo Jo 4unowo ayl (o) •JoeA loos!; snolnaJd o woJ,tJano pewoo aq o4 pun;luawanojdw!au ui 4puep JO snldJnsAuo JO4unowo ayl (q) •sesuedxe 1o4uepaui lIO 6ulpnou! 's4uawanoJdwl pasodoJd pub 6u4slxe ilo 6uIOiAJes puo 6u!uia4uiow Jo puo s4uawanoJdwi pasodoJd lID 6u111o4sul Jo 6u4OnJlsuoo Jo 54500 lobo; ay; 6ulaq 's4soo 4uawenoidwl 10404 eyl (0) :6uIMOIIoJ aye JOJ sa}ow4se up4uo3 hogs Joak 100514 014 104 s+uawanoJdwl mu to s4so0 ay4 to alowise ayl s4ua4uop :Slso°to salowisB • •4uawnJ4sul pauigwoo o so woj6oip eyl u! pe4oJodJOoui aq Aow L140 JO J81.41e JO S4uawn4sw e4oJodes so pajodaid eq Aow suo400IIOads Jo suold eLil•auoz Lions yooa Jo;papinoid aq 04 s4uawanoidwi to ad/' puo ssop eq4 al.00lpul'loys uo400y!Oeds puo suold 8q4'seuoz opul papinlp sl p!Jlsip 4uawssesso 8144 l! 's4uawenoidw!au to lualxe puo'uo!000l'eJn.ou eq4 eglJOSap Jo MO14S Aey4 Jl 4ue!OiJJns eq hogs 4nq 'pailo4ep aq 4ou paau suoi400!;iOads puo suold ayl'sluawanoidwl pesodoid puo 6uisixe egiiosep puo mot's Toys suo400iJloads puo suold eyl seuoz :suo44r0O!Jlaads puo suold • • - FILING OF ENGINEER'S REPO • Once completed, the engineer's report is filed with the City Clerk for submission to the City Council. The Council may approve or modify the report and proceed to adopt a Resolution of Intention,which declares the intent of the City Council to form a special benefit district and collect assessments to cover the cost of providing a specific service. The Resolution of Intention also notices a public hearing. NOTICES The City Clerk then causes the Resolution of Intention to be published, posted or mailed,which serves to notify property owners within the proposed district. • The Resolution of Intention is 'published once in a newspaper of general circulation not less than 10 days prior to the date of the scheduled public hearing. • Notices of the CityCouncil's intent to establish the district and hold a public hearing on the proposed formation also are mailed to all property owners within the district, unless the Clerk publishes the notice at least once a week for two successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation,in which case a mailed notice to affected property owners.is not required. PROTEST HEARING - The CityCouncil shall consider oral and written statements concerning the proposed formation of the district at the time of the public hearing.Modifications to the Resolution of Intention can be ordered by the Council during the hearing. Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council determines the following: • If the Council concludes that a majorityof the properlyowners within the proposed district protestthe district's formation,the Council mayoverrule the protest bya four-fifths vote.If four-fifths of the Council fails to override a majority protest, proceedings are abandoned. • If the Council concludes that there is nota majority protestof the propertyowners within the proposed district, the Council may them proceed to order the formation of the special benefit assessment district bya majorityof the Council.A resolution to form the district must be adopted no later than July 1,or at a later date authorized by the CountyAuditor,but under no circumstances later than the third Monday in August. Resolutions to'continue special benefit assessment districts from one fiscal year to the next must be publicly noticed and annually considered by the City Council at its first regular meeting in June. GENERAL NOTES (a) Divisions 4 and 4.5 of the Streets and Highways Code not applicable.(Sec. 22507) (b) CEQA proceedings are required. (c) L ■FCO proceedings not applicable. (d) The 1972 Act is outside Article XIIIA of the State Constitution. (e) Assessments shall not be apportioned on an ad valorem basis; use per parcel, front foot, area, etc., basis of benefit. (f) Areas within an assessment district may be classified into separate benefit zones. (g) The assessment district may consist of contiguous or non-contiguous areas. . (h) Territory may be annexed to and detached from an existing assessment district. () Proceedings must be taken pursuant to the Act for each fiscal year an assessment is to be levied. (j) Assessments are collected at the same time and manner as County taxes. (k) If the estimated costs of the improvements,othern than maintenance and operation,are greater than can be conveniently raised in a single assessment,the assessment can be collected over a period not to exceed five fiscal years. Annual installments must be authorized by Resolution adopted by the Legislative Body.(Sec. 22660, Sec, 22661) • LASER I AGLD • ,I • MAP -• .....,,,,,;,..../ .. _ , :•iii;'i i •//. •...:,/ - OF THE CITY OF :,��: , ./ % /;; MARGINAL M4 ARCADIA = ,JJ ;J_fir :/i - CALIFORNIA : , jl j j/i i (' / �� ', Z./ i ?:' r i (---- ,-, z,-, , ,_ _. • ..._:: ,., ,, , ___-„...,-- _,, „,,, „,„, --':g r --7.-_--L_______ -=–='-'' 9 , ii_______ 77-=---„, ,..„ • I I ,-1:;-: 'Y. ' Tiiii/ u./ a,/ A /.% i:,.•%/.ii-i:/.?»\ i' ,,,%;\; `�p ..tea\ 3 ■ iiii. �/ - �> iiilllCill fi„lt∎ 7'''''-.1 i _— III IIL' • - _ tl� .h': k.ttllllll1l I .. 1 I IIIIII L ! ��IIIIIIIIIIII...0.4willill -,. I _ ICI „,0„ „};•III�.:I� .arlul.,l IIII.I NORTH d � � IIIIIIhI hU!.--�;uwiun lulwu'-�y;;Ilil I. - e IIII IIII ::.�\�II ......\\\\c IIII NO SCALE ;7r r% �° ill ,,\.,, Ila\.\.. _ �p . III I \ �� � ICI r �< ';��II \.� \\��<.: • �';,��'*� S. I IIII .,/ is •a�<z•y\\\....;:`.;�!•"_ • III ,;.^,34. %/r,\� �.i�a _ pII' rI1 IUI / /�,, d.\\\� 'i r.% U�IIIII IIIIIIIIII I�f .s�,' IiIIIIIIIIIIII- /-.'x' \\\�\��/ ".'.,./-4,; lIlllllf II III ,�. \\\\\� � `:"IIII1111fiqpi '- I - ', -- /'' J i '�— ,IIIIII; i .`, 9 \� - z / '/4 /if;' � �� � �� /i'��>dk�;;av"�t ,/,-!t! /i.. /4;. / %''/iia/ r j In U// `,,,,.•,-:�. ': -Ally / �j�' G„/ // , /..: �% % • i, ''t '.* %ice MP'� , �iiii/ice. //ii////%%%%` 4 A r::I,.i is .-"�� ., r /r ,..,/.1,,;.;, % %;,, ,, -3..:'"iiiiiii02,•. ii.%'<1�"• i ! 1's j1:7.4//� ,...�. '! _ 1 / / °"vii'' s// /iii ;/,. rr;'/; / n , rte.- i:,,, %/���00��G��- • a/iii iiiiiii ai 4 } � 4ir� ' �'/. '- �V A './/�/'/, ,„,iii<--.+- %l 1 �� :, ,i;//v/ii-„ %/. 'fit % {� 434 !./:� ",- ,..•,..z••-,.,.,,,-,,. I •/ t om'; .�'M, g--I . - ' I�likv) / -_ - -; fir i�%2%' Eal . /1 1~I r �/, a \\ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII s;: iiiiiiii liiililllllll lilllill� r j. �. °IIIIII _.. I I . ; § t 11111 • LEGEND i j IIIIIIIl�i ZONE ' I111r1'Ilii«. A r`,, Ii �.... /,IIII I;• :IIII•::�`� ZONE B iiW4% j I o sow: �liiiil;ii,Il°`i•i i•,I4' SYSTEM I ♦n I1 ZONE C uuuuuDuum 1 J \ ZONE DI i I C I TY OWIJED ••••' "' / , Z 0 NE E �\\\\\\\\\�J s ysrEvA • ... UNZONED J STREETLIGHTS •- .. MAP OF sJ' ,`� • LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT- ZONES //� i �. , ti 0eC/O —Guy c�,/;"ral t/ /, 1' • �r �r nTnernot andum revirn 4a • c�e�ouT10. Date: May 11 , 1992 • TO: City Council FROM: Joseph R. Lopez , Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Study Session Item No. 12 , "Undergrounding Utilities" The attached sheets regarding Rules 20A & 20B are to replace those that were previously sent to you in your Agenda packet for Study Session Item No. 12 . /1 JRL:mlo Attachment Z.2-2/ • • LASER IMACID /02-- Rosemead, California • Cancelling Revi ' Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11841-E RUIe AoA II C ule 20 Sheet I of KU I.E LO atiee[ z of r�r1 •-�..�.1-{ -� -1.��11�.r Ill _II IUII II/ID GI eamaza GI tI 2=xca REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES . A. The Utility will , . at its expense, replace its existing overhead electric facilities with underground electric facilities along public streets and roads, and on public lands and private property across which rights-of-way satisfactory to the Utility have been obtained by the Utility, provided that: 1. The governing body of the city or county in which such electric facilities are and will be located has: a. Determined, after consultation with the Utility and after holding public hearings on the subject, that such undergrounding is in the general public interest for one or more of the following reasons: (1) Such undergrounding will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead electric facilities; (2) The street or road or right-of-way is extensively used by the general public and carries a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic; and (3) The street or road or right-of-way adjoins or passes through a fri civic area or public recreation area or an area of unusual scenic interest to the general public. b. Adopted an ordinance creating an underground district in the area in which both the existing and new facilities are and. will be located requiring, among other things, (1) that all existing overhead communication and electric distribution facilities in such district shall be removed, (2) that each property served from such electric overhead facilities shall have installed in accordance with the Utility's rules for underground service, all electrical facility changes on the premises necessary to receive service from the underground facilities of the Utility as soon as it is available, and (3) authorizing the Utility to discontinue its overhead service. • (Continued) LASER IMAGED (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1. 1990 Decision 90-05-032 Effective July 11. 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice President Resolution Southern Calif( _. 'a. Edison Rev' i Cal . PUC Sheet No. 12201-E Rosemead, Cali 1 i a Cancelling Revised Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11841-E & 11842-E 4,1 A u e Rule 20 Sheet 2 of 6 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES (Continued) A. (Continued) 2. The Utility's total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding within any city or the unincorporated area of any county shall be allocated as follows: a. The amount allocated to each city and county in 1990 shall be the highest of: 1. The amount allocated to the city or county in 1989, which amount shall be allocated in the same ratio that the number of overhead meters in such city or unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system overhead meters; or • 2. The amount the city or county would receive if the Utility's . total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding provided • in 1989 were allocated in the same ratio that the number of overhead meters in each city or the unincorporated area of each county bears to the total system overhead meters based on the latest count of overhead , meters available prior to establishing the 1990 allocations; or 3. The amount the city or county would receive if the. Utility's total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding provided in 1989 were allocated as follows: a. Fifty percent of the budgeted amount allocated in the same ratio that the number of overhead meters in any city or the unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system overhead meters; and b. Fifty percent of the budgeted amount allocated in the same ratio that the total number of meters in any city or the unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system meters. (Continued) LASER IMAGED • (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1. 1990 Decision 90-05-032 Effective Jul v 11. 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice President Resolution Southern Califc a Edison Rev Cal . PUC Sheet No. 12202-E Rosemead, Calii __ Aia Cancelling Revised Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11842-E Rule . o4 Rule 20 Sheet 3 of 6 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC, FACILITIES (Continued) A. (Continued) 2. (Continued) b. Except as provided in Section 2.c. , the amount allocated for undergrounding within any city or the unincorporated area of any county in 1991 and later years shall use the amount actually allocated to the city or county in 1990 as the base, and any changes from the 1990 level in the Utility's total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding shall be allocated to individual cities and counties as follows: 1. Fifty percent of the change from the 1990 total budgeted amount shall be allocated in the same ratio that the number of overhead meters in any city or unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system overhead meters. 2. Fifty percent of the change from the 1990 total budgeted amount shall be allocated in the same ratio that the total number of meters in any city of the unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system meters. c. When a city incorporates, resulting in a transfer of utility meters from the unincorporated area of a county to the city, there shall be a permanent transfer of a prorata portion of the county's 1990 allocation base referred to in Section 2.b. to the , city. The amount transferred shall be determined: 1. Fifty percent based on 'the ratio that the number , of overhead meters in the city bears to the total system overhead meters; and 2. Fifty percent based on the ratio that the total number of meters in the city bears to the total system meters. When territory is annexed to an existing city, it ;shall be the responsibility of the city and county affected, in consultation with the Utility serving the territory, to agree upon an amount of the 1990 allocation base that will be transferred from the county to the city, and thereafter to jointly notify the Utility in writing. (Continued) ,14) LASER iMj\u .L (To be inserted by utility) Issued by ' (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1. 1990 Decision 90-05-032 Effective July 11. 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice President Resolution 05/11/92 11:52 FAX 7i'4 592 3727 SCE COVINA DIST 4005 Southern Califo a Edison Rev I ' Cal . PUC Sheet No. 12203-E Rosemead, Cancelling Revised Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11842-E A L, /e a D p Rule 20 Sheet 4 of 6 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES • (Continued) A. (Continued) 2. (Continued) d. However, Section 2.a, b, and c, shall not apply to any utility where the total amount available for allocation under Rule 20-A is equal to or greater than 1.5 times the previous year's statewide average on a per customer basis. In such cases, the Utility's total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding within any city or the unincorporated area of any county shall be allocated in the same ratio that the number of overhead meters in the city or unincorporated area of any county bears to the total system overhead meters. e. The amounts allocated in accordance with Section 2.a, b, c, or d, may be exceeded where the Utility establishes that ; additional participation on a project is warranted. Such allocated amount may be carried over for a reasonable period of time in communities with active undergrounding programs. In order to qualify as a community with an active undergrounding program, the governing body must have awl adopted an ordinance or ordinances creating an underground district and/or districts as set forth in Section A. 1.b. of this Rule. Where there is a carry-over, the Utility has the right to set, as determined by its capability, reasonable limits on the rate of performance of the work to be financed by the funds carried over. When amounts are not expended 'or carried over for the community to which they are initially allocated, they shall be assigned when additional participation on a project is warranted or be reallocated to communities with active undergrounding programs. (Continued) U\SF_R � �� ,r �x • (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1, 1990 Decision 90-05-032 Effective JulY 11, 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice` President Resolution 146J V VU Southern Califoi, i Edison Revi Cal . PUC Sheet No. 12204-E Rosemead, California Cancelling Revised Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11842-E gut l e alsc A e Rule 20 Sheet 5 of 6 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD W_j_jT UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES (Continued) A. (Continued) 3. The undergrounding extends for a minimum distance of one block or 600 feet, whichever is. the lesser. Upon request of the governing body, the Utility will pay for the installation of no more than 100 feet of each customer's underground electric service lateral occasioned by the undergrounding. The governing body may .establish a smaller footage allowance, or may limit the amount of money to be expended on a single customer's electric service, or the total amount to be expended on all electric service installations in a particular project. • B. In circumstances other than those covered by A above, the Utility will replace its existing overhead electric facilities with underground electric facilities along public streets and roads or other locations mutually agreed upon when requested by an applicant or applicants when all of the following conditions are met: J 1. a. All property owners served from the overhead facilities to be removed first agree in writing to have the wiring changes made on their premises so that service may be furnished i from the underground distribution system in accordance with the Utility's rules and that the Utility may discontinue its overhead service upon completion of the underground facilities, or b. Suitable legislation is in effect requiring such necessary wiring changes to be made and authorizing the Utility to discontinue its . overhead service. IMAGED (Continued) LASES (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1, 1990 Decision 90-05-032 Effective July 11, 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice President Resolution Southern Califoi i Edison Revi Cal . PUC Sheet No. 12205-E Rosemead, California Cancelling Revised Cal . PUC Sheet No. 11843-E R cA Ie 20 B Rule 20 Sheet 6 of 6 REPLACEMENT, OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES (Continued) B. (Continued) 2. The applicant has: a. Furnished and installed the pads and vaults for transformers and associated equipment, conduits, ducts, boxes, pole . bases and performed other work related to structures and substructures including breaking of pavement, trenching, backfilling, and repaving required in connection with the installation of the underground system, all in accordance with Utility's' specifica- tions, or, in lieu thereof, paid the Utility to do so; b. Transferred ownership of such facilities, In good condition, to . the Utility; and c. Paid a nonrefundable sum equal to the excess, if any, of the estimated costs, exclusive of transformers, meters, and services, of completing the underground. system and building a new equivalent overhead system. 3. The area to be undergrounded includes both sides of a street for at least one block or 600 feet, whichever is the lesser, and all existing overhead communication and electric distribution facilities within the area will be removed. C. In circumstances other than those covered by A or B above, when mutually agreed upon by the Utility and an applicant, overhead electric facilities may be replaced with underground electric facilities, provided the applicant requesting the change pays, in advance, a nonrefundable sum equal to the estimated cost of the underground facilities less the estimated net salvage value and depreciation of the replaced overhead facilities. Underground services will be installed and maintained as provided in the Utility's rules applicable thereto. D. The term "underground electric system" means an electric system with all wires installed underground, except those wires in surface mounted equipment enclosures. • LASER IMAGED (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal . PUC) Advice 870-E • Ronald Daniels Date Filed June 1. 1990 Decision 90-05-032 . .. Effective ,July 11. 1990 RULE20. 12 Vice President Resolution P D Fr Yo ° Gd 166def5-/6/1//;t, ` :. Memotan ,tjj. Date: May 12, 1992 TO: City Council FROM: Joseph R. Lopez, Director of Public Worksj (/ SUBJECT: Underground Utilities Attached are a copy of the City's Rule 20A allocation balance sheet and a copy of the prioritized list of potential Rule 20A underground utility district projects as approved in the 1991-1996 and 1992-1997 Capital Improvements Programs. The City's annual Rule 20A allocation is approximately $260, 000. Also attached is a copy of Rules 20A & 20B of the California Public Utilities Commission. As always, please contact me if you have any questions. JRL:ds Attachment LASER IMAGED • UNDERGROUNDING FOR UTILITIES FUNDS Rule 20A Allocations. Each year, the Southern California Edison Company sets aside approximately $260, 000 for underground conversion projects within the City of Arcadia. The balance in this account as of July 1992 is expected to be as follows: Amount Available July 15, 1991 (includes 1991 Allocation) $314,760 Estimated 1992 Allocation (Available 7-1-92) $261,206 Estimated available funds for 1992 (Available 7-1-92) $575,966 Less estimated expenditure for undergrounding utilities District No. 13 (Second Avenue from Huntington Drive to La Porte Street) ($160.000) Sub Total $415,966 Estimated available funds for 1993 (available 7/1/93) $260,000 Estimated available funds for 1994 (available 7/1/94) $260.000 Sub Total $935,966 Less estimated expenditure for proposed Underground Utilities District No. 14. (Santa Anita Avenue from Colorado Blvd. to Huntington Drive) ($760,000) ° 1 Total Balance (available 7/1/95) $175,966 co rCapital Fund. Each year, the capital budget includes $50,000 to be placed in a fund reserved for undergrounding utilities and installing street lighting systems. This fund provides the necessary monies for the City share on City/property owner participation types of projects. Attached is a list of proposed� p p projects for utility undergrounding under Rule 20A in order C7 of priority with Estimated Cost. RULE -2,0 A POTENTIAL UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT PROJECTS 1. Santa Anita Avenue - Colorado Blvd. to Huntington Drive $ 760,000 2. Foothill Boulevard - Michillinda Boulevard to Rodeo Road $2,100,000 3. Colorado Street - Michillinda Boulevard to Princeton Road $1,100,000 4 . Duarte Road - West City limits to Holly Avenue $2,200,00 '- 5. El Monte Avenue - Duarte Road to Las Tunas Drive , $2,600,000 6. Holly Avenue - Huntington Drive to Live Oak Avenue $2,600,000.. 7. Santa Clara Street - Huntington Drive to 41 W. Santa Clara Street $ 300,000 8. First Avenue - North of Floral Avenue to alley north of Foothill Boulevard $ 250,000 9. Santa Clara Street - Santa Anita Avenue to railroad tracks $ 300,000 10. Morlan Place —Huntington Drive to Santa Anita Avenue $ 300,000 11. Alley_ - North of Huntington Drive from First Avenue to Indiana Street $ 200,000 12. Alley - South of Live Oak Avenue from east of Santa Anita Avenue to Second Avenue $ 600,000,__ 13. Alley - North of Foothill Boulevard from First. Avenue to east of Santa Anita Avenue $ 250,006 -; 14. Second Avenue - Huntington Drive to Duarte Road (only distribution lines and only $1,100,000 in' conjunction with widening) CJ) rn G rn ? • 4,9 . • _,,wero Southern California Edison Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 9011-E 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue.ROSemead.Ca Worms 91770 Cancelling Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 5999-E • R ale 2 0 A • Rule No. 20 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES A. The Company will, at its expense, replace its existing overhead electric facilities with under- ground electric facilities along public streets and roads, and on public lands and private ' property across which rights-of-way satisfactory to the Company have been obtained by the Company, provided that: 1. The governing body of the city or county in which such electric facilities are and will be located has: a. Determined, after consultation with the Company and after holding public hearings on the subject, that such undergrounding is in the general public interest for one or more of the following reasons: (1) Such undergrounding will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead electric facilities; (2) The street or road or right-of-way is extensively used by .the general public . and carries a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic; and ' (3) The street or road or right-of-way adjoins or passes through a civic area or public recreation area or an area of unusual scenic interest to the general public. b. Adopted an ordinance creating an underground district in the area in which both the existing and new facilities are and will be located requiring, among other things: (1) That all existing overhead communication and electric distribution facilities in such 'district shall' be removed, (2) That each property served from such electric overhead facilities shall have installed in accordance with the Company's rules for underground :service, all electrical facility Changes on the premises necessary to receive service from the underground facilities of the Company as soon as it is available, and (3) Authorizing the Company to discontinue its overhead service. , • 2. a. The Company's total annual budgeted amount for undergrounding within any city or unincorporated area of any county shall be allocated as follows: (1) Forty-five percent of the budgeted amount shall be allocated in th'e same ratio that the number of overhead meters in' such city or unincorporated' area of 'any county bears to the total Company overhead meters. (2) Forty-five percent of the budgeted amount shall be allocated in the same ratio that the total number of meters in such city or unincorporated area of any county bears to the total Company meters. (3) Ten percent of the budgeted amount shall be allocated to a Special Projects Fund. Conditions of eligibility for such funds are set forth in Section 2.b. below. • However, a county may elect to receive its proportionate share of the annual system Special Project Fund, as an annual allocation under the conditions set forth is Section 2.c. below. b. Special ' Project Fund allocations for replacement of overhead with underground ' electric facilities are subject to the following conditions, as determined by the Company. (1) Projects shall provide special benefit to the community or communities involved. (2) Overhead lines to be removed shall be located along a heavily traveled roadway that is designated as a scenic highway in the applicable city's', or county's general plan or in an area such as, but not limited to, adjacent to a civic • center or public recreation area where their removal would benefit a significant number of people. • • (Continued) LASER IMAGED (To be,owned by uealy) Issued by (To to inserted by Cal.P.U.C.) Advice No. 746-E Michael R. Peevey Date Filed • Decision No. • Name Effective • 86O812CO2(1) Executive Vice President Resolution No. Title 1. _/'4 Southern California Edison Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 9012-E 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue.Rosemead.California 91770 Cancelling Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 4658-E 20 A ('or14/ti CCU) Rule No. 20 • REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES • (Continued) A. 2. b. (Continued) (3) People other than residents of the affected city will benefit.. • (4) At least ten percent of the total cost of the Special Project shall be provided by the city or county requesting the Special Project Fund allocation. Greater weight in determining funding priority may be given by the Company to a city or county providing a higher percentage of the total cost of the Special Project. (5) The allocation for any one Special Project shall not exceed one million dollars (S1,000,000.00). (6) No city or county shall be funded from the Special Projects Fund for more than one Special Project within a five-year period. • c. Allocations may be elected by a county in lieu of participation in the Special Project Fund subject to the following conditions: (1) The county shall provide a letter to the Company electing not to participate in the Special Project Fund by November 1 of the year prior to the calendar year in which it elects not to participate. Such election shall remain in effect for future years without further notice. A county that does not provide notice as set forth above shall participate in the Special Projects Fund. However, a county may elect to change its status of participation or nonparticipation in the Special Projects Fund by providing notice to the Company by November 1, prior to the calendar year in which it requests the change to commence. (2) The Company will calculate the requesting county's prorated share of the Special Projects Fund and add this amount to its otherwise authorized annual conversion allocation. The prorated Special Projects allocation will be calculated on the same ratio as the county's share of the annual system conversion' allocation. The Special Projects Fund balance will be reduced to reflect these allocation transfers from said Fund. d. The amounts allocated in accordance with Section 2.a.(1) and (2) may be exceeded where • the Company establishes that additional participation on a project is warranted. Such allocated amounts may be carried over for a reasonable period of time in communities with active undergrounding programs. In order to qualify as a community with an active undergrounding program the governing body must have adopted an ;ordinance or ordinances creating an underground district and/or districts as set forth in Section A.1.b. of this Rule. Where there is a carry-over, the Company has the right to set, as determined by its capability, reasonable limits on the rate of performance of the work to be financed by the funds carried over. When amounts are not expended or carried over' for the community to which they are initially allocated they shall be assigned when additional participation on a project is warranted or be reallocated to communities with active undergrounding programs. Special Project Fund allocations under Section A.2.a.(3) may be carried over for a reasonable period iof time, as determined by the Company. 3. The undergrounding extends for a minimum distance of one block or 600 feet, 1whichever is the lesser. - Upon request of the governing body, the Company will pay for no more than 100 feet of the customer's underground service lateral. The governing body may establish a smaller footage allowance, or may limit the amount of money to be expended on a single customer's service, or the total amount to be expended on consumer services in a particular project. (Continued) LASER IMAGED (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal.P U.C,1 Advice No. 746-E Michael R. Peavey Date Filed Decision No. Name Effective 860812602(2) Executive Vice President Resolution No. T)w s Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 9013-E m17. Southern California Edison 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue.Rosemead.California 91770 Cancelling Revised Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No, 4658-E Rule -20 6 Rule No. 20 REPLACEMENT OF OVERHEAD WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES • (Continued) B. In circumstances other than those covered by A above, the Company will replace its existing overhead electric facilities with underground electric facilities along public streets and .roads or other locations mutually agreed Upon when requested by an applicant: or applicants when all of the following conditions are met: 1. a. All property owners served from the overhead facilities to be removed first agree in writing to have the wiring changes made on their premises so that service may be furnished from the underground distribution system in accordance with the Company's rules and that the Company may discontinue its overhead service upon completion of _ the underground facilities, or b. Suitable legislation is in effect requiring such necessary wiring changes to be made and authorizing the Company to discontinue its overhead service. 2. The applicant has: a. Furnished and installed the pads and vaults for transformers and associated equipment, conduits, ducts, boxes, pole bases and performed other work related toy structures and substructures including breaking of pavement, trenching, backfilling, and repaving required in connection with the installation of the underground system, all in accord- . ance with Company's specifications, or, in lieu thereof, paid the Company to do so; b. Transferred ownership of such facilities, in good condition, to the Company; and c. Paid a nonrefundable sum equal to the excess, if any, of the estimated costs, exclu- sive of transformers, meters, and services, of completing the underground system and building a new equivalent overhead system. 3. The area to be undergrounded includes both sides of a street for at least one block or 600 feet, whichever is the lesser, and all existing overhead communication and electric distribution facilities within the area will be removed. C. In circumstances other than those covered by A or B above, when mutually agreed upon by the . Company and an applicant, overhead electric facilities may be replaced with underground electric facilities, provided the applicant requesting the change pays, in advance, a nonrefundable sum, as determined by. the Company, equal to the estimated cost of the underground facilities less the estimated net salvage value and depreciation of the replaced overhead facilities. Underground services will be installed and maintained as provided in the Company's rules applicable thereto. D. The term "underground electric system" means an electric system with all wires installed underground, except those wires in surface mounted equipment enclosures. • • • LASER IMAGED (To be inserted by utility) Issued by (To be inserted by Cal.P.U.C.) Advice No. 746-E Michael R. Peevey Date Filed Decision No. Nam Effective Executive Vice President Resolution No. 860812602(3) Tito • s ` Lo 5 una'w(//ls \' : .�s•• � -� en�tota>>�i turn • e! °aroa.s.v. Date: May 12 , 1992 TO: City Council FROM: Joseph R. Lopez, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Sound Walls The construction of the Foothill Freeway through the City of Arcadia was accomplished in two sections. The portion east of Santa Anita Avenue extending through Monrovia and beyond as completed and opened to traffic in September 1968. The portion west of Santa Anita Avenue and extending to Pasadena was comple ed and opened to traffic in July 1971. It was not until March 1:76 that the portion through Pasadena connecting the Foothill Free ay to the Ventura and the Golden State Freeways was completed. Al•ng the portion built to the east of Santa Anita Avenue no sound walls were constructed in conjunction with freeway construction; howev-r, along the portion built to the west, some walls consisting of black or stucco-covered chain link fence were constructed. Commencing in 1974, the City of Arcadia, in response to petiti•ns from homeowners, began urging the State Department of Transportation, CALTRANS, to build sound walls. CALTRANS respon•ed by November of 1976 with test results that indicated noise lev-ls were not high enough to warrant including Arcadia in their six-y-ar planning program for noise barriers. Additionally, CALT''• S further advised that if the City would participate with 50% of he construction costs, construction of a soundwall project could t=ke place within two to three years. The City Council in January 1:77 declared their intention to participate. In March 1977, howev-r, CALTRANS stated that because of administrative changes it wo ld adhere to established criteria on a state-wide basis and would I of approve Arcadia's sound walls. Following a review of te-ts conducted in April 1977, CALTRANS stated that since sound lev-ls were at or within allowable Federal standards, no funds would be used for sound wall construction in Arcadia. Any project wo ld have to be funded by Arcadia if it desired to have the barri-rs constructed. Please note that Caltrans ranks potential soundwalls according to a Priority Index (PI) number. The PI number represents a bene. it to cost ratio as determined by the following Caltrans soundwall formula: LASER IMAGE' `� r � I (Achievable dbA reduction) x (dbA Noise Level-67dbA) x (number of Living Units) PI = Cost (in thousand dollars) The Caltrans benefit to cost ratio (P.I. ) is based upon the cos to Caltrans. If the City contributes a portion of the total cost, the net cost to Caltrans is lower, thereby resulting in a higher Caltrans benefit to cost ratio (P.I. ) and priority ranking. The City's partial contribution, however, is not reimbursable. If the City contributes the entire cost, the project jumps to the to;' of the list and can be constructed. The entire cost would be reimbursable without interest but would not be reimbursed for any years. In June 1980, CALTRANS constructed sound walls along cer ain portions of the Freeway in Monrovia because noise levels exce-•ded the established standard. Feeling that traffic in Monrovia was the same as that going through Arcadia, the City Council in July 983 adopted a resolution urging CALTRANS to construct noise barr ers within the City of Arcadia and forwarded copies of the resolu ion to CALTRANS and Assemblyman Mountjoy. Additionally, the Mayor in a letter to the Governor, urged that CALTRANS re-study the noise levels. An amendment to include Arcadia as a Transportation Improve ent Program (TIP) candidate project sponsored by Assemblyman Mountjoy was rejected by Los Angeles County Transportation Commis%ion (LACTC) because of non-qualifying noise levels. Pursuing another approach, Assemblyman Mountjoy in March 1984 requested CALTr • S schedule a new study. The City, in the meantime, decided to re ain Van Houten & Associates in April 1984 to prepare a new sound 1=vet study. CALTRANS reported in May 1984 the results of a new study wtich showed measurements indicating no significant change from ptior measurements. A preliminary report from Van Houten & Associates indicated noise levels of 64 to 70 dbA, which were similar to ttose taken by CALTRANS. Public interest continued through the summer, and in August 984 the Final Study by Van Houten was submitted to the City Cou cil indicating no change in the noise levels as previously reported. The total cost estimate of sound walls to reduce the noise leve by 10 to 12 dbA was estimated at $13 .8 million. Today's cost woul'; be approximately the same based on $350 per lineal foot. Please ote that Caltrans officials estimate that soundwalls constructed ith concrete filled polyurethane blocks cost less at about $265 per lineal foot. Based on $265 per lineal foot, the total cost would be approximately $10.4 million. Caltrans, however, has not yet approved this type of construction in lieu of the standard soundwall. LASER rvlrAciFn I ) A comparison study was deemed necessary by the City Council, as ten out of twenty-four sites in the Van Houten report indic.ted borderline noise levels of 67 dbA. The new report, submitte• in January 1985 by Van Houten & Associates, concluded that the t=sts were similar to those of the CALTRANS study and that the construction of sound walls to reduce the noise to accept-ble levels was not practical. After performing additional comparisons at the request of the C ty, Van Houten & Associates in March 1985 met with CALTRANS for fur'her discussions. In April 1985, CALTRANS retested and reported tha no significant change had occurred in the noise levels from prior tests and that Arcadia still did not qualify for the priority 1 st. Responding to the Citizen's Soundwall Committee request that 24- hour noise level measurements be taken, the City in October 985 retained Van Houten & Associates to perform additional measurements. Van Houten met with the Soundwall Committee, an in December 1985 conducted further investigations and test ng. Expressing misgivings about Van Houten & Associates, in that the consultant was not being responsive enough, the Soundwall Committee asked that they be replaced. In March 1986 the Council respo ded to the consensus of the Committee and approved that another acoustical consultant be retained. Subsequently, Gordon Bricken & Associates was retained in Septe ber 1986 to prepare a report for presentation to CALTRANS. Ater reviewing the correspondence in the City's files and discuss ons with the City, Bricken & Associates in January 1987 met ith CALTRANS for a review of criteria for determining placement on the priority list. CALTRANS indicated that it would take nto consideration any data collected by others but would use •;ata collected solely by CALTRANS to determine priority placement. nom January to April 1987, Bricken & Associates conducted f eld tests and reviewed various City records. The Final Report was presented in late July which identified four sections wit' a positive Priority Index. It was concluded that one section w•.s a good candidate for inclusion in the priority list but the o her three were marginal candidates. After reviewing the report, CALTRANS in October 1987 agreed to include the northside sec ion between Don Pablo and Baldwin low on the priority list but reje. ted the remaining sections because they did not meet the criteria Bricken & Associates was retained to conduct further test- in January 1988 to identify sites where noise level tests would re urn significantly higher results. Sites were identified, CALTRANS was notified, and in June 1988 Bricken & Associates conducted simultaneous tests with CALTRANS. The test results were similar to the previous test results, bu as indicated by the CALTRANS report in late June 1988, no o her section qualified for the priority list. CALTRANS additional y LASERINAGEP J • 1 • stated that until there was a significant event on the Freeway 'hat could change the results, no further testing would be performed by CALTRANS. More recently, however, a proposed soundwall on the north side of the Freeway (from Second Avenue in Arcadia to eas of Chestnut Avenue in Monrovia) was re-tested and was placed on the Caltrans priority list. However, it is low ranked. Therefore it will be many years before it could reach the top of the list. In fact, as other new eligible sections are placed on the lis ' at higher priorities, it may not be reachable. The estimated cost for this soundwall is $562, 000 for 1, 584 lineal feet in Arcadia and $188, 000 for 528 lineal feet in Monrovia. In an effort to increase Freeway capacity, CALTRANS is curre tly constructing a 19+ mile (approximately from Freeway 210/13 - to Freeway 210/57) re-striping project and High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane addition. A CHP enforcement area and sound all (approximately 4, 000 Lineal Feet) are included as part of the project in Arcadia. A soundwall/retaining wall will onl be constructed where the freeway needs to be widened to accommodat- an enforcement area. The project limits for the enforcement and soundwall construction initially included the north and south s.des of the Freeway from Michillinda Avenue to Baldwin Ave ue. Subsequently, however, due to limited funding, CALTRANS decide• to defer construction of the enforcement area and soundwall on the north side (westbound) , which would include the aforementi.ned soundwall between Don Pablo and Baldwin, until additional funding becomes available. Completion of the current construction project is expected by December 31, 1992 . As always, if there are any questions, please contact me. JRL:mo LASER IMA ED