|
Council Agenda - City of BurbankTuesday, May 30, 2006Agenda Item - 3 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PURPOSE
Staff is proposing that the City Council:
Attachment 1 is the report by the Public Works Director (Report); and Exhibit �C� of the Report is the Map showing the exact boundary for UUD#1. Generally speaking, UUD#1 encompasses Olive Avenue from the Western Flood Control Channel to Victory Boulevard, and Lake Street from Olive Avenue to Magnolia Boulevard.
BACKGROUND
The City desires to underground overhead lines along view corridors. Within Burbank, 12,000 power poles support 275 circuit miles of BWP�s overhead power lines. Although �major view corridor� is an inexact term, staff estimates that 29 circuit miles run along 12 street miles of major view corridors like Olive Avenue. (More than one overhead circuit can attach to a pole; and so several circuit miles can run along one street mile). At its Council Study Session on June 15, 2004, the Burbank City Council (Council) reviewed policy issues and possible implementation steps for undergrounding overhead lines along major view corridors. Council embraced the strategy of focusing staff�s undergrounding efforts on major view corridors.
Council has maintained the existing level of $360,000 per year in BWP funding for aesthetically-driven undergrounding. By itself, this amount can fund about one-tenth street mile of undergrounding per year; today�s cost of undergrounding along major streets runs $3.6 million per mile or more. Given the current level of funding, staff is concentrating on short view corridor segments for which undergrounding would have maximum visual impact.
Underground Utility Districts (UUDs) allow the City to leverage its own undergrounding resources. On occasion, new developments and electric system upgrades allow aid-in-construction fees and capital improvement funding to supplement the $360,000 amount, but significant and predictable leveraging comes from forming a UUD:
UUDs increase the aesthetic impact of undergrounding by ensuring that other utilities underground their lines when the City undergrounds its utilities� overhead lines. With planning and coordination, UUDs can be timed to coincide with the City�s scheduled street resurfacings.
UUDs have been used to good effect by a number of municipal utilities including Anaheim, Pasadena, and Palo Alto. (Anaheim currently has 25 distinct UUDs, and its undergrounding program is a favorite of its residents and businesses alike.) Under Burbank Municipal Code Section 7-1002, the Council can form UUDs; and at its Study Session in June 15, 2004, Council directed staff to pursue establishing UUDs.
Attachment 2 was staff�s presentation to Council during the June 15, 2004 Study Session and includes PowerPoint slides as well as the staff report that reviewed undergrounding policy issues.
Council approved the first step towards forming UUD#1. On September 13, 2005, Council approved Resolution 27063, which directed the Public Works Director to:
Since the passage of the Resolution, BWP and Public Works have been working with the affected communication companies and customers.
ANALYSIS
UUD#1 would allow the City to achieve considerable visual impact with a minimum of complication. As mentioned earlier, UUD#1 encompasses Olive Avenue from the Western Flood Control Channel to Victory Boulevard, and Lake Street from Olive Avenue to Magnolia Boulevard. It represents a nearly ideal first UUD for several reasons:
The only drawback to UUD#1 is that BWP and the other utilities are entering a recently-resurfaced segment of Olive Avenue between the Olive Avenue Bridge and Lake Street; and this segment would have to be restored to its current condition. On balance, however, UUD#1 provides the community with �a lot of bang for the buck� without the complications that can occur with most UUDs.
UUD#1 would affect three communication utilities. As pointed out in the Report, BWP, the City, and three communications utilities would be undergrounding their lines within UUD#1:
The Report describes in detail each utility�s facilities within UUD#1.
Customer impacts are minor. As described in the Report, a handful of private customers along Olive Avenue would have to switch from overhead service to underground service as a result of UUD#1:
United Rental has underground service already, but BWP would need to move it from Olive Avenue to Orange Grove Avenue. Also, BWP would need to install a padmount switch at Pep Boys to enable the undergrounding of one of the power lines. BWP has contacted these customers, as well as Bormann Steel, and identified acceptable undergrounding routes within their property.
As described in the Report, a handful of private customers along Lake Street would have to switch from overhead service to underground service as a result of UUD#1:
Notice that, along Lake Street, BWP does not have to convert any of its customers from overhead to underground electric service.
For both the Olive Avenue and Lake Street customers, the underground line extensions are less than 100 feet, and so the utilities pay for them, not the customer. Customers would have to suffer the usual inconveniences during trenching and street restoration, which would last three or four months.
The work under UUD#1 would be similar to other BWP undergrounding projects. Although somewhat more extensive in its scope, undergrounding within UUD#1 involves the same basic steps of other undergrounding projects:
The economies of undergrounding within a UUD come mainly from joint trenching and the sharing of street restoration costs (when entering streets not scheduled for resurfacing).
BWP and the other utilities reached a consensus on key cost issues. BWP and Public Works held a kickoff meeting with these parties on November 7, 2005, as well as follow up meetings on December 8, 2005, and February 9, 2006. Working with a preliminary design of the proposed undergrounding (Exhibit �D� of the Report), the utilities were able to reach a consensus on key cost issues:
BWP�s cost estimates for these capital improvements do not reflect joint trenching but do reflect a joint sharing of street restoration costs.
Under Rule 32 of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the communication utilities will be in a position to pass on their share of the detail design and construction costs to their ratepayers once the Council establishes UUD#1. Until then, cost-sharing estimates rely on the preliminary design and await later refinement.
Dividing the work into two phases lowers the operational and financial impact in any one fiscal year. BWP and the other utilities also agreed to divide the undergrounding work into two phases that span a total of three years (June 20, 2006 to May 30, 2009):
This phased approach would spread the cost over the next three fiscal years (2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09) and would allow BWP to better coordinate UUD#1 undergrounding activities with its station construction activities.
The estimated costs for Phase 1 and Phase 2, from detail design through street restoration and removal of overhead facilities, break down by utility as follows and are based upon the judgment of the various utility staffs:
The Report provides cost estimate details for each utility. Most of BWP�s undergrounding efforts in UUD#1 are driven by the nature of the capital improvements to the electric system:
Only the existing 69kV lines would be undergrounded purely for aesthetics. Out of BWP�s total undergrounding cost of $3,021,000, this represents a cost of only $980,000, or 32%. (Italicized costs occur during Phase 2):
The undergrounding work within UUD#1 is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The exemption falls under the provisions of Paragraph 15302, Class 2(d) of �Guidelines For Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act � as adopted by the Secretary for Resources of the State of California , June 1992 or the latest revision. According to the State�s Secretary for Resources, converting overhead facilities to underground, and restoring the streets to as good or better condition, does not have a significant effect on the environment and is declared to be categorically exempt. BWP has filed a Notice of Exemption in the office of the Community Development Department�s Planning Division.
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT Creating UUD#1 would not have an adverse impact on BWP (Fund 496). The electrical undergrounding work would be funded within BWP�s existing funding for aesthetic undergrounding, supplemented by previously-identified capital improvement activities. Creating UUD#1 would not have an adverse impact on the City�s Street Lighting Fund (Fund 129). The street lighting undergrounding work would be funded within the existing funding for street lighting (1.25% of electric retail revenues). Creating UUD#1 would not have an adverse impact on the General City, including Public Works. The affected utilities would bear the costs of street restoration because, in the case of UUD#1, the affected street segments were not scheduled for resurfacing. Creating UUD#1 would have minimal adverse impact on customers, as they would not have to bear the costs of conversion to underground service.
Creating UUD#1 enables the City to leverage BWP�s planned capital improvement activities into an opportunity to beautify highly visible segments of the Olive Avenue and Lake Street corridors.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council:
If the Council concurs, the appropriate action would be motions to adopt the following resolutions:
GLS:DDB:jg L:\City Council\Staff Reports\2006\Olive Ave. Underground Utility District No. 1.doc
Attachment 1-Report of the Public Works Director Exhibit �A�-Council Resolution No. 27,063 Exhibit �B�-Burbank Municipal Code, Sections 7-1001 through 7-1032 Exhibit �C�-Map showing boundaries for UUD#1 Exhibit �D�-Preliminary underground design on which cost estimates were based
Attachment 2-Staff presentation at June 15, 2004 Study Session
c: Bonnie Teaford-Public Works Rick Morillo-City Attorney�s Office Paul Hermann-Purchasing
|