HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1985/05/02 Item 18 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 2126/86
ITEM TITLE: Public hearing to consider deferring the requirement to
underground existing overhead utilities adjacent to Otay
Valley Road Industrial Park
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works/
City Engineer (4/5ths Vote: Yes No x )
REVIEWED BY: City Manager
Sammis Properties, the developers of Otay Industrial Park, as a Code
requirement were required to place all existing overhead utility lines
adjacent to their property along Maxwell Road underground. Per the attached
sketch, utility lines are on the east side of the road at Otay Valley Road and
continue northerly adjacent to the Maxwell property on three poles, then they
cross over to the westerly side of the road for two poles, and then cross
back. In order for Sammis Properties to remove the two poles on their side of
the road, it is necessary to underground approximately 840 feet of utility
lines.
The developer has requested that the City not require the undergrounding of
these lines by Sammis Properties. The City Council is holding this public
hearing before considering this approval or denial of the request.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council hold the subject public hearing and deny
the request for deferring the utilities.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Sammis Properties is in the process of developing a 19-acre industrial
subdivision approximately 40 acres on the west side of Maxwell Road northerly
of Otay Valley Road. The Municipal Code requires that if the adjacent
facilities measure 600' or more, those facilities shall be placed
underground. Because of the crossing over effect on Maxwell Road, in order to
remove the two poles on the westerly side of the road, 840 feet of utility
lines would need to be placed underground.
The Municipal Code also provides for deferrals for waivers of the requirements
to underground in certain cases. The Code states in part:
"After conducting said public hearing the Council may defer the requirements
of this division after the Council finds from the evidence presented at the
hearing that all of the following facts exist:
s 'a'•
\-
Page 2, Item 6
Meeting Date Z1Z6I85_
3/12/85
A. That extraordinary conditions exist to the extent that enforcement of this
subsection would result in unnecessary hardship to the subdivider or the
utility company.
B. That such a deferral will not.. .be detrimental to the health, safety or
general welfare of the neighborhood."
According to the applicant, a representative from San Diego Gas & Electric
Company quoted an estimated amount of $35,000 to remove the two poles and
provide the undergrounding. The four poles on the east side of Maxwell Road
would remain. The representative suggested that it would be more practical to
underground these facilities as an overall district.
The developer, if not required to underground, must still relocate the two
poles to prevent conflicts with the planned surface improvements in Maxwell
Road. This would be done at a cost of $6,000-$7,000.
Sammis Properties believes that to require the undergrounding of these poles
at this time would be an expensive project and provide an unnecessary hardship
to them at this time.
Engineering staff does not believe that requiring the undergrounding of the
utilities along Maxwell Road would represent an unnecessary hardship to the
subdivider or the utility company. Sammis Properties is developing in excess
of 40 acres of industrial land. It is staff's opinion that the $35,000
expenditure is not excessive compared to other requirements for undergrounding
in the City. Staff does agree that it would be more beneficial to install all
the utilities along Maxwell Road as one project. However, from a procedural
standpoint, that could not be done unless Sammis paid the City directly for
their share of a future undergrounding project. _
If the project were to be installed at a later date as an assessment district
and the cost spread based upon benefit received, the assessment engineer would
look at the fact that the removal of these utility poles and lines would
benefit traffic on Maxwell Road based on some sort of traffic generation
factor. Since all of the property adjacent to Maxwell Road in this area is
zoned industrial , the logical method of prorating the cost would be on an
acreage basis. Sammis Properties will have approximately 40 acres while the
Maxwell property to the east will be approximately 17 acres. San Diego Gas &
Electric has estimated, on a very rough basis, that the total cost to
underground everything along Maxwell Road adjacent to Sammis and Maxwell
Properties would be $60,000. Therefore, if the total cost of undergrounding
the utilities along the frontages of Maxwell 's and Sammis' property is
$60,000, then the proportionate responsibility for Sammis would be:
40 acres x $60,000 = $42,100
57 acres
ik711PAPktinIAT
Page 3, Item 6
Meeting Date 2i/2&/-&5
3/12/85
Based on estimates from San Diego Gas & Electric, it would be cheaper for
Sammis to underground the portion between poles #3 and #6 at this time at a
cost of $35,000 than it would be to pay their fair share of undergrounding the
project at a later date. Because in addition to paying their fair share they
need to pay SDG&E $7,000 to relocate the existing two poles now. At a later
date when the Maxwell property is redeveloped, that property's developer would
then be required to underground the remaining poles #2, #3, and #6, therefore,
undergrounding the remaining wire between poles #1 and #7.
Relieving Sammis Properties of any undergrounding at this time places a larger
burden on the smaller 17-acre parcel entirely or leaves the burden upon the
City of Chula Vista to do the undergrounding. Based upon the design
guidelines in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project, these electrical
facilities need to be undergrounded. Therefore, Engineering staff does not
see justification for approving a deferral or waiver of the requirements at
this time.
The utility companies which may have overhead facilities in this area have
been notified of this request and its associated public hearing.
Slides of the area and plat are available for Council viewing.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
JWH:fp/PB005
WPC 1405E
by Lh2 City of
Chula Vi,;ta, California
Dated 5" 7-85-
A11AL91EiT
C
City Council Meeting - 3 - March 12, 1985
d. REQUEST TO INSTALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING NEAR BASE OF THE BONITA VALLEY
COMMUNITY TREE AT THE DUCK POND (Bonita Valley Garden Club)
The Bonita Valley Community Tree is planted near the Duck Pond on the Chula
Vista Municipal Golf Course. The Garden Club requested the installation of
four outdoor floodlights near the base of the Community Tree in order to make
the tree visible during the early evening hours throughout the year. They
have sufficient funds remaining from the Christmas Tree Drive last December
to cover the purchase and installation of the lights and would like to have
this installation completed for the Easter Weekend, April 6-7, 1985.
MSUC (Moore/Scott) to refer to staff for review and report no later than the
19th of March.
e. REQUEST FOR STUDY REVIEW AND GUIDE LINES FOR BALLOT ARGUMENT ACCEPTANCE
(Bob Green, 292 Talus Street, Chula Vista)
Mr. Bob Green requested Council initiate a study review regarding ballot
argument acceptance and guidelines for the City Clerk to follow in future
elections.
MSUC (McCandliss/Moore) for the letter to be filed.
Councilman Moore noted the City Clerk is doing what the law and policy states
and presents it to the Council before final approval. Mayor Cox requested a
letter be sent to Mr. Green noting Council's action.
f. REQUEST TO CONNECT TO CHULA VISTA SEWER (Joe Aflame, 46 "H" Street, Chula
Vista)
Mr. Aflame, owner of the lot at 4245 Allen School Lane requested connection to
the Chula Vista sewer provided all fees and annexation forms are submitted to
both LAFCO and the City of Chula Vista. The home is presently three quarters
completed with completion scheduled in early- June.
MSUC (Moore/Malcolm) to refer to the City Manager for action pursuant to the
standard City's Policy.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
4. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER DEFERRING THE REQUIREMENT TO UNDERGROUND
EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES ADJACENT TO OTAY VALLEY
ROAD INDUSTRIAL PARK (Continued from February 26,
1985 meeting) (Director of Public Works/City Engineer)
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public
hearing.
City Council Meeting - 4 - March 12, 1985
City Engineer Lippitt submitted slides of the area explaining Sammis
Properties is in the process of developing a 19-acre industrial subdivision
approximately 40 acres on the west side of Maxwell Road northerly of Otay
Valley Road. The Municipal Code requires that if the adjacent facilities
measure 600' or more, those facilities shall be placed underground. Because
of the crossing over effect on Maxwell Road, in order to remove the two poles
an the westerly side of the road, 840 feet of utility lines would need to be
placed underground.
City Engineer Lippitt noted the other issues involved: (1) The Maxwell
property is now a storage yard for their construction company and it may be
some time before they wish to develop that property; (2) if the area is ever
fully undergrounded and nothing is required of Sammis at this time Maxwell
could be held responsible for the entire cost at a future date; (3) this is in
the redevelopment project area and undergounding utilities will be considered
in design guidelines a future time for development of properties.
Staff contends that to relieve Sammis Properties of any undergrounding at this
time places a larger burden on the smaller 17-acre parcel entirely or leaves
the burden upon the City of Chula Vista to do the undergrounding. Based upon
the design guidelines in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project, these
electrical facilities need to be undergrounded. Therefore, Engineering staff
does not see justification for approving the deferral or waiver at this time.
City Engineer Lippitt outlined various alternatives recommending alternative
No. 3 - Sammis Properties to contribute to a future project.
Sammis Properties believes that to require the undergrounding of these poles
at this time would be an expensive project and provide an unnecessary hardship
to them.
Jeff Whistler, Property Manager for Sammis Properties stated the ordinance
stipulates the requirement for undergrounding.
"if there is 600 lineal feet or more of distance between poles within the
subdivision in a boundary area. .."
Mr. Whistler said he has measured the distance between lineal poles and his
figure is a total of 580 lineal feet. He added if poles 4 and 5 could be
relocated to accommodate the widening and resurfacing of Maxwell Road within
the subdivision, the cost would be $3,200. Mr. Whistler further explained
there are a total of eight poles in this boundary and feels only two of the
eight are on this subdivision property which does not constitute 1/3 of the
cost. He pointed out the ordinance states:
"that such a deferral will not be detrimental to the health safety or
welfare of the neighborhood".
The immediate neighbors are a rendering plant to the west, a recycling park to
the east and a dump to the north noting if the poles on Maxwell Road were not
undergrounded it would not have much of a visual impact on the "scenic
corridor" of Otay Valley Road.
City Council Meeting - 5 - March 12, 1985
There being no further comments either for or against, the public hearing was
declared closed.
Council discussion continued regarding not waiving any fees for
undergrounding; staff solution being equitable; desire to get area cleaned up;
the City may have to pay the largest portion of the $100,000 allocation; area
not being a 'scenic corridor' is not the question - City trying to upgrade
area; undergrounding would not include poles 1 and 8 until other projects were
completed; staff recommendation is for undergrounding to be paid 1/3 by the
City, 1/3 by Sammis and 1/3 to be fronted by the City and repaid when the
Maxwell property is developed; this property is in the City's redevelopment
area.
MSC (Cox/Moore) to deny the request for waiving the utility undergrounding and
approve an arrangement where the Sammis Property, the Maxwell Property and the
City of Chula Vista would each contribute one-third of the cost for
undergrounding the wires between poles two through seven.
Councilman Malcolm suggested referring the motion for the City's contribution
to the Redevelopment Agency. Mayor Cox stated this could be incorporated into
the motion.
The motion passed with Councilman Malcolm voting "no".
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Bess Pocklington, 656 Glover Place, Chula Vista, questioned whether the
'letter of the law' was being followed in appointing members to Boards
and Commissions (Chula Vista residents only). City Attorney Harron
responded that the City is complying with the law. There are some
committees however, that are not regulated by the Charter provision such
as the those in the Redevelopment areas.
b. J.R. Norman, 908 Mission Avenue, Chula Vista, referred to his request
over a year ago concerning the traffic report on the East "L" Street.
City Engineer Lippitt stated it would be at least six months before this
study can be completed unless a signal on Melrose is designated.
CONSENT CALENDAR (6-7-8-9)
MSUC (McCandliss/Cox) to approve the Consent Calendar (Items 6-9)
Mayor Cox commented he would abstain from voting on Item No. 6 due to a
potential conflict of interest.
6. RESOLUTION 11953 ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - BEACON PLACE, DAWN
COURT, RIDGEBACK ROAD - HIDDEN VISTA SUBDIVISION
(TERRA NOVA) (Director of-Public Wbrks/City Engineer)
a ti i ";Y r' r o
SDGE
San Diego Gas & Electric
May 20, 1985
SOUTH BAY DISTRICT OFFICE FILL NO
MOPAC 81073
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010 R
Attn: Paul Desrochers ` G Ej
IVED
Subject: Otay Valley Industrial Park MA Y 2 1 1985
G°mm°pi velopm
ty pee
Dear Sir: nt Dept.
This is to advise you the agreements providing for the installation
of utility facilities at the above-referenced project have been executed by
an authorized representative of San Diego Gas & Electric Company. The
effective date of the agreements is May 17, 1985.
As provided in the agreements, you have 60 days from the effective
date within which to initiate the work required by the agreements. The
60-day period will expire on July 17, 1985.
Additionally, the agreements provide that work must be completed
within one year of the effective date. Since the one-year period specified
in the agreements will elapse on May 17, 1986, it is important you be aware
of the time frame within which the work must be started and completed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call
the Planner, Barry Allred, 425-2330.
Sincerely,
/ ' :4•0e
4
Geof'rey P . Kregg
District Accountant
GDK:apc
cc: BEAllred
ie_l9 0/7
436 H STREET•CHULA VISTA.CALIFORNIA 92010 •TELEPHONE 619/425-3060