HomeMy WebLinkAbout7 High Street Water Pipeline Agenda Item
U11 am MIN 10 i MWO
To: Board of Directors
From: Peter Holzmeister
Date: April 2, 2004
Subject: High Street water pipeline
Why this matter is before the board: This matter was raised initially when
Dennis Zirbel made a request to the board under public input. At the last
meeting, the board referred this matter to staff and asked that we present draft
findings for a possible joint funding plan to construct a water pipeline in High
Street.
History: Attached are a letter from Dennis Zirbel and a staff memorandum that I
prepared for your review at the March 17 meeting.
New information: Attached is a draft resolution that contains a series of findings
in the "whereas" clauses and then proposes a decision that the board would
enter into a joint funding agreement for construction of the water line on High
Street.
Recommendation: If it is the board's wish to proceed with a joint funding
arrangement, adoption of this resolution would accomplish that task.
Agenda Item # 4
now I
I� IIII ,
Public1► •
4 • i District
Memorandum
To: Board of Directors
From: Peter Holzmeister
Date: March 12, 2004
Subject: Request of Dennis Zirbel
Why this matter is before the board: Dennis Zirbel appeared at the last board
meeting and presented the attached letter. He is in the process of purchasing
property on High Street, and has been told by District staff that the developer of
that parcel would need to extend the water line to satisfy fire flow requirements
associated with that site. In essence, Dennis believes that the District should
bear responsibility for extending the water line because the entire District would
benefit from it. The board agreed to agendize the matter.
History: There is an eight-inch water line along High Street that terminates just
before the parcel that Dennis is considering buying. So there is no water line in
front of that parcel at this time. We have talked with other parties interested in
building on that parcel. We know that the fire flows required by the Fire District at
that site will require looping of the water system from where it currently
terminates to the water line on Donner Pass Road, a distance of about 735 linear
feet and a cost of about $60,000.
The parcel that Dennis is buying is not the only vacant parcel that needs water
service. The adjacent parcels also need a looped line to meet fire flow
requirements. If the developer of each vacant parcel needing water service
constructed the water line in front of his parcel the water line would be extended
half way to the point of looping.
Dennis is drawing our attention to the 2000 Water Master Plan, which
recommends that a looped water line in that area would improve water quality for
the neighborhood. We agree. However, that project has not risen to high
enough priority for it to be constructed at this time.
New information:
Attached for your review is the District Rule regarding water main extensions.
Section 6.18.010.1 states that an applicant for water service requiring and
extension or modification of the water system shall furnish it at his expense. In
this case that parcel can only be developed if the line is looped for fire flow.
Service to the applicant requires modification to the water system.
The rule goes on to state in Section 6.18.010.2 that the District can require the
applicant to install facilities of a greater length or capacity than what is required
by the applicant, but the District must reimburse applicant for the excess cost. In
this case, looping the water system is not a facility greater than what is needed
by the applicant.
Dennis is relying on the fact that the looped water line will be a benefit to other
District customers. His argument is that the District should, therefore, build the
line. Caution is needed here. Generally, when a developer builds a water line
the case can be made that it has a benefit to other portions of the District. The
long-standing position of the District is that but for the developer we would not be
required to build that line. We therefore do not participate in its construction.
Changing our position now could have larger implications.
Alternatives:
1) The first developer in could be required to construct the looped line and, under
the District's current rule, would be entitled to a reimbursement from future
developers.
2) A second alternative would be for the owners of adjacent vacant land to join
forces to construct the water line. We could help facilitate such an arrangement
3) The third alternative would be for the District to contribute to the cost of the
line based on recognition of the value of the looped system to water quality. This
opens Pandora's box. If the board considers this alternative I suggest you make
findings that distinguish these circumstances from other developments.
RECD FEB 1 2004
February 12, 2004
Mr. James Maass, President
& Fellow Board Members
Truckee Donner Public Utility District
PO Box 309
Truckee, CA 96160
Dear Mr. Maass & Fellow Board Members,
I am currently performing my due diligence on purchasing a piece of mixed-use zoned property in
downtown Truckee, located @a 10363 FIigh Street. In continuing with my involvement and
research on the referenced property, I understand that the current water distribution system would
need to follow a proposed District upgrade, due to required fire flows- not usages - prior to the
construction of the property I am considering buying. My research on the water distribution
system for this area indicates that this property is at the end of a dead end system that has been on
TDPUD `s Master Plan to be completed as a loop system since at least the year 2000.
I have met with the District's staff and spoken to them about this area. I understand their
position: that the upgrading of this water flow from a dead end system into a beneficial loop
system is developer driven. I also understand that the District has higher priority projects in
providing reliable water to our community. I don't, however, feel it is equitable that the dead end
system be upgraded to the improved loop system primarily by the owners of the vacant property it
fronts. This proposed loop system has been on the Master Plan books prior to any of the more
recent development interests. By putting the financial burden of the District's proposed upgrade
on a small group of property owners is over and beyond what a typical customer in Brickelltown
is responsible for and makes their projects more difficult to "pencil out." There have been many
projects that have been proposed in this area, but they have been unsuccessful due partly to the
financial burden of this proposed upgrade.
From my understanding, I see that the beneficiaries of a complete loop water distribution system
are numerous and not limited to five owners considering the construction of modest office
buildings on the vacant land. I see that TDPUD would greatly benefit from having this dead end
system upgraded into a much enhanced and reliable water distribution system, especially at
someone else's expense. But considering how many of your customers would benefit from this
upgrade, I question whether asking five property owners to pay for this upgrade is equitable. All
the residential and commercial properties in the Brickelltown area of downtown Truckee would
benefit from an enhanced and reliable water system provided by TDPUD.
I am hoping that the President and Fellow Board Members of the TDPUD can also see the
benefits to the District's water system and the community it serves. I believe that because of the
District's end benefit and the benefit to it's customers, that TDPUD consider a better way of
funding this project that has been on the District's Master Plan for many years. Obviously the
District has felt that the proposed loop system is a benefit to it's water systems, adding it to their
master plan originally, naming TDPUD as the responsible party for the construction and noting
facility fees as the funding source. Additionally, with the District paying for the District's
proposed upgrade, they are in fact directly involved in strengthening Truckee's economy, a goal
in which the district seems to embrace.
This spring two of the five property owners are looking to start construction. In an effort to
expedite this process, I will attend your upcoming Board meeting and read this letter during the
public comment section. I would hope that this matter might then be added to the next available
Board Agenda so an equitable solution can be worked out with all involved.
Sincerely,
Dennis E. Zirbel
cc Bill Quesnel
Bob Hunt
Myrone Kamenetsky
Mitch Clarin
Ed Taylor
Peter Holzmeister
PO Box 296 Truckee, CA 96160
CHAPTER 6.18
WATER MAIN EXTENSIONS
Sections: •
6.18.010 Conditions
6.18.010 Water Main Extensions
6.18.010.1 Each applicant for service requiring an extension or modification of the water
distribution facilities shall furnish at his expense such extension or modification.
6.18.010.2 The District at its option, however, may require such applicant to install distribution
facilities with more capacity, of greater length, or of a different route than would be required for the
service requested (hereafter "excess facilities"). In such event, the District may reimburse the
applicant for the costs of such excess facilities if such excess facilities are required solely to benefit,
improve or upgrade service to existing District customers. If, however, such excess facilities are
deemed necessary by the District for the orderly development of an integrated water distribution
system in the area of the proposed line extension or alteration, then the District may require the
applicant to install and pay the cost of such excess facilities, and the applicant may be entitled to
reimbursement pursuant to Subsection 6.18.010(6).
6.18.010.3 All water distribution facilities installed hereunder shall be and remain the property of
the District.
6.18.010.4 Size and location of facilities installed shall be specified by the District. Type and
quality of material shall be that specified in General Requirements, Water Specifications, as •
adopted from time to time by the District.
6.18.010.5 The installation of main extensions does not alleviate the applicant from the facilities
fee requirement.
6.18.010.5 At the District's option, it may enter into an agreement with the applicant whereby
adjacent properties connecting to the main extension, installed by the applicant, will be required
to reimburse the applicant, through the District, for a prorated share of the main extension cost.
This reimbursement will continue until the line has been in service for a period of ten years.
(Water Rule 21, Minute Order 87-76)
6.18.010,7 Properties to be connected to the water system must be adjoining a cistribution main.
Extension of water distribution facilities shall be required for service to parcels not adjoining the
existing distribution main. Distribution system extensions or modifications may be required to meet
current system design and capacity criteria. The District may determine that it would not be in the
best interest of the District to allow a system extension or modification.
6.18.010.8 If, by reason of a lot line adjustment or lot split, water service to a parcel no longer
satisfies the requirement of Section 6.18.010.7, water service to the nonconforming parcel may be
terminated until such time as it is brought into compliance with District regulations. At such time that
the District becomes aware of a nonconforming parcel, the District will notify the property owner
anc nifia:e the process of bringing the water service into compliance with District requirements.
6.18.010.9 An applicant for water service or existing customer may apply for a variance from the
service requirements of the District. The variance shall be submitted in the form of a letter stating
• the requested variance, the reasons for the request and submitting a fee of two hundred dollars
(5200). The request shall be reviewed by the Water Superintendent and General Manager of the
District. If both agree tc grant the variance, the variance is granted. If either or both deny the
variance, the variance is denied. If the variance is denied, the applicant may appeal to the Board
of Directors.
6.18.010.10 In granting a variance to District requirements, conditions may be imposed to mitigate
any adverse impacts to the District water system caused by the nonconforming facilities.
(Water Rule 21, Minute Order 87-76, Reso. 9623)
R `solution No. 2004- XXX
PROVIDING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A WATER
PIPELINE EXTENSION IN HIGH STREET
WHEREAS Truckee Donner Public Utility District(District)serves water in the Truckee Community
for domestic and fire protection purposes; and
WHEREAS to accomplish that task the District builds and maintains a water distribution system in
accordance with certain engineering and construction standards; and
WHEREAS District experiences significant growth in customer base resulting in an increase in
demand for water for domestic and fire protection service; and
WHEREAS District has a long term policy requiring that development pay its own way by paying for
facilities that are required to serve the load it places on the District's system for domestic and fire
flow service; and
WHEREAS District policy recognizes that District has an obligation to current and future customers
to have in place a water distribution system that meets certain performance standards relating to
pressure, water quality and fire protection, and prepares a Water System Master Plan to guide the
District in development of its water system; and
WHEREAS said Master Plan calls for construction of a water pipeline extension in High Street to
provide a loop for water quality for existing customers to be funded with facilities fees; and
WHEREAS construction of said loop in High Street has not been scheduled for construction for
several more years; and
WHEREAS the Town of Truckee has announced that it intends to perform pavement restoration on
High Street; and
WHEREAS the Town and District attempt to coordinate construction of water pipelines such that
District does not cut recently paved streets; and
WHEREAS owners of certain parcels on High Street in Truckee desire to develop said parcels in the
future, which by itself could require extension of the pipeline; and
WHEREAS each prospective developer of vacant land on High Street proposes to develop at
different times; and
WHEREAS the Board of Directors finds that it is in the interest of District's current customers and
future developers of vacant parcels on High Street to agree to jointly fund construction of a pipeline
in High Street at this time to accommodate the Town's paving program;
NOW therefore be it resolved by the Board of Directors of Truckee Donner Public Utility District that:
1. District offers to enter into an agreement with the owners of five vacant parcels on High
Street,further described as APN 19-081-32, 19-081-33, 19-081-34, 19-081-20 and 19-081-
09,to construct an eight-inch water pipeline on High Street from the western terminus of the
existing High Street pipeline to a point of interconnection to an existing pipeline at the
Roundabout on Donner Pass Road.
2. Funding for said pipeline extension shall come from contributions from the developers of the
vacant parcels on High Street and from the District's previously collected facilities fees.
3. The contribution of funds from District's existing facilities fees shall be 50% of the cost to
construct the pipeline extension, not to exceed $50,000.
4. The developers of the remaining five parcels shall pay the remainder of the cost to construct
the pipeline extension by contributing equal shares sufficient to fund the remainder of the
total cost.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors at a meeting duly called and held
within the District on the seventh day of April, 2004 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
James A. Maass, President
ATTEST:
Peter L. Holzmeister, District Clerk
4
i
04t02/2004 13:54 5305828938 ZIRBEL ARCHITECT PAGE 01IO2
Dennis E. Zirbel, Architect
A Professional Corporation
P.O. Box 296
Truckee, CA 96160
Phone (530) 582-8979
Fax (530)582-8938
FACSIMILE
TRANSMITTAL
From: (1c}�t!-�1 S 2,t ,72�•-
Job#:
Date: A _
Fax
Pages: _page(s) total,including this cover sheet- Hard copy to follow: ❑Yes o
Notes:
k.pkG%.4 Tq-Vj 6 T S .,
Are N ' 5 F,>� ( �eSoL.%A T
NOTICE: CONFIDENTIAL&PRIVILEGED MATERTAL
The information eanteined in this faossimile is legally privileged and intended for use by the individuAs)named atxmve. If the reader of this Notice urn the original message to us at the shove address. Thank you.
is
not the intended recipient;you am hereby not5$ed that any di"emioation,distribution or mpuing of this facsimile is strictly prohi6ted. If you have
received this facsimile in error,please immediamly notifv us by telephone,and ret
re t
04/02/2004 13: 54 5305828938 ZIRBEL ARCHITECT PAGE 02/02
,--, .1�-
1. District offers to enter into an agreement mo�th th r
on High Street, fur#tar described as ARN e oviner's of TOK vacant parcels
pipeline on High Street from W*xxxx, to construct an e4Wftb water
pipeline to a point of inter the Western terminus of the oxistiAs jqiih stnst
Donner Paw poad. OnrlectiOn to an existing pipeffne,at the Pouridabouton
2. Funding for said pipeline extension shall come from co",bXOns frort,
developers Of the vacant Parcels on High Street and Me
collected facilities fees. from the District's previously
3. The contrtbution
cost to construct otfupnitplaeli from
exDtfamo
tdfofna ex's#n`9 faelit"es few shall be 60%of the
he
, not to exceed$WOW.
4. The developers of the remaining four parcels shall Me
pay remainder off he cost
to construct the pipeline extension by contributing eqUaf shares sufficlent to fund
the remainder of the total cost.
� f
T - 1:1 - 0 11�> k I 3 12-
-Z 'M3,e\-. og k , 3 -A-,)
�•"Z-PET'SY—� \c1 -
C>
OD 114X's fA�L
' LOT
T'O
PTN. S.W. 1/4 SEC. 7 & N.W. 1/4 SEC. 18, T. 17 N., R. 16 E., M.D.B. & M. Tax area Code 3-021 � g-35,
O '
DONNER
DONNER +-6e 2000o OLYMPIC TRACT
LAKE TRACT 1 300 00
18
42 I # OORAINE ROAD se
moo. t 2 Sec t8
+990 89, $ 18 $ "
Bk. 2 — g (7
19°3Ac o a z f,IM sOL oo'
,� 8 °Q
17 a ,e Pa ,>_,>6 w
351
16 17 8 j A 35� 0 28 25 24 2
14Ac 1 Me i
S 86 2" 00' E i/ 11 _Q .-> 5 10 9
L 14Ac 14AC _
32 s 66 z4 00-E A 3
1190 z�3 DONNER PASS ROAD
5Ri0 a°°s woo woo• w000' 36
64c ,_g4O iBAe �1 4 $� 66) n 5 >-4, 2Mpor�
OBAc OBAc 75Ac 09A. " O i6 35 �'1 as 10-45 ,00 oo• so ou• woo• ,000e '
,_—
�~-� 11-31 , 2 COuupN NtEA 6 10 # 8 > 8 9 84
\� 21 3 4 5 i 19 189 13 t5 #
78/w 3oM 21 Ac 74
o n$
J G
\\�\ ?�>a• •+ 8s 12-z90
A o zs
DONNER LAKE
A ozs
34
NOTE Assessor's Block Numbers Shown m Ellipses
DONNER PINES TRACT SUS. Bk. 1, Pg. 84 ,_,_oz Assessor's Parcel Numbers Shown m Crcles
DONNER PINES TRACT EXT. SUB. Sk. 1, Pg, 92 ONSSOR S PARCEL Assessor's Map Bk. 18—Pg.35
TINKERS LANDING SUB. Bk. 7, Pg. 61 County of Nevada, Calif.
TRUCKEE INC. R.S. Bk. 11. Pg. 67 2001
DLB 12/Ot
i