The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About8.2 UtiltyUndrgrndingPriortiesCITY CLERK File # 1Z1FQ1F91&�F21 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 26, 1995 SUBJECT: EXHIBITS ATTACHED Utility Undergrounding Priorities Report Prepared by: Public Works Director Lee Thompson 1) 1983 Adopted Policy Regarding Undergrounding 2) % Procedure for Use of Rule 20A Funds 3) Slides of various proposed undergrounding segments will be shown at the meeting RECOMMENDATION: Review underground utility projects and establish priorities for future VA undergrounding projects. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The City currently has a $20,000 balance in its P.U.C. (Public Utilities Commission) Rule 20A account (see description below for explanation) and will accrue additional funds at the rate of about $95,000 per year beginning in 1995. DESCRIPTION: The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requires utility companies to set aside funds for undergrounding (Rule 20A). Funds are accrued annually for each community, based on the relative number of overhead electrical services. When a City establishes a Rule 20A undergrounding district for PG&E purposes, the other utility companies are obligated to also underground their facilities at their cost. In 1983, the City Council established a priority list for underground utility projects. Two projects were subsequently constructed in 1985 and 1986 utilizing a 10-year advance of Rule 20A funds from PG&E. These projects undergrounded utilities on San Ramon Road between Dublin Boulevard and Martin Canyon Creek and on Dublin Boulevard between San Ramon Road and I-680. In addition, a Rule 20B underground project was constructed on Dougherty Road between the Southern Pacific Railroad Right -of - Way and Amador Valley Boulevard by the developer of the Villages at Willow Creek project in partnership with the City of Dublin. -------------------------------------- COPIES TO: g: \agenmisc\undergrd. doc Alain Erdozaincy, PG&E Dan Rothenbush, PG&E Frank Salguero, PG&E ITEM NO. _ 0*2_ e e Now that 10 years have passed, Dublin is again beginning to accrue Rule 20A funds. The City's balance at the end of 1994 was approximately $20,000, and funds will be accrued at the rate of approximately $95,000 per year, beginning in 1995. At the present time, funds may be borrowed only three years in advance. The current cost for undergrounding is estimated at $200 to $300 per lineal foot, depending on the extent of the utilities to be undergrounded and the amount of construction necessary. Rule 20A funds will pay for the cost of construction but will not pay for extraneous costs such as permit fees or administrative costs and will not pay the cost of any toxic cleanup that may be necessary in the trench area. Rule 20A funds will also not pay the cost of undergrounding the services for individual private properties. Following is a list offuture undergrounding projects, listed in order of the priority set by the City Council in 1983, with relative lineal footages and the present estimated cost for undergrounding: LOCA TION ESTIMATED LINEAL FOOTAGE 1,400 1,200 1,300 2,100 1200 ESTIMATED COST $280,000 to $420,000 $240,000 to $360,000 $260,000 to $390,000 $420 000 to $630,000 $240,000 to $360,000 2,000 $400,000 to $600,000 1,800 $360000 to $540,000 5,700 $1,140,000 to $1,710,000 4000 $800,000 to $1,200,000 6400 $1,280,000 to $1,920,000 As noted in the previously adopted policy (Exhibit 1), it is recommended that commercial areas be considered before residential areas, and that consideration be given to projects which could include developer participation or which could be done prior to or in conjunction with a street widening project. The street widening projects that could be done concurrently with undergrounding projects are as follows: 1) The Dublin Boulevard Widening project now under construction will relocate the sidewalk on the north side of Dublin Boulevard from Village Parkway easterly to the DSRSD offices. The utility companies could install conduit at this time when the area is opened up. This widening project would match the Dublin Boulevard - 1-680 to Clark Avenue section. 2) Dublin Boulevard Widening (Clark Avenue to Sierra Court). This project is tentatively scheduled for construction in Fiscal Year 1997-98 and could be done in conjunction with a second underground project. 3) Dublin Boulevard Widening (Sierra Court to Dougherty Road). This project has insufficient funding in the Five- Year Capital Improvement Program time frame, and as a result, has not been scheduled. Page 2 e e 4) Dougherty Road Improvements, Phase II (Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way to Houston Place). This project has insufficient funding in the Five Year Capital Improvement Program time frame and, as a result, has not been scheduled. If the City were to undertake an undergrounding project in 1996, approximately $390,000 in Rule 20A funds would be available, including the $105,000 from 1994 and 1995, plus $95,000 per year for three future years. It should be noted that if there are gaps in the street light pattern after. undergrounding as a result of removing wood poles, the City will need to add a Capital Improvement Project to install these lights as part of the underground project. This would be a concern in areas which currently have street lights on wood poles. Staff is requesting that the City Council review this project list, provide direction as to any changes in priority, and provide direction as to timing for the first priority project. Once the priorities have been determined, Staffwill work with PG&E to develop more exact cost figures for future capital project(s). Page 3 e e RECOMMENDED POLICY REGARDING PRIORITIES FOR THE UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES (June 13, 1983) Commercially fronted streets considered before residential fronted streets because of higher visibility due to commercial setbacks and higher traffic volumes thus affecting more people. Streets with pole lines on two sides of the street be considered before streets with poles on one side of street due to the greater reduction in visual pollution. Consideration be given to projects including outside participation such as private developers or assessment districts which would considerably lessen the public cost of the project. Consideration be made where a street is to be widened and the existing overhead utilities will need to be relocated. Review of priorities be made on an annual basis or more often as circumstances warrant. RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES I. Commercial Areas More visibility - high traffic use A. San Ramon Road - Dublin Blvd. to Martin Canyon Creek (poles both sides of street and can match timing with widening of roadway). Rule 20A estimated cost $350,000 (total cost with street lights $400,000). B. Dublin Blvd. - San Ramon Road to Golden Gate Drive (poles on both of street and heavy downtown traffic). Rule 20A estimated cost $421,000 (total cost with street lights $463,000). C. Dublin Blvd. - Golden Gate Drive to 1-680 (poles both sides of street). Rule 20A estimated cost $336,000 (total cost with street lights $372,000). D. Dublin Blvd. ., remainder between 1-680 and Dougherty Road E. Dublin Blvd. - San Ramon Road to Silvergate Drive F. Dublin Court G. Dougherty Road H. Village Parkway - Dublin Blvd. to Amador Valley Blvd. (note that existing overhead lines are already on street light poles). II. Residential Areas Less visibility because oflandscaping and less traffic. More problems with people undergrounding their own overhead services. A. Village Parkway - Amador Valley Blvd. north to City Limit line B. Amador Valley Blvd. - Village Parkway to Stagecoach Road C. San Ramon Road - Amador Valley Blvd. north to City Limit line ....."',d'- ~~DIT I ~~:,:,^t:~~c, '",_,,","~~~"'__~M'.~':l~ ! qg3 HdDpid 1h~~-' e e PROCEDURE FOR THE UNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD UTILITIES THROUGH THE USE OF PUC RULE 20A FUNDS I. Pre-Inquiry Stage A. City passes an underground ordinance (Dublin adopted the Alameda County ordinance by reference). B. City sets up an Underground Committee with regularly scheduled meetings to coordinate its underground program. (Dublin's Utility Coordination Committee meets on a montWy basis). II. Inquiry Stage A. City Council sets a first priority project and officially requests PG&E to proceed with the project. Details of the project are worked out between the City and utility staffs such as: 1. Validity of project (conformance to Rule 20A qualifying criteria) 2. Project boundaries 3. Project timing 4. Lead agency for trenching 5. Project costs 6. Review of Rule 20A allocations 7. Engineering specifics of the projects, including which poles the District will terminate on. B. PG&E responds to City in writing, confirming the major points of the proposed Rule 20A project. III. PG&E Review Stage A. PG&E's division staff reviews the proposal, solidifies the details, and votes on the project. B. PG&E advises the City of project acceptance and/or changes required on project. IV. Government Agency Action Stage A. City Attorney prepares a Notice ofIntention to form an underground district. Public hearing dates are established. Property owners within the District are sent copies of the Notice of Intention. B. Public hearings are held. C. Underground resolution passed by the City Council and sent to involved utilities. V. Estimate Preparation and Approval Stage PG&E prepares cost estimate, bidding documents, and contracts between the various utility companies involved. VI. Proiect Construction Stage A. Utility customers within the District perform their underground service conversion work. B. PG&E contractor completes the utility undergrounding work. (City may include the trenching and setting of utility vaults as part of the street improvement project for ease of coordination. ) C. PG&E removes poles. O:e:V U.. nIT " ,~,'''''~n~~';Jf "_~_IY......-- r.~) 1(b~duJre f>l Use or; ~~t