Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Eminent Domain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board adopts resolution of necessity for PUC subsurface tunnel easements; eminent-domain measure passes unanimously
Summary
The board held a public hearing and adopted a resolution of necessity authorizing acquisition of subsurface easements by eminent domain for a five-mile water tunnel connecting the peninsula and East Bay, part of the Public Utilities Commission's Water System Improvement Program.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Nov. 24 adopted a resolution of necessity authorizing the acquisition of subsurface tunnel easements in Alameda and San Mateo counties for a five-mile water tunnel that will connect pipeline segments across the bay as part of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Water System Improvement Program (WSIP).
The PUC’s director of the WSIP, Julie Labonte, presented the project and said the board’s approval of the resolution is a necessary step to secure property rights before the project awards contracts and orders a custom tunnel boring machine, which can take nine to ten months to fabricate. Labonte said the tunnel alignment runs roughly 100 feet below ground on the peninsula side and about 60 feet below on the East Bay side and that the subsurface easements will not impair surface uses of the affected properties.
The PUC is seeking subsurface easements from three owners: the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Cargill Inc., and the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans). The easements would protect a zone around the tunnel varying from about 15–45 feet below ground down to roughly 90–100 feet, depending on the vertical alignment.
Board members asked technical and schedule questions, including the cost and disposition of the custom tunnel-boring machine; the PUC said contractors factor salvage value into bids and the city typically is left with the finished tunnel rather than the machine components.
Under state law and the board’s procedures, the resolution of necessity required a supermajority in certain contexts; the clerk noted relevant statutory requirements, and the board proceeded with the hearing. After hearing from the PUC and receiving no public opposition at the hearing, the board adopted the resolution by unanimous vote (11 ayes), enabling the PUC to secure the property rights needed to proceed with procurement and contracting.
Ending: The PUC said it remains committed to negotiating voluntary agreements with property owners but needs the resolution to secure rights in a timely manner before awarding contracts and ordering long-lead equipment for construction.
