Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4 Dennis Zirbel Request Agenda hero # 4 �Ii� ��U�III�f� t�IgllilI�I�IiM�r Memorandum To: Board of Directors From: Peter Hohzmeister Date: March 12, 2004 Subject: kequest of Dennis Zirbel wny this matter is before the board: Dennis ZirbeP appeared at the last hoard meeting and presented the attached leffar. 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 fiow requirements associated with fhat site l essence, Dennis believes that the District should bear responsibility fior extending th 6.water,line because the entire Eistricf would benefit from it. Fhe board agreed to agend(ze the matter. History; Where is aR eight-inchuAter line.along High Street that terminates just before the;percel that Dennis is considering buyarq ;So there.'ts no vvater,ICrre in- front of fhat parcela# this tune t! ttatire to#kd wrfh,atner Parties interestari in brt�idcng or41hat.parcel .We know that:e fire flows reiiuired b}%'ttse dire Disfrtct at that site wit[ require loopir g. of the water system from where it currently ter nm6tes,to the ytater line.on Donner Pass Road, a,dista nee:of afzauf 73 linear feet and:a dost,of;about$60;400> The parcel;ttiat Dennis is buyEng is not the only vacanf parce(.that,needs water service. The adjacent parcels also" need a looped ,line to; meet fire.flow requirements. If tf e developer of each vacant parcel needing water service constructed the water line in€ront of his paroel=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 foe it to be constructed at this time. t t f is s. 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 FER 13 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 @ 10363 High 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 Brickelhown 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 1 benefit from an enhanced and reliable water system provided by TDPUD. F i 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 Garin Ed Taylor Peter Holzmeister PO Box 296 Truckee, CA 96160 i 1 r 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 thaf 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.E 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 :equired 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 nitiata the process of bringing the water service intc compliance with District requirements. i 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 cf 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 to 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)