No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-06-05 PacketAGENDA iTEM NO: MEE'I-[NG DATE: 3a .lune 5, 2002 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT,' INTRODUCTION OF INTERIM FIRE CHIEF RON COHN The City has recently retained the services of Ron Cohn, retired Fire Chief, as Interim Fire Chief for the City of Ukiah for up to six months. Ron was an employee of the California Department of Forestry for 40 years in various capacities including Division Chief, Deputy Chief, and finally Chief of the Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit. He also served as Fire Chief of El Dorado County Fire Protection District between 1999 and 2002. During his employment with the CDF, he was responsible for 11 rural fire stations, a 100-person conservation camp, and 28 urban stations, all staffed with full time firefighters and over 700 volunteers. Since his official retirement in 1995, he has served in several other capacities with fire districts and conservation camp programs, and has now agreed to serve with the City of Ukiah Fire Department for an interim six-month basis. Ron lives with his wife, Carolyn, in Shingle Springs, California, and has been a resident of El Dorado County for 28 years. We welcome Ron Cohn to our staff. He has already revealed an optimistic, professional style and we are very pleased to have him as part of our management team. RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved:' Candace Horsley, City'~nager 4:Can/ASR.RCohn.060502 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 2002 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on May15, 2002, the noti~:~:'w~:i~ ~. had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:30 p.m. in the Civic ~~ CounCii Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken :~ii!i~:i~ii~ollowing Councilmembers were present: Larson, Smith, Libby, and ?~ay~:~ii ~shiku. Councilmember absent: Baldwin. Staff present: Commun~ ~ervices :~;~i~ector DeKnoblough, Assistant City Manager Fierro, Risk Uanager/Budge~::~i?~icer Harri~i:::'~ Attorney Rappo~, Deputy Public Works Director Seanor, and;Gity Cler~?~ila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ash iku led th e P led ge of Allegiance. Mayor Ashiku read the Proclamation designating M~ ~?:~::, 20~2 as a Walk & Roll Festival in the City of Ukiah, and urged all who are '::~to take advantage of the benefits offered to those who ride a bicycle, walk, or ride a':~ bus to de so during this week and throughout the year ......... ~:~:::.~ :: Sanjeev Salajee accepted ~ ~+~i~~::~ behalf of the::~:~:h Rock and Walk Coalition. He discussed t~ ~ ~ ~ sche'~~[~?~:.~is week ?:~::~ thanked all of their Councilmem~;~~ ~:~mcommende~ ~ correction to page 5, fifth paragraph, second sentence it was his i~nsi~ to say that the Use Permit fees for second .un~::should b~ ~wered comm~6~ely to affordable housing permit fees being:t~[ed. He content to st::~J~?{he second sentence from the record. Mayor of accuracy, the minutes of the current meeting shou to state that Councilmember Larson stated his intent and would to reflect what was wriEen. City ~ney Rapp°~ ~i~::~d that if the last sentence is stricken it doesn't make the minutes i~rrect. Th:e:::i~l of detail is at the discretion of the Council. Council could remove th~i~nguage;~{:hout disto~ing what actually happened. Councilme~r Larson contended that the language is misleading from what he intended ~. He recommended the sentence be deleted from the minutes. He also the following corrections: hth paragraph, last sentence to read, "He supposed more than 1% in~ in Council's sala~ and felt a stipend for Commissioners should be considered separately from the Council's salad." Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 1 of 10 Page 11, sixth paragraph, the motion should read, "M/S Larson/Smith adopting Resolution 2002-35, approving Memorandum of Understanding for the Police Unit for the term of October 1,2003 - September 30, 2007." Councilmember Smith recommended the following corrections: Page~:'~i ~ird paragraph, to read, "Councilmember Smith voiced his support of the reco.~:ndation? Page 11, last paragraph, third sentence and advised that the minutes~,i?,i~?:='~"Co;~i based on what he said at the meeting, however, he made a mistake is sa~!~ that Don'~i~ ~erry was the new vice-president. He corrected his statement to ~ead, :'~h~y Fowler¥~ ~D new president and Richard Mosier is the new vice-preside~=~,~,,,:~:ii~,~,ii,:?:~? ~'~'~'::: Councilmember Libby recommended the following co~~n~'~?:~:made:~ Page 2, ninth pa agraph, to read, Counc~lmember L~bby recommended a correcbon to page 2, fifth paragraph, last sentence to read, "The Ukiah Police; ~cers ~ociation has challenge~ the Mendocino County Sheriff's Association to ~~heir ma~='~ Page 6, fifth paragraph, first sentence to ..... ~ead,==~=~:::~~¥~em~er Libby was not suppo~ive of doubling any of the fees. Page 7, first paragraph, and "Councilmember Smith su advised that the City process. She inquired if Cz to a statement Smith, of the a and she fees associated with the appeal to amen~.~'~:is statement. Councilmember Smith did not Libby's reference to his comment on Page 7. She also,recQ~ i~=~correction be"=~'~!~de to Page 7, third paragraph, first sentence, to read, 'C~"~'i'imem~ii![ibby voiced h==~ 99~ition to doubling any of the fees, was supportive ~='a small or ~sonable incre~ ~'~the levels as noted in Table 2, but did not sup~ a fee for a ;" Page 9, should read, "When the public is not being se~ed someone ~s an acceptable solution." third par~=~ b~jnning with "Ron Libby" and advised that she "has been aske, ~ak( a ch~?~?~ehalf of a member of the public because the comment was not ~ur italy re~~d. ,She requested the minutes be amended to include a more deta~i~:~ount of~:~:~. Libby s statements. City Clerk ~i~ila stated that the minutes summarize points of interest or concern of Council an~b public. :::'~:~?~:S~ ibby approving the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2002, as amended b~?~~ilmembers ~rson, Smith, and Libby to pages 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 11, failed to c ::~?;~y the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith and Libby. NOES: Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 2 of 10 Councilmember Larson and Mayor Ashiku. Councilmember Baldwin. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Mayor Ashiku felt Councilmembers have to be careful about changing wi" said at a prior meeting. If a Councilmember meant something else then reflected in this meeting's minutes. He expressed concern with amen~ an~ later if a citizen listens to a tape that's the part of the record the~ these minutes don't reflect what was actually said during the meeting, if Councilmembers want particular or specific language incorporated should li~en to those tapes to understand what was actually said. '~':~::~/':~:'/~?.:~ Councilmember Libby inquired as to what amendment Mayor Ashiku advised that he was speaking in gen~i?~bout s~me of the things that :.:: have come forward or proposed. Councilmember Libby stated that she has a'?~i?~ ~e ta~'::~:~~ listened to them to make sure what she had said. :~'~::~:'~'!!i?~iii iii ?~ili,~:~:~,~i~,!,,',i ~i~'~'~::~:~ ...... City Attorney Rapport explained that all Of the other C~'~i!membe[8~,may not have listened to the tapes so they're no[:.:~,i,~, a position to know whet~ii~,[~:~ei ~tements were incorrect. He advised that there~ii,,ii~~:,i?~tO,,~:,~e some method of v~i~!':i~:~he statements if it becomes an issue. Prob~ii~'='::~::~:~~t, iiiiii~y would be fQ~ i~!i?~ouncilperson who believes that discrepancy e~i~ t~ ~resen'~'::=:::~i~ ~'~i~e~::City Cle~ ~efore the meeting so she has an opportunity t0'::::'listem!~.i~O: the ta~ ii!~i~i~ ~,,~:,,~e meeting and verify the inaccuracy and be able to inform all Cou,~i~,~embe:~ ~?,~ the actual facts. Mayor Ashiku ~~d that Council'~'ii!~iii?':discussed:::'~:'~":~:!~'i~is matter in the past. When Council deal~,,~:~ii~ii~ii~!~utes issue s~i~:::: mo~:~hs ago, the members ,concurred that if there was.:.=~iiiiiiii~fbblem t~i i~is,crepancy ~!d,::~;~=,,,~~'~ brought to the Clerk s attention. H,e noted Ce~i~"il,m_ ember L~°n s earlier co~~~ where the City Attorney stated that it s at the ~¢il s pleasu~ii~ incorporate a~ ~;:~'ch detail as possible. His feeling was that this is:=~:~t G0uncil~~:;~[SO8 ig~enS'ed to say and the minutes should reflect his comments. y a~~:~,~:.~,:, advised that ~n Counc~lmember Larson s case, he lust wanted to a sentenC~ii!iii ~i~:minutes. He wasn't putting something else in that would then ] question~:'~'~i~!i~hat was actually stated. Mayor stated:~'ii~ii~t it is important to understand the difficulty of transcribing from a tape and ~at the Council should not take it to a personal level. He thought that is inappropriat~?~nd stated he won't allow Councilmembers to attack the professional integrity of ~ther elected office. He felt it is not in good taste. ~:i?:~nc:.~i~ber Libby stated that she said it in a very kind way for the City Clerk to b,e c~ i~:'i:th the minutes because she listened to the tape and disagreed with the Clerk s tr ~'~iption of what she said. She stated that the minutes should reflect accurately wh~t happened at the Council meeting. She inquired if every time Council has a Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 3 of 10 change to the minutes, if it needs to listen to the tape, or if Council can take each other at her or his word? Mayor Ashiku clarified his previous comments in that he thought Coun, Libby's comment was inappropriate. He thought it important that everyone of each other. City Clerk Ulvila stated that she agreed with the City Attorney's should be some procedure for checking recommended changes noted her frustration because there have been corrections over and in listening to the tapes, what was actually stated in th~ person actually said. At the following meeting, the C( Ihere statement in the draft minutes. When a Councilm, he/she may have misspoken or didn't mean what was said, it should be:~bted in the minutes. If someone wants to correct a statement that is totally oppo previously said, they need to clarify it and there should be a mech; be checked. We all try to take each other at our word and this is Mayor Ashiku advised that Council needs to revisit policy. In the interim, he asked that if there is a q Councilmembers bring it to the determine whether there is a~ Council's attention at the tim~ Motion Libby/Smith approving th, by Council. and adopt a formal that the can then and call it to tes for the purpe~e::of accuracy. all corrections stated Councilmember ......... n advised th,; questioning theiii!:~ i~f anyone s are used tQi?,i~and a~:~'::::~"i~itical ideolo¢ intended~.~,:~:?':i~e in sum~ form an~l nl in a sente~ or two by opposed and it more than an' vote "nd~:~'~='~'~n the motion because he is not t?anscriptions but frequently these things He noted that the minutes are comments regarding a subject are s and Councilmembers alike. He was singled out and virtually transcribed in total lue and debate out of perspective. That, politicizes these minutes. He felt Mr. Libby's statement should be an accurate summary of what he spoke and it is balanced by the Col Smi d with Councilmember Larson's opinion and felt it is placing e~~sis on 6~b individual's comments as opposed to the summary. He, too, thought tha~ ~ summary presented would suffice. M/S Larso amending the motion to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of 1, as amended by Council and to retain the comments by Mr. Libby as the Draft Minutes, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: ars Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES' Councilmember Libby. Af N' None. ABSENT: Councilmember Baldwin. Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 4 of 10 There was a brief discussion clarifying the motion. Roll Call on the original Motion, as amended by the Motion to amend, the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, and May NOES: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilm~ by 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL Mayor Ashiku read the appeal process. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S Smith/Larson approving items a through g of the Cons~ a. Approved Disbursements for Month of April 2002; b. Received Report to Council Regarding Commi Occuring on June 30, 2002 and Authorization Vacancies; c. Approved Notice of Completion for Landscaping Project, Specification No. d. Authorized Contract Award to Ferranti C0nstru~ Construction, Specification No. 01-10; e. Awarded Bid to BB & T Office Solutions for Police Di Amount Not to Exceed $20 Granted Relief of Bidder Contract Code and Awarded Constructi( Airport Park Blvd. Re~'edi. g, Release Advertising the in Street Parking Lot for A.D.A. Ramp Furniture in an Public Park Blvd.; struction of the Motion carried by the following Libby, and Mayor:~:~hiku. NOES: N( Baldwin. 7. ON M Street, wanted to AYES; ~mbers Larson, Smith, ~: ~'~ne. ABSENT: Councilmember ITEMS that she submitted sections of the and action on items not on the agenda and .USINESS Amending Division 1, Chapter 2, Article 2 ion 62 of City Code Re_qarding Councilmembers Salar'ie-~ Risk Ma~r/Budge~ ~icer Harris advised-that at its May 1, 2002 meeting, the City Council di d that'~':"~',~h ordinance be prepared for action providing a one percent annual increase over the last two years for a compensation total of $471 per month. Pursuant to ~vernment Code §36516, this increase would not become effective until ii?~::.,~ after the N~ber 5, 2002 election. to introduce Ordinance bY Title only, carried by the following roll call w ES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Co~ilmember Libby. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Baldwin. Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 5 of 10 City Clerk Ulvila read the title of the Ordinance. M/S Larson/Smith introducing Ordinance, carried by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Councilm, ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Baldwin. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9a. Adoption of Resolution Making Appointments to the D~ Review Committee City Clerk Ulvila advised that on April 17, 2002, Council adopted~::~lution amending the membership to the Demolition Permit Revi~ representative of the Mendocino County 'Historical S~ resident. A Press Release was issued announcing Permit Review Committee. As of the deadline of from William D. French, Jr. and Judy Pruden Mendocino County Historical Society was rec~ the Historical Society does not designate re would provide a letter of support for its member~ volunteer efforts. It's letter recognized Judy Pruden's process for this Committee will begin with the Mayor and M/S Ashiku/Smith nomin. Committee as the "historical the Councilmember Libby stated th~ Report was written in that a re Society is to sit on this committee Resolution stat~ or other ;rk's office indicating However, it ges its members' The nomination f. Permit Review at the way the Staff ~ County Historical 2002-34. She noted the be a member of the Historical Society local, history or a local historian. Mayor Councilml resolution b~ S( Judy if there was a problem with the has expertise in this area. the applicant's name has been put in the I has voted on any appointments. rney RaP: ~:::,clar~d that Councilmember Libby is referring to the second ,ginning w:i~ ~'~'reas the Mendocino County His,~orical Society recognizes an ex~,~:::.~:'~:~':?,i~'n ..... local history and building history. Councilm, Libby stated that she thinks an appointee has been illegally siting on the Design Board since 1993 and felt the report is written in a manner that suggests should ignore this. There are only two applicants and two positions to ~:~. :~:~ill: and bo~:,~pplicants have been before the Council concerning their views to save the She thought there's a possibility that the matter of the Palace would the Demolition Permit Review Committee and felt people on this C~ittee should not have a personal agenda but respect the directive of the Council. sh'~ quoted statements made by Planning Commissioner Loewenstein on his Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 6 of 10 application for appointment to the Planning Commission. She felt there are a lot of qualified people who could sit on this Committee and she would like to see this put back out to the public and to receive more applications .... Councilrnernber Smith noted that in regards to the draft resolution in:~~'~ ~'~ Pruden's name is mentioned, it is based on the statement that the M~ Count~ Historical Society made in its letter to the City in which they recogniz~ ~den as an expert on local history and building history". That does not meana Councilmember Libby advised that if the Council decides to go::'~''~ out for applications, there may be other applicants who also been~'~?:'?,~Ognized possibly their names could be included in the Resolution. it pre~'~ture to put name in the resolution. Discussion continued concerning Lib~y's comments and recommendation to readvertise for the vacanciesi::?,~,?:i':'~::?;::::, Jeff Burrell, Ukiah, advised that he did'n~i~' see:?~"~i??~!:,iii~:~i~e a~out the, committee vacancies and he would like to be on this committee e~ ~ough he hasn t submitted an application and it is past the deadline. Councilrnernber Libby rem for almost 10 years and, someone to that position Mayor Ashiku stated that in the incompetence, or something like th serve on the that Judy Pruden h;i~i~ ~:' this committee lo term limits,?,?~:~ ~;,ii~'°ntinue to appoint a sta!~uS ~bo. Cou :e that demonstrates a very qualified person to Motion ca and M, Coun< Councilm~ Review thc )wing roll call':?'iii~e;~iiii~iii!~YES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, N( 3: Councilme ?Libby. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: g an individual to the Demolition Permit : Councilme~,~er Libby asked Council to consider not filling this position adve rti~:~:r th e vacancy. an apology to Mr. Burrell because it is to° late to con: as an a he did not follow the procedure for applying. M/S Smit~rso,n, n( ating William D. French, Jr. to the Demolition Permit Review Committee ~he public member". and to by the following roll call vote: /or Ashiku. NOES: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN: ~'ilmember Baldwin. Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 7 of 10 AYES: Councilmember Larson, Smith, None. ABSENT: M/S Larson/Smith adopting Resolution 2002-36, making appointments to the Demolition Permit Review Committee of Judy Pruden (historical member) and::Wi!iiam D. French, Jr. (public member), carried~ by the following roll call vote::. :::,~:AYES: Councilmember Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Councilmem~Li~bYi ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Baldwin ............ ~ 9. NEW BUSINESS 9b. Authorization of City Manager to Execute Contract With Probation Department for Weed Abatement to a Maxim~ Community Services Director DeKnoblough noted that ~[~ the ~n years, City has steadily reduced the use of herbicides and i~ ,,on :Is to abate weeds on public property. In an attempt to address this?i~e a~:avoid high labor cost, staff is proposing to contract with Mendocino Cou Department to provide supervised juvenile labor force to remove the we~ such as curb painting and debris removal. Th, for the supervision of the juvenile work maximum amount of $7,500 each year. other special project§ would be primarily contract is for a M/S Smith/Larson authorizing the City Manager to exe( County Probation Department for carried by the following roll call Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9c. Setting of Date and Time Accomplishments and Ob Risk M; date and tim 2002-2003 Staff Ro~i namely 1) for re then C~ du of the budc th Mendocino abatement to a meach year, Libby, and Coun.¢i~:mber Baldwin Year 2002-2003 Budget staff is requesting the City Council set a and objectives for the Fiscal Year two options not noted in the objectives to Council in written form of the City Manager at any time, or consider the goals and objectives as part ~cil.member~:'"'S~ith advised that he would not be available for the June 5 Council ,of Coueeiii" ?' as to direct staff to submit the accomplishments and objectives f~:~.Fiscal ~r 2002-2003 Budget to Council as soon as possible for their review and '~bment. If there were sufficient comments to staff concerning any of the items, there~uld be adequate time before the budget hearings to obtain clarification. ii. . ?'~::~??~i?, ...... ~tion of Resolution Encoura_qin_q Use of Clean Emission Vehicles Rr~iiM~hager/Budget Officer Harris ad~/is(~d that the Redwood Empire Branch of the A~an Lung Association has sought the City's assistance in meeting its mission to create lung healthy communities. It submitted a letter requesting the City Council adopt Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 8 of 10 a resolution encouraging the use of clean emission vehicles. He noted that staff modified the draft resolution due to concern that some of the statements contained in the original resolution may have further restricted the City Council. However, st~ .els that clean emission vehicles are very appropriate. The City has leased from Nisson for parking enforcement and meter reading. Councilmember Larson reported that he received a call from J~ Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) and she sug! amended to include acknowledging the partnership of the City emission vehicles (Z.E.V.) demonstration project from 1996 referenced the charging station located across from the P~ has led to a whole coalition of Z.E.V. individuals who this endeavor. He recommended an amendment to paragraph to read, "The City partnered with MI project from 1996 through 1999." of the be ~ro y~'and promote after the seventh a Zi'E.v. demonstration:~~ Consensus of Council was to include the M/S Smith/Ashiku adopting Resolution 2002-37, as clean emission vehicles, carried by the following roll call Larson, Smith, Libby, and Mayo~ Councilmember Baldwin. :1, encouraging the use of :.: Gouncilmember ABSENT: 11. COUNCIL REPORTI Councilmember Larson reported which was an abbreviated tour of park at the Train Depot. He will be boarding up the attended the Inn. It wa activitie,, the be attendance happening in forum and Roll Bike Tour, the site of the new pocket er concerning the City of O~en access to the building. He Divisio~i?,i:;~f the League of California Cities at Benbow meeting with?~::~,~ite~,,~?;,,iii~ii!?bit of reporting on different legislative are being pr~ '8. He noted that the basic message is money.!~'"have that came from the state had better state. The Division's legislative aid was in good job of keeping cities informed of what is and providing a channel of communication. He also attended 4 and noted that it was not well attended. Couh~ii~ember Smil was to ''~' . in ~ happening":i?~h the that the League of California Cities' Policy Committee but the meeting has been cancelled. There is a lot budget and so far it looks like the cities are fairing well. Mayor C~ foU~ years or longer. reported on May 22® there would be a presentation by Sonoma County the Ukiah Conference Center from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. It will cover )n, fishery mitigation, public outreach, recycling water, and state funding. Councilmembers interested in attending should contact the City so she can make arrangements for catering. He encouraged all to attend because this is a matter that will be of interest for the next The potential impacts are very significant. Over the last several Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 9 of 10 years, Council has heard reports from Councilmember Baldwin and occasionally from the City Manager and himself about the Inland Water and Power Commission considering raising the dam through a bond issue and in cooperation with any effQ~ by the Army Corp of Engineers. Currently they are considering hiring a financial ~~t to look at the feasibility of funding. In the meantime, the Corps is looking a~,~ ~si~i'~i~ study and how that may be funded, and they are also doing a reconnai~Ce of th~ site. Shortly after this water forum, and based on the information con~~ ~i?~.~he City, he will be asking Council to provide him with clear direction as to its~i~!i~ fo~iii~ ~uture which he will vote on at the Inland Water and Power Commission. 12. CITY MANAG ER/CITY CLERK REPORTS .... , Assistant City Manager Fierro reminded Council that ~i~?:S woU':i~?be holding VIP reception and buffet dinner, on July 29 at 5:00 p~i~:ii~'he~?:ii~uld be asking for a : minimum $5 donation Applebee s will open to the ge~'i' ublic on Jul 30th Staff met" with the NCRA group last week and disc.ussed::,::~:,::,~'::::grant ~fQ,:[ refurbishing the Trai~ Depot. It was also mentioned to NCRA that the~i~ to sec~ that building, since the City doesn't own it. He noted people have be~'?~ing in ~?'~:~ilding and there has been a fire at that location. .... Mayor Ashiku advised that Bruce Moreno, Applebee's M~ by his office and asked him what non-profit might benefit from and he suggested the Recreation Cent, 13. CLOSED SESSION None. 14. ADJ 0 U R N M E NT There being no fu~he~business, the meeti:~g was adjourned at 7:36 p.m. Marie Ul~?~ity Clerk Regular City Council Meeting May 15, 2002 Page 10 of 10 ITEM NO. 6a DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. M003 TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY- STATE AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL-AID PROJECTS NO. 01-5049 SUMMARY: The City of Ukiah has been authorized to receive funding for its Ukiah Historic Train Depot Restoration Project, Specification Number 02-09, Project No. STPLER-5049 (013), EA: 01-280734. The attached Program Supplement No. M003 is the mechanism by which the State transfers funds to the City for reimbursement of eligible preliminary engineering project costs. Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution and execution of the attached program supplement. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of Program Supplement No. M003 to Administering Agency- State Agreement for Federal- Aid Projects No. 01-5049. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Elect not to proceed with the project and do not adopt resolution. Citizen Advised' Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City En~i_r]ee~~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for Adoption 2. Program Supplement No. M003 APPROVED :~ ~._~~~'~=~ _ Can~ace Horsley, City ~anager AGprogSuppM003.SUM ~,TTACHMENT_.~ RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. M003 TO ADMINISTERING AGENCY - STATE AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL-AID PROJECTS NO. 01-5049 WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah has been authorized to receive federal funding for its Ukiah Historic Train Depot Restoration Project, Specification Number 02-09, Project No. STPLER-5049(013), EA: 01-280734; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah has previously executed the Agency-State Agreement (Master Agreement) on July 27, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Program Supplement must be executed between the Agency and the State prior to the Agency receiving federal funding reimbursement for eligible project costs related to Project No. STPLER-5049(013), NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah approves the execution of Program Supplement No. M003 and authorizes the Mayor to execute same. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of June, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Phillip Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Resolution No. 2002- Page 1 of 1 PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. M003 to ADMINISTERING AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR FEDERAL-AID PROJECTS NO. 01-5049 ATTACHMENT -_~. Date: May 08, 2002 Location: 01-MEN-0-UKI Project Number: STPLER-5049(013) E.A. Number: 01-280734 This Program Supplement is hereby incorporated into the Agency-State Agreement for Federal Aid which was entered into between the Agency and the State on 07/27/99 and is subject to all the terms and conditions thereof. This Program Supplement is adopted in accordance with Article I of the aforementioned Master Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved by the Agency on (See copy attached). The Agency further stipulates that as a condition to payment of funds obligated to this project, it accepts and will comply with the covenants or remarks setforth on the following pages. PROJECT LOCATION: Ukiah Train Depot TYPE OF WORK: Intermodel Facility LENGTH: 0(MILES) Estimated Cost Federal Funds Matching Funds BTB0 $15,393.00 LOCAL OTHER $17,388.00 $1,995.00 $0.00 $0.00 CITY OF UKIAH STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation By By Date Attest Title Chief, Office of Project Implementatic Division of Local Assistance Date I hereby certify upon my personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance: 10~ 2001 2~0-101-890 2001-2002 '"~.010,827 '~-JC 2~20~2 ~92-F $15,393.00 AMOUNT 15,393.00 Program Supplement 01-5049-M003- ISTEA Page i of 4 01-MEN-0-UKI 05/08/2002 STPLER-5049(013) SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS 1. The ADMINISTERING'AGENCY will reimburse the State for the ADMINISTERING AGENCY share of costs for work requested to be performed by the State. 2. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY will advertise, award and administer this project in accordance with the most current published Local Assistance Procedures Manual. 3. Ail project repair, replacement and maintenance involving the physical condition and the operation of project improvements referred to in Article III MAINTENANCE, of the aforementioned Master Agreement will be the responsibility of the ADMINISTERING AGENCY and shall be performed at regular intervals and as required for efficient operation of the completed project improvements. 4. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY is required to have an audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act and OMB A-133 if it receives a total of $300,000 or more in federal funds in a single fiscal year. The federal funds received under this project are a part of the Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) 20.205, Highway Planning and Research. OMB A-133 superceded OMB A-128 in 1996. A reference to OMB A-128 in a Master Agreement (if any) is superceded by this covenant to conform to OMB A-133. 5. The ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that payment of Federal funds will be limited to the amounts approved by the Federal Highway Administration (F~WA) in the Federal-Aid Project Authorization/Agreement or Amendment/Modification (E-76) and accepts any resultant increases in ADMINISTERING AGENCY funds as shown on the Finance Letter, any modification thereof as approved by the Division of Local Assistance, Office of Project Implementation. 6. Award information shall be submitted by the ADMINISTERING AGENCY to the District Local Assistance Engineer immediately after the project contract award. Failure to do so will cause a delay in the State processing invoices for the construction phase. Please refer to Section 15.7 "Award Package" of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual. 7. STATE and ADMINISTERING AGENCY agree that any additional funds which might be made available for new phase(s) of work by future Program Supplement 01-5049-M003- ISTEA Page 2 of 4 O1-MEN-O-UKI 05/08/2002 STPLER-5049(013) SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS Federal obligations will be encumbered on this PROJECT by use of a STATE approved "Authorization to Proceed" and Finance Letter. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that Federal funds available for reimbursement will be limited to the amounts obligated by the Federal Highway Administration. 8. ADMINISTERING AGENCY agrees that it will only proceed with work authorized for specific phase(s) with an "Authorization to Proceed" and will not proceed with future phase(s) of this project prior to receiving an "Authorization to Proceed" from the STATE for that phase(s) unless no further State or Federal funds are needed for those future phase(s). 9. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TEA) SPECIAL COVENANTS: 1. The Legislature of the State of California has enacted legislation by which certain Federal funds may be allocated to ADMINISTERING AGENCY by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) after being recommended for funding by the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the enhancement project submitted by ADMINISTERING AGENCY as described in the Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Application Form; and as such the Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Application submitted by ADMINISTERING AGENCY and all assurances contained therein are made an express part of this AGREEMENT. Should any conflict exist between the application and the AGREEMENT, the AGREEMENT shall prevail. 2. PROJECT shall be completed as provided in this AGREEMENT. 3. The PROJECT, or projects must be included in a Federally-approved Statewide TranSportation Improvement Program (FSTIP). 4. Federal funds may participate only in work which has been officially programmed to and authorized by FHWA in advance of its performance. 5. This AGREEMENT is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available to the STATE by the United States Program Supplement 01-5049-M003- ISTEA Page 3 of 4 01-MEN-0-UKI 05/08/2002 STPLER-5049(013) SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS Government and the California State LegiSlature for the purpose of this program. In addition, this AGREEMENT is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the Congress or the State Legislature that may affect the provisions, terms or funding of this AGREEMENT in any manner. 6. It is mutually agreed that if the Congress or the State Legislature does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program this AGREEMENT shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds. 7. STATE has the option to void the AGREEMENT upon 30-days written notice to ADMINISTERING AGENCY or to amend the AGREEMENT to reflect any reduction of funds. 8. PROJECT downscoping and/or phasing will require another approval by both the appropriate RTPA/MPO and the CTC. No additional funds will be made available by the CTC for cost overruns. ADMINISTERING AGENCY will be required to downscope, split PROJECT into phases or provide additional matching funds to cover cost overruns. Program Supplement 01-5049-M003- ISTEA Page 4 of 4 ITEM NO: DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT AUTHORIZING $2,000 EXPENDITURE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUNDS FOR COMPUTER REPLACEMENT SUMMARY: There are $2,000 remaining in the Building Inspection account of the Equipment Replacement Fund (698) and the Building Inspector's computer requires replacement. Staffdid not anticipate expending these funds during the present fiscal year, so a budget amendment must be approved by the City Council. Staff is recommending that the City Council authorize the expenditure of the $2,000 to replace the computer equipment for the Building Inspector by amending the budget allowing this expense in account 698.2201.800.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve budget amendment authorizing expenditure of $2,000 in account 698.2201.800.000 for computer replacement. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not approve budget amendment and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Planning and Community Development Department Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mike Harris, Budget Officer 1. Budget amendment worksheet, page 1. APPROVED;,, ~e Horsley, City~Malger LU Z 0 E E -~ ~ --, E E '-0-°: n n --- N=~ '=~." ""'b. mE = '~ ~-- g '- ~°g,d, o.o " ....... ,~~ > ~ ~,m'5- o ~;~ o o oooooooo o i ooooo ~ : : 000~¢~ 00000 00000 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~i~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ooo,o~,ooo oooooooo ~ ~ ~o~ oo ............... ~~ ~ ooooo · ~,~o~o~o ,~oooo~ ~ ~oo¢~oOO ,o,ooooooo ooooo oo O x :~!~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ¢ ¢ 0 ¢ ~;~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ O ~~ -- 0~~00 ~0~0~0~ '~0~ . . ddodddKK' Kddddddd x ~00~00 0~~0~ ~ xO ~ 0 O0 0 O0 ~ O0 0 O0 0 : : : : : : : : O0 : : 0 : :, : : : : : : : : O0 0 O0 00 0 00 00 0 00 ~ o ~ : : : : : : : : ~4' : : ~ : : : : : : : : ~ : : : ~ oo o G oo ~ ~ ~ oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ oo o o oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o oo o  ~ oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6c DATE: June 5, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION RESTORING 62 FEET OF ON-STREET PARKING ALONG NORTH OAK STREET SUMMARY: At the November 6, 1996 meeting, City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-35 Abolishing On-Street Parking and Establishing Loading Zones on North Oak Street. Please refer to Attachment 2 for the location of the loading zones. The First Baptist Church now owns the property at 302 Henry Street and the adjacent property to the north at 460 North Oak Street. Pastor Garry Zeek of the First Baptist Church requested the removal of the yellow loading zone and white loading zone on the North Oak Street frontages of Church property. The net result of the proposed action will be to restore two parking spaces along the North Oak Street frontage of the First Baptist Church property. The Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC) considered the request to restore on-street parking at its meeting on May 21,2002. Since there is no need for the loading zones to support the current use of the First Baptist Church property, the TEC agreed to request the City Council to restore 62 feet of on-street parking at the location of the previously approved loading zones. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution restoring 62 feet of on-street parking along North Oak Street. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not adopt resolution and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Pastor Garry Zeek Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer(~~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for Adoption 2. Map of North Oak Street at Henry Street AP P ROVE D.~.. ~'~:~,~ Q ~.-, Candace H~rsley, ~ity~anager RJS: AG-NorthOa k-Hen~yRestorePa rking ~,TTACHMENT__.~ RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH RESTORING 62 FEET OF ON-STREET PARKING ALONG NORTH OAK STREET WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously authorized, by Resolution No. 97-35, loading zones on North Oak Street; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) considered a request to remove the loading zones and to restore 62 feet of on-street parking within the City of Ukiah; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer recommends the request to restore 62 feet of parking; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does restore 62 feet of parking on the west side of North Oak Street, at a location near 460 North Oak Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of June, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Phillip Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Resolution No. 2002- Page 1 of 1 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. DATE: June 5, 2002 6d SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR PURCHASE OF PATROL VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,667.50 TO DOWNTOWN FORD SALES Included in the Fiscal Year 2001/2002 budget (account 100.2001.800.000) is the purchase of one patrol vehicle for the Police Department at an estimated cost of $30,000. In May of this year the Police Department submitted bid requests (RFB) to vehicle vendors, including all local car dealers for the purchase of a new patrol car according to State of California Specifications for Police Vehicles with preferred additional optional items desired by the Department. Bids were opened May 28th, 2002, with two responses. Both vendors met the specifications provided for in the RFB and Downtown Ford Sales had the lowest bid at $24,667.50. Staff recommends that Downtown Ford Sales be awarded the bid for one Police Vehicle in the amount of $24,667.50. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bid to Downtown Ford Sales in the amount of $24,667.50 for a Police Patrol Vehicle. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Reject bids and provide staff with alternative action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Ukiah Police Department Chris Dewey- Police Captain Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief 1. Bid Analysis 2. Excerpt of adopted budget. APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Cityh~4anager CITY OF UKIAH 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 (707) 463-6217 (City Clerk's Office) BID OPENING FOR: One (1) New 2002/2003 4-Door Packaqed Veh~_C!_e SPECIFICATION NO. E22072 DATE: May 28, 2002 TIME: 2:00 p.m. COMPANY AMOUNT , DOWNTOWN FORD SALES 525 NORTH 16'tH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-0518 Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Bids: Police Car I-, Z AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6e DATE: June 5, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO FERRANTI CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF MENDOCINO DRIVE, SPECIFICATION NO. 00-06, IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $60,834. SUMMARY: The City distributed specifications to nine builder's exchanges and seven contractors for the subject project. The City publicly advertised this project on May 5 and May 10, 2002 in the Ukiah Daily Journal. Four sealed proposals were received and opened by the City Clerk on May 23, 2002. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Ferranti Construction Inc. of Redwood Valley, California with a total evaluated cost of $60,834. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is $63,050. If the bid is awarded, compensation for the performance of the work will be based on approved unit prices bid for contract item quantities actually installed. The actual total paid to the contractor may be lower or higher than the evaluated cost indicated because of unforeseen work or because actual quantities installed exceed estimated quantities. Policy Resolution No. 13, authorizes the responsible Department Head with approval of the City Manager to issue change orders not to exceed 10 percent of the original contract sum or $5,000 whichever is greater provided that no change exceeds the amount budgeted for the project. This contract work will be charged as follows: $46,000 to 330.9803.250.001, SB 45 reimbursable fund and, the balance, including any changes, from 699.3110.800.014 special project reserve fund. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award Contract for Mendocino Drive Sidewalk Improvements, Specification No. 00-06, to Ferranti Construction Inc. in the amount of $60,834. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine contract should not be awarded and direct staff to re-bid project and sacrifice the $46,000 330.9803.250.001 reimbursable fund. 2. Determine that the sidewalk on the North side of Mendocino Drive is not to be constructed with any City Funding and reject all bids. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: N/A Diana M. Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Tim Eriksen, Civil Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Bid Tabulation 2. Bid Proposal from Ferranti Construction Inc. 3. Fiscal Year 2001/2002 Budget Sheets Candace Horsley, anager ,'-~TTACHMENT .,/, BIDDING SCHEDULE M'TACHMENT_~_. ITEM NO. QUANTITY DESCRIPTION AND UNIT PRICE BID EXTENDED AMOUNT in writing and in figures FOR ITEM 1. 671 LF Saw Cut Asphalt Concrete for a price per linear foot of . ~~ ($ ~f~', .~O ) 2. 20f2 LF ~emove Asphalt Concrete Pavement for ~ price per squar~ foot of 3. 671 LF Concrete Curb and Gutter for a price per linear foot .O~ , 4. 221 LF Concrete Retaining Curb for a price per linear ($ 5. 3355 SQFT Concrete Sidewalk and WheelChair Ramp for a price p, er square f,~t of ,, C:XMy Documcnts\Word97XMCOGXSTIP-MendoDrSidcwalkXSpec. PW00-06 .doc 47 Spec. No. 00-06 6. 1342 SQFT Type B Asphalt Concrete Pavement for a price per squqre foot of 7. 3 EA Relocate Street Signs for a ~dce per each of 8. 1 'LS S~ey S~ing for ~e l~p sum price of 9. 1 EA Replace Water Meter Box for ~e price per each of TOTAL BID AMOUNT ~ ~3 (~' ~ "' $ 1 1 1 Ii ii Ii I/ In case of discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. C:XMy Documents\Word97XMCOGXSTIP-MendoDrSidewalkXSpec. PW00.06 .doc Spec. No. 00-06 48 Z 0 0 Z ATTACHMENT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. DATE: June 5, 2002 SUBJECT: AWARD TIME AND EXPENSE CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENT TO WlNZLER & KELLY FOR DESIGN SERVICES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF ORCHARD AVE. BRIDGE AT ORR CREEK AND ASSOCIATED STREET IMPROVEMENTS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,054, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT SUMMARY: Submitted for the City Council's consideration and action is staff's recommendation that a Consultant Service Agreement for engineering design services and the preparation of contract documents for the construction of the Orchard Ave. Bridge at Orr Creek and its related street improvements be awarded to Winzler & Kelly. It is proposed that compensation for services rendered under the agreement be made on a time and expense basis not to exceed the maximum compensation of $100,054.00. BACKGROUND: In response to the City's Request for Proposals (RFP), four proposals were received prior to the deadline. The RFP requested cost proposals from selected design consultants for the design and preparation of contract documents and plans for the construction of the bridge at the crossing of Orchard Ave at Orr Creek, the extension of Orchard Ave to Brush Street and the interim and ultimate improvements of Brush Street from the extension of Orchard Ave to the railroad tracks. All elements of the design would be incorporated into construction documents excluding the ultimate improvement of Brush Street. The ultimate improvement features for Brush Street would be incorporated into a reference document for the benefit of providing direction to future developers within the Brush Street Triangle. As indicated in the April 30, 2002 memorandum to the Director of Public Works (Attachment #3), it was recommended that two of the four Consultants submitting cost proposals be considered for further consideration and that City staff meet with County staff to clarify agency design responsibilities or desires concerning the project prior to conducting the final consultant interviews. On May 8, the City's Public Works Director and project staff met with the Director and Assistant Director of the County's Transportation Department to discuss agency responsibilities and desires concerning the design of the interim and ultimate improvements for Brush Street. As a result of the meeting and subsequent discussions between the respective staff, the County will be responsible for the design and construction of the interim and ultimate improvements of Brush Street. The City will be responsible for the design and construction of the bridge and the extension of Orchard Ave to Brush Street. Since interim improvements must be made to Brush Street at the time Orchard Ave is connected to it, City staff offered (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Award Consultant Service Agreement for Orchard Avenue Bridge Design Services to Winzler & Kelly and authorize compensation to be on a time and expense basis not to exceed a maximum compensation of $100,045.00. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Consultant Service Agreement on behalf of the City. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Abandon the Orchard Ave Bridge Project and its related street improvements and not award the Consultant Service Agreement for Design Services. Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED BY: Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Enginee~~ Rick Kennedy, Project Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Winzler & Kelly's revised cost proposal. 2. Creegan & D'Angelo's revised cost proposal 3. Memorandum to the Public Works Director dated April 30, 2002 regarding ~~iOnsultant selection' Candace Horsley, City I~lanager Page 2 June 5, 2002 Award Consultant Service Agreement to Winzler & Kelly for the Performance of Design Services Related to the Construction of Orchard Ave. Bridge at Orr Creek and Related Street Improvements. Compensation To Be on a Time and Material Basis Not to Exceed $100,054. Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement to County staff to have the City's selected design consultant design the interim improvements at the County's expense and to the County's road standards. The County staff continues to consider the offer. During the week of May 12, the Consultant Selection Committee met with the project team leaders from Winzler & Kelly and Creegan & D'Angelo to discuss their cost proposals in more detail and to explore cost cutting measures that could facilitate a lower design fee. The consultants were notified that the design of the ultimate improvements for Brush Street would no longer be included in the consultant service agreement and that the interim design for Brush Street was pending. Both consultants were asked if they had adequate resources to complete the design and preparation of contract documents prior to August 13,2002. Both consultants committed to completing 100% of the design effort prior to that date, if the City could expedite its review and if preliminary engineering work could be authorized prior to an anticipated agreement award of June 5, 2002. Revised cost proposals were requested from the two finalists in consideration of the reduced scope of work, the accelerated completion date for the 100% design effort, and other task modifications discussed in the interviews. Since the requested completion date for the design work is prior to the anticipated completion date for the revised environmental Impact Report (EIR) and subsequent public hearings and prior to receiving permits from State and Federal agencies, any design changes needed as a result of the recommendations contained the revised Final EIR and permit conditions will be made via a change order to the consultant service agreement. Since both consultant finalists are equal as to professional experience and both consultants possess the resources needed to perform the work of the proposed consultant agreement, cost becomes a major criterion in the selection of the consultant. Winzler & Kelly and Creegan & D'Angelo submitted revised cost proposals in the amounts of $100,054 and $113,789, respectively. Upon review of the revised proposals, it was discovered that the Creegan & D'^ngelo's proposal contained an error in the amount of $11,160 making the actual total compensation $124,949. Given that all selection criteria are equal excluding the cost criterion, it is recommended that Winzler & Kelley be awarded the Consultant Service Agreement. Should the County elect not to have the City's consultant design the needed interim improvements for Brush Street, a change order will be issued reducing the maximum compensation appropriately. The cost reduction should be in the range of $10,000 to $15,000. Funds within the Orchard Ave Bridge Account, 290-9645-xxx.xxx, will be utilized to pay the consultant for their services. Sent by: WINZLER & KELLY 7O7 523 1010; C O N ~ u I. T t N G E N G ~ N E K* II $ 05/15/02 2:32PU;JJl/lX,_#268;Page 1 Poet-it* Fax Note 7671 ~ '"~'~'7-"~'~"'~"~'~ Rdr P2-2224-34004 May 15, 2002 Ms. Diana Steele Public Works Director/City Engineer Department of Public Works City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Revised Proposal for Design Services for Orchard Avenue Bridge at Orr Creek and Related Roadway Improvements Dear Ms. Steele: Thank you for thc opportunity to meet wilh Rick Sea. nor, Rick Kennedy and yourself to discuss our qualifications for the Orchard Avenue Bridge Project. We walked away from our meeting with a better underst,'mding of the project as well as further excited by the opportunity to work with you on the project. Attached is a revised Scope of Work and associated engineering fees. The Scope is based on our discussions and reflect the City's requirement to have 100% design completed by August 12, 2002. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to present our team and qualifications to thc City. Wc look forward to the opportunity to work with you on this project. Sincerely, WINZLER & KELLY Marc S. Solomon, P.E. Region Manager Attachment Crcative S,',lt, ti~,,as for Over 495 Tvsconi (~iwl,', Santa Ros;h CA 954014690 ael 707.62 LiOlO Fax Sent by: WINZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:33PU;)eff, x #268;Page 2/8 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK Proposal for Design Services for Orchard Avenue Bridge At Orr Creek and Related Street Improvements Thc City of Uldah, Department of Public Works, is planning the construction of a new bridge to cross Orr Creek on Orchard Avenue and improvements to Orchard Avenue and Brush Street. Thc new structure will be approximately $6-fcet long and 62-feet wide and will pass the 100- year flood with l-foot of freeboard. The structure is to be a 2-span slab deck with wing walls for flood protection of the abutmonL Orchard Avenue will be extended to Brush Street. Brush Street improvements will be designed to a 40% design effort. The City will be responsible for mapping, hydrology, hydraulic and geotechnical studies, however, a scour analysis will be required by the consultant. Permitting will be thc responsibility of the City with assistance from thc consultant. The City is finalizing the CEQA process. Thc following is thc Scope &Work for the project: TASK ! - PRELIMINARY DESIGN (40% AND 80%) 1.1 - Project Development Team Meetings Winzler & Kelly will schedule and facilitate three Project Development Team Meetings during the Task 1.0 work. These meetings will be held at the City of Ukiah. 1.2 - Civil Engineering Winzlcr & Kelly will prepare thc design for the bridge approaches, roadway layouts, and necessary drainage facilities, We will show construction staging and erosion control and specify project signing in accordance with City criteria and standards, and Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Plans for bridge embankrn~t protection (reek slope protection) and other areas that are disturbed (fences, gates, etc.) will also be developed. The Brush Street Drawings will only be developed to the 40% design level while the Orchard Avenue Drawings will be developed to the 80%design level. 1.3 - U tlIRy Relocation Potential conflicts with utilities in the roadways will be addressed as part of the Task 1.0 work. 1.4 - Structural Design The structural design will be prepared in accordance with "Bridge Design Specifications", Load Factor Design Version, dated April 2002, as well as current AASHTO geometric design specifications as supplemented by Calwans bridge design aids and manuals. Design live loadings will be HS 20-44. P2-2224.3a, O()4 -- Scc~:x: of Work Sent by: WINZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:33PM;~etF, x #268;Page 3/8 1.5 - Hydrologic/Hydraulic Studies A shore protection and scour analysis will be prepared following guidelines set forth in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual, Chapter 11, and based on information provided by the geotechnical consultant. 1.6 - Right-of-Way Based on information obtained from the City, Winzler &Kelly will prepare the fight-of-way maps for the extension of Orchard Avenue to Brush Street. If is understood that the City will provide all necessary right-of-way appraisal and acquisition services. 1.7- Preparation of PS&E Package Drawings The plan sheets will be prepared in CADD according to the City standard. Plans will be prepared in English milts and will be consistent with Caltrans Standard Plans. Drawings will be 24" x 36" with font size adcxtuate to allow reduction to 11" × 17" and still be legible. The following preliminary Drawing list has been prepared: 1 G-1 Title Sheet .... 2 G-2 .... Legcnds,._A.b_.brevia'~io_ns .and General .~.o._tes ..... 3 .,. C-I .Rq..adway- T~ical Sections and Details 4 C-2 Plan and Profile - Orchard Avenue 1' - 20' 5 C-3 Plan and Profile - Orchard Avenue 1"-20' 6 ......C-4 _Plan and Profile - Brush Street 1"=20' (,40%_Desigrt). ... ....... 7 C-5. Plan and Profile... - Brush .... Street I;;;,20' (47/¢ Design) ..... 8 . _.C-6 ___P!_an and Profile - Brush Street 1"=.20' (40% Design) ....... 9 S-I ..... General Bridge Plan. ........ 10 S-2 Bridge Deck Contom 11 S-3 Bridge Foundation Plan 12 S-4 Abutment Details 13 .......S-5 ..W.. ing Wall Details 14 S-6 Bent Details is _S-7 ,' Bridg_c- Typica_l S~_tions ......... 16 s-8 Bridge - Slab Reinforcement 17 S-9 Pile Details i 18 "' GT-1 '" Log of Test Borings (Provicic~d by City, S Geotechnical ~ Engineer) Winzler & Kelly will prepare 40%, 90% (Pre-Final) and Final PS&E package& We will produce 10 copies of the 40% submitlal and 4 copies of the 90% submittal. We anticipate two weeks duration for City and County review of the 40% and 90% packages. To meet the schedule, an "Over-the-Shoulder" review will be conducted at the 40% and 90% submittals. PS&E will be in City format. The following Drawing schedule is anticipated: P2-2224-34004 - .',;cope or' Work Sent by: WZNZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:33PM;J~d~.~L_#268;Page 4/8 Estimate of Probable Construction Cost Roadway Section Drainage Facilities Roadway Layout Bridge General Plan Bridge Layout Bridge Section Scour Study Outline Specification Estimate of Probable Construction Cost Design Calculations Structural Calculation Horizontal and ¥~tical Alignment Orchard Avenue Plans All Bridge Plans Erosion Control Plan Specifications Specifications Project Specifications will be based on City and Caltrans Standard Special Provisions, Structure Special Provisions, and standard specifications. Construction Quantities and Estimate Construction quantities and estimate of probable construction costs (Q and E) will be developed. Quantities will be calculated in accordance with Caltrans' practice and segregated into pay items. Thc estimate will include quantities and unit costs as well as project cost summary. Quality Control and ConstructabilRy Review As an integral part of our QAdQC Program, a senior level engineer will review the PS&E package for uniformity, compatibility and construcmbility. 90% Design Presentation Meeting A design presentation meeting will be held at the 90% submittal phase so that the plans, specifications, and estimate can be discussed. This should save considerable time in the delivery of the Final PS&E. The meeting will be conducted at City Hall or the consultant's office with the City's team and Public Works Director. 1.8 - Standards We will prepaxe all designs and deliverables utilizing and in accordance with Caltrans Standard Plans, Standard Specifications, and Special Provisions. 1.9 - Permit Support The City will prepare the following permit applications for the project: · Application for Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Nationwide Permit · Application for California Depaxlment of Fish and Game 1601 and 1603 Streambed Crossing or Alteration Agremn~t Permits · Coordinate with thc California Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain a Water Quality Certification or waiver, if necessary Winzler & Kelly will assist the City by attending agency meetings, providing engineering drawings and assisting with other information required to obtain the permits and to facilitate project approach. P2-2224-34004 Scope of Work Sent by: W[NZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:34PM;J~.ff_l~L#268;Page 5/8 TASK 2.0- FINAL DESIGN 2.1 - Submittal of Final PS&E Upon receiving 90% review comments from thc City and other agencies, any comment will be reviewed and discussed. All apparel conflicts will be resolved. Appropriate modifications will be made to thc plans, specifications, and estimate of probable construction cost. The PS&E will th~ be resubmitted to the City for approval at the Final stage. 2.2- Submit Bid Packages 30 copi~ of the Final PS&E package will be submitted to the City for bidding purposes. 2.3 - Bidding/Advertisement Support Wiazle~' & Kelly will assist the City with responses to questions, attend a pre-bid meeting and, if necessary, prepare an addcndunx for issue by Public Works. TASK 3.0 - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 3.1 - Construction Man agement/Support Services Winzler & Kelly will assist the City with the following activities during construction: . Pre-construction meeting. Attend the pre-consWaction meeting. · Submittal Review. Review submittals for precast piles and other pre. cast, prestressed concrete members. (8 ~bmittal reviews have been assumed for the estimate). · Request for Information (RFI) and Desitin Clarifications. Respond to RFI's and design clarifications and, if necessary, make recommendations regarding design change request. (6 RFI's have been assumed for the estimate). · Pile Driving Observation. Provide a representative during pile driving operation and make written observations. · Monthly Observations. Make monthly field visits to observe thc progress and note construction techniques and progress. (4 field visits have been assumed in the estimate). 3.2 - Record Drawings One set of reproducible "Record Drawings" will be prepared following completion of construction. Mark-ups for the "Record Drawings" wiLl be provided by the City. e2-2224-34004 - 5colg or' Work Sent by: WINZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2'34PM;~ZIUL#268;Page 6/8 Sent by: WINZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:34PM;)etFax #268;Page 7/8 .... , [[[[ ... ~ ............. .... l= ' ...... ' I1' ,,...,. ...........  ~ .... ~ .... · ....... '"'2".' .,., ..,, ,~.,..., · .,.,. ,...... h2'~ .. [: 3:,' . .. ....~ .. ~ .3.,~,~  .... ~ .'.'.-.' ~: m ~ 0 ','.'.',  _ ,:.:.:.: . . . ~ ~ ::::::::,  . , Sent by: WZNZLER & KELLY 707 523 1010; 05/15/02 2:34PM;JeJ~BaL#268;Page 8/8 --., . . .... i! Ii · IIIII i ~...~ ~ ~ ~ o 8 ' '"'" ~ ~ , ~.,.'...,  ~ ~, .'..'. ...... ~ ~, .. m . .-'. ~ .'.. ~ · ,"-' '~' ~,., ~ ..... . .... "-::' . . ~ ~.~'. ~ ~ ..2 .. ..~... ~ .'2 ~ .':'., . .'. . ..... .... ,.,...,, ...~..... ..... ,,~..,.~ ,.,.,... ~ .... ,... ~ ~~ ~ .:.:,:,:- ~ .-.-.-,-,  .... · ,....  ......... Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Diana Steele, P.E. Director Public Works/CityEngineer 707-463-6204 (fax) Reinhard Ludke, S.E / / ! May 15, 2002 / Orchard Avenue Bridge and Road Improvements Project Description, Scope of Work, and Compensation RECEIVED MAY i ? 2002 CITY OF UKIAH DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS Diana, Attached here is a revised Scope of Work and manhour estimate. I believe that this work scope can be used or modified for attachment to the City Contract. Creegan + D'Angelo would like to be selected for this project based on the qualifications we represented to you and Rick on Monday. Robed and I understand the scope of work and we will complete the work requested on or before August 14, 2002. We reduced our total effort by 132 manhours based on the changed work scope we discussed with you. The attached compensation model shows the effod we believe will be required to provide the contract documents. We propose to use a lump sum fee contract for Tasks 1 through 4, which we will complete by August 14 if have an early Type Selection Meeting and can get Rick Kennedy submittal review and review meetings scheduled as we discussed. I am looking forward to working with the City of Ukiah on this project and trust that we can agree on a work scope and fee that is satisfactory to the City and Creegan + D'Angelo. Please call or email me if you need any clarification or additional information. email: rludke@cdengineers.com cc: Robed Jones, P.E. C+D F:~R L~Proposal~Municipal~Ukiah\MEMO 020515.doc 170 Columbus Ave., Suite 240 · San Francisco, CA 94133 · Tel: (415) 834-2010 Fax: (415) 834-2011 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Project Description The Project is located both within the corporate limits of the City of Ukiah and the unincorporated areas of Mendocino County known as the Brush Street Triangle. As recommended in the "City Wide Traffic Circulation Study" prepared in 1979 and as a result of retail development in the area west of Highway 101, east of Hospital Drive, north of Perkins Ave., and south of Clara Street, the City desires to extend Orchard Ave. northerly from its current terminus at Orr Creek to Brush Street and to improve portions if Brush Street from the extension of Orchard Avenue to the Northern Pacific Railroad right of way. The extension of Orchard Ave to the north will necessitate the construction of a bridge at Orr Creek and the dedication of rights of way. Orchard Avenue is a north-south major collector located on the west side of and paralleling Highway 101. It is a fully developed city street within a 60-foot right of way between Perkins Street to the south and Ford Street to the north. Between Ford Street and the south back of Orr Creek, Orchard Avenue is improved on its west half. The design of the east half and the design of the reconstruction of a portion of the west half will be a component of the Project. Brush Street is a minimally improved east-west local road within a 30-foot right of way and it is included in the County of Mendocino's Maintained Road System. Portions of Brush Street between the railroad tracks and the proposed intersection with Orchard Ave. are of substandard pavement width for two-way traffic. The project will include minimal widening and surface improvement of Brush Street from its proposed intersection with Orchard Ave. to the railroad tracks all meeting the approval of the Mendocino County Department of Transportation. See attached Exhibit"6" Section E-E Orr Creek is a west to east tributary to the Russian River and it serves as a major drainage conveyance for the northern portion of the City. It is a spawning ground for salmonoid fish and there has been and continues to be creek restoration efforts along its banks. The Project will involve the design and construction of a one or two span concrete bridge approximately 86 feet in length. The proposed bridge crossing will occur approximately 3,235 feet upstream of Orr Creek's confluence with the Russian River. The elevation of the creek banks at the proposed crossing is 603 feet above mean sea level. As indicated in the "FEMA Flood Insurance Study" applicable to the City of Ukiah, the 100-year flood level at the proposed crossing is 604.1. At approximately 73 feet upstream of the crossing, the regulatory floodway width is 76 feet with a surcharge of 0.7 feet. Utilizing the floodway data at the upstream location for the proposed crossing, the regulatory floodway elevation would be 604.8. Setting the bottom of the bridge at one foot above the surcharge elevation will establish the bottom of bridge elevation of 605.8. The bridge alignment will be skewed from the creek's perpendicular section necessitating a bridge total span of 76 feet between the inside face of the bridge abutments. The bridge will be approximately 62 feet in width to accommodate a 48 foot wide traveled way with five (5) foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the bridge and an allowance of two (2) feet on each side to accommodate a concrete barrier with handrail. [CLJF:~R L~PROPOSAL~IUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC ! Consulting7 Civil and Structural Engineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Street Improvements The Project will involve the design and construction of street improvements for the east half of Orchard Avenue, the reconstruction of a portion of the existing improvements near the proposed south bridge approaches on the west side of Orchard Avenue and a two lane traveled way with base rock shoulders and drainage ditches for the extension of Orchard Avenue between Orr Creek and Brush Street. Refer to Exhibits 3 and 4 for an overview of the street system to be improves. Exhibits and diagrams for the project are attached. R-values of the basement soils as reported by the Geotechnical Consultant and the established Traffic Index of 9.0 will determine the design structural sections. The Project will include the design and construction of limited widening and surface improvements for Brush Street from the proposed intersection with Orchard Ave. to the railroad tracks. The structural sections shown for the new widening are approximate; the R-values of the basement soils as reported by the Geotechnical Consultant and an assumed Traffic Index of 10.0 will determine the design structural sections. Bridge Type Selection The depth of the new bridge is constrained by the flood water plane clearance and the flat site topography. It is desirable to limit raising the road profile over the bridge as it impacts the approach grades, length of approach and impacts to adjacent private property. If a fiat slab type bridge is used, maximum spans of 40 - 50 feet suggest that a two span bridge is needed to limit depth. The type selection procedure will look at single span and two span options. It is assumed that the bridge deck elevation will be approximately EL. 608 or five (5) feet above the adjacent ground surface just beyond the creek banks necessitating retaining walls for the support of the bridge approaches within the established 60-foot right of way of Orchard Avenue. Both sides of the proposed north bridge approach are undeveloped as well as the east side of the proposed south approach. Existing street improvements and multi-family housing units are near the west side of the proposed south approach. For the purpose of completing a the type selection alternative bridge study, we will assume that the bridge approaches would be approximately 30 feet long at a gradient of 10% leaving a 2 foot height differential at the lower end of the approaches. It is probable that this gradient must be reduced to 8.33% to conform to ADA requirements. The deepened sidewalk edge or minor retaining structure would be utilized beyond the bridge approaches. Subsequent to development of the vacant land, fill will be places by the developers to bring the new structures and improvements above the flood plain elevation of 604.1. It is envisioned that the bridge abutments will be open-end seat type with perpendicular wing walls or retaining walls to permit backfilling being the abutments for support of the bridge approaches. One alternate that will be considered is a precast, prestressed concrete slab of approximately 21 inches in depth and spanning approximately 43 feet. The bent will be a ICL]F:~R L~PROPOSAL\MUNICIPAL~UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 2 Consulting7 Civil and Structural En~Tineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 solid wall founded on the spread footing or subsurface piles as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. The bridge abutments and wing/retaining walls will be founded on either spread footing or piles as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. A cast in place concrete wearing surface and diaphragm course of four (4) to six (6) inches will be placed over the bridge deck. We will design the bridge to allow for a future 2 - 3 inch asphalt overlay for future street rehabilitation. The bridge and wing wall barrier will be a Caltrans type 26 concrete barrier with pedestrian railing. Exhibit 1 has particulars pertaining to the proposed bridge. Exhibit 2 has topographic features at the proposed crossing over Orr Creek. Contract Scope of Work The services provided will include the services as described. The scope of work to be completed will include, at minimum, the following work tasks: The City will provide the County with two copies for their review. All communications with the County shall be by the City. The City will provide copies of the design documents to the state and federal permitting agencies along with the permit applications. Pre-Design Services Pre-design services include a project initiation meeting, collecting data and criteria, and making a detailed site visit. The tasks will include the following: · Attend a project kick off meeting with the Public Works Director/Engineer and assigned staff. · Review field conditions and review applicable recorded and unrecorded documents and plans on file with the City and County. · Prepare a right of way map for the extension of Orchard Ave. from Orr Creek to Brush Street to be used for rights of way acquisition. The right-of-way map will be prepared from record descriptions of the property. The City will furnish Title Report and recorded property description. C+D will not resolve boundary, provide survey, or file a property boundary record of survey. The City will use the C+D furnished map and property description to file property record information. Owner furnished information: · The City will provide the Design Consultant one copy set of the documents on file with the City that are desired by the consultant. ICL]F:~:~ L~ROPOSAL~tUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 3 Consulting Civil and Structural En(lineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 · The City will provide electronic Auto Cad files of survey and site 1:20 plan and profile sheets. The City will provide the Design Consultant with an electronic copy of the City's Standard General Conditions in Word format. The City will provide the Consultant with a preliminary title report confirming the rights of way dedicated to the County for and easements affecting Brush Street. Electronic file of City Standard Title Block Title Report for property ROW acquisition. Copy of reference recent construction contract- Contract, general provisions and technical specifications for our use. The City will provide FEMA storm water and flood report. The City will provide the Geotechnical Report for the Project. C+D will review the Report and provide comments and incorporate the recommendations into the design of the Project. The Design Consultant shall pay the applicable copy fees charged by the County for those documents on file with the County that are desired by the Consultant. Bridge Engineering Task 1. Type Selection: Bridge Site Visit, Meetings and Conceptual Plan . Review roadway plans, survey, geotechnical data and seismological data for the site. 1.1 Obtain and review all records for the bridge including: State Plans - Highway 101 Orr Creek Bridge Geotechnical report and LOG OF TEST BORINGS including any information at County Foundation Report Report Required The Geotechnical Investigation should include foundation design recommendations for the new bridge. The field data and boring logs will include data that will be used to prepare a Foundation Report that includes [CL]F:tR L~DROPOSAL~MUNICIPAL~UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 4 Consultin(7 Civil and Structural Engineers REF. NO.: P201878,00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 recommendations for foundation type, depth for scour protection, and geotechnical and site fault seismic design criteria. 1.2 Obtain seismological data. 2. Field Review 2.1 Perform Field Review with City 2.2 Review Reports Includes: Field review notes, structure location, preliminary geotechnical information, and applicable photos. 3. Proposed structure model and analysis 3.1 Design alternatives are modeled and analyzed for the Type Selection Meeting. Type selection study will include single span concrete girder and a two span precast prestressed slab structure alternative. The new bridge width will be determined as part of the Type Selection. Road way width with shoulders is 62 feet. Bridge will also include retained earth approach fills and guard railing as required. 3.2 We make a structural computer mass and stiffness model and analyze the alternative structures using appropriate BDS analysis procedure. Our approach to preliminary designs is to use simplified analysis and models to initially quantify the bridge. 3.3 Summarize the Type Selection Analysis. 3.4 Type Selection Report and Meeting Strategy 3.5 Prepare Preliminary Type Selection Report. Task lB. Road Design o Civil Engineering [CL]F:~q: L~PROPOSAL~MUNICIPAL~UKIAH~ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC $ Consulting~ Civil and Structural En~/ineers REF. NO.: P201878,00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 The civil engineering and site construction plans will be prepared using CAD. The roadway plan and profile sheets will be prepared from the base survey sheets furnished by the City. The Roadway Plan and Profile Roadway drawings are prepared in CAD. ao Confer with Client to define the nature and scope of the project. Review design schemes and provide discussion of road & site work. b. Make site visit to identify existing conditions Co d. Prepare plan of site with sections and details sufficient for the City, County and property owners to understand the type and location of the proposed street improvements. Prepare preliminary sketches of grades, drainage, curbs, gutters, and construction items which indicate type, size, and location of major elements. e. Confer with County and utility companies to determine utility location and elevations. Task 1C: storm water, gas, water, electric power, telephone, cable television . f. Preliminary construction quantities Hydraulic Scour Study The hydraulic scour study will use the FEMA Storm Water hydraulic study and the creek profile to evaluate scour potential and provide design recommendations for foundations to limit foundation scour risk. C+D will use a storm water flow consultant to provide the hydraulic analysis. Pier foundation depth for scour protection must be determined. Right of Way 1. City will provide property map, title report and survey and property information. . C+D will prepare a right of way map for the extension of Orchard Ave. from Orr Creek to Brush Street to be used for rights of way acquisition and City use to file property changes. (CL]F:\R L~PROPOSAL~MUNICIPAL\UKIAH~ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC Consulting Civil and Structural En~lineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2O02 Task 2 Bridge Type and Roadway Type Selection Meeting 1. Attend the Type selection meeting on the agreed date. 2. Distribute Type Selection Report and roadway design to the City . Distribute Final Selected Bridge Type General Plan and Roadway Plan and Profile after incorporating Type Selection comments. These plans are the basis of the PS&E package. Task 3 Construction PS&E + Bridge Calculations Upon approval of the Type Selection by the Contract Manager, begin detailed design. 1.1 Sketch all non-standard details for the detailer. 1.2 1.3 1.4 Organize and assemble all design detail sheets required for the PS&E. Organize, index, and provide summaries of all designer calculations. Perform a hydraulic analysis to determine the estimated scour depth at the bent and abutments foundations. Determine if the banks under the bridge need to be armored and if so incorporate into the design. 2. 65% Plans, Specifications, & Cost Estimates 2.1 The 65% design will be submittal to the City for review within 25 working days from the date of the execution of the Design Consultant Agreement. 2.2 The submittal will include a specification outline and 10 copies of the submittal shall be provided. 2.3 Schedule and attend presentation meeting with the Public Works Director at City Hall to discuss the design 2.4 Provide Bridge General Plan and related information pertaining to the design of the bridge that may be requested by the state and federal permitting agencies during their review of the permit application. Communications with the permitting agencies will be by the City. [CL]F:~R L~°ROPOSAL~VlUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 7 Consulting/Civil and Structural En~lineers REF, NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 2.5 Review and address the edited documents by the City and incorporate any needed changes to the design where appropriate. . 90% Plans, Specification & Cost Estimate 3.1 Prepare and submit a 90% design submittal within 25 working days from the receipt of the City's comments to the 90% submittal. 3.2 Schedule and attend a design presentation meeting with the Public Works Director at City Hall. 3.3 Modify the standard general conditions to suit the Project and submit specifications with the submittal. 3.4 As a part of the contract documents provide an Erosion Control Plan that must be implemented by the Contractor during construction. 3.5 Incorporate the boring log provided by Geotechnical Consultant into the contract documents 3.6 Provide four (4) copies of the submittal. . Design Check 4.1 Check the design and specifications to see conformance between plans and specifications and sufficient details. Based on the check, incorporate comments. 4.2 Resolve all calculation and detail conflicts with the designer. Revise details accordingly. Check al.__[ details to insure conformance to CALTRANS standards and format. 4.3 Prepare quantity calculations 4.4 Prepare engineers estimate of construction costs Task 4 Final Plans, Specifications, Estimate, Quantities, and Details o Prepare and submit a 100% design submittal within 10 working days from receiving the comments to the 90% submittal. Provide the City with four (4) copies. Receive, review, and discuss with the city any comments received from the state and federal permitting agencies and incorporate (CL]F:~R L~PROPOSAL\MUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 8 Consulting Civil and Structural En~lineers REF, NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 . . . . . . . 10. 11. into the contract documents the permit requirements. Review and address the edited comments to the 90% submittal and make any required changes to the design Calculate, organize, index, and summarize all quantity calculations. Perform an independent check of all quantity calculations. Document and resolve all differences between original quantities and independent check. Organize, index, and summarize all quantity check calculations. Provide the City with one set of bridge structural calculations and other analyses performed for the project in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the Caltrans Bridge Design Specification. Structure estimate. Include for Final PS&E submittal: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) Item List with description and numbers Item Prices Final Pay Specialty Items indicated Payment clauses for all items Working Day schedule Structural Quantity Survey and Cost Estimate Lump Sum Items Lump Sum price supporting information Prepare Special Provisions in English units, modify current CALTRANS metric format. Submit Plans, Specifications, and Estimate Complete the final contract documents and submit the original of the contract documents to the Public Works Director for approval. Provide the City with 30 copies of the "Approved for Construction" contract documents, one mylar reproducible, and electronic CAD file of the plans, and electronic MSWord file of specifications within five working days from the date the Public Works Director approves and signs the contract documents. Task 5 Bidding and award services Assist the City in responding to enquiries from construction bidders during the bid period. All communications with the bidders will be through the City. JCLJF:~:~ L~PROPOSAL~JVlUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC Consulting Civil and Structural En~Tineers REF, NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Task 6 Preconstruction/Construction Service o . . . o . o Construction services as requested by the City. Usual construction support services include RFI's, shop drawing review, site visits, inspection, and provide contractor requested clarification information. Assist the City in responding to requests for design clarifications and other questions submitted by the Contractor pertaining to design intent. Review and make a recommendation to design change requests that have been referred to the Design Consultant by the City. All communications with the Contractor will be through the City. Attend a job start meeting and assist the City in responding to questions raised at the meeting. Review and approve submittals for precast piles and other precast, prestressed or reinforced concrete members. The Geotechnical Consultant is to provide a representative to record blow counts and approve the pile foundation installation. If the Geotechnical Consultant or Design Consultant specifies that a pile indicator program is to be performed, the Geotechnical Engineer will provide a representative to observe the driving of the indicator piles. C+D will not have a representative during pile driving operations. We will review pile inspection logs and make written report to the City regarding the acceptance of the pile work and conformance to contract documents. Perform general or summary monthly inspection (kick the tires) and inform City construction management/inspection staff of any noted discrepancy. The City will provide detailed and daily inspection. Record As Built information provided by the City onto the plan originals and provide one mylar set of As Built plans to the City Project De#verables Summary of Project Milestones and Deliverables: 1. Type Selection General Roadway Plan and Profile and street sections Bridge Type Selection Report . 65% PS&E Construction Documents [CL]F:~R L~ROPOSAL~MUNICIPAL\UKIAH~ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC ]0 Consultin~l Civil and Structural Engineers REF, NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Bridge Plans Roadway Plan and Profile ROW Map and descriptions Outline Specifications 3. 90% PS&E Construction Documents Bridge Plans and Details Roadway Plan and Profile and details ROW Map and descriptions Technical Specifications Quantities and Engineers Estimate 5. Bid Documents submittal Plans Specifications and General Provisions Calculations Quantities and Cost Estimate Project Schedule This project schedule summarizes the tasks and required to prepare the construction documents in the time schedule discussed with the City Engineer. The turn around review time is critical to maintain project submittal schedule. The overall schedule for design and completion of documents for bid is aggressive. Type Selection Meeting June 5, 2002 65% PS&E July 22, 2002 90% PS&E August 5, 2002 100% PS&E August 14, 2002 [CL]F:XR L~PROPOSAL~IUNICIPAL~UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515,DOC 1! Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Proposed Compensation BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS The project man-hour effort and budget is based on the work scope and the design schedule. C+D Engineers and our consultant believe that the Basic Tasks for Bridge Engineering, Road Alternatives and Construction Plans can be developed within the budgets proposed. Maintaining the project schedule will require that background information be prepared to meet the schedule. Critical path information that must be prepared and furnished includes: Property Title Report, boundary and topographic survey Utility survey and mapping Foundation Report for Foundation Recommendation Environmental Document FEMA Hydraulic Study Construction Cost Estimates Cost estimates for the Riverside Drive Bridge will be based on drawings, information, sketches and specifications provided by the Engineer and Consultants. The preliminary construction budget will be finalized when Type Selection is completed. Subconsultant We have selected Richard Van Bruggen of Water Resources Consulting Services to provide hydraulic analysis and storm water scour risk for bridge foundation design. The firm and individual resume follow. [CL]F:~R L~PROPOSAL\MUNICIPAL\UKIAI~ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC 12 Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 CITY OF UKIAH ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS MAY 15, 2002 Contract C+D proposes to furnish our services for the contract documents on a lump sum basis. We propose a payment schedule based on milestone deliverables. Total compensation to be negotiated based on the work scope, deliverables, and effort indicated on the attached Project Compensation Model. Milestone Date Payment Type Selection Meeting June 5, 2002 20% 65% PS&E July 22, 2002 50% 90% PS&E August 5, 2002 20% 100% PS&E August 14, 2002 10% [CL]F:~C~ L~PROPOSAL~IUNICIPAL\UKIAH\ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE CONTRACT SCOPE 020515.DOC ]3 Consultin~l Civil and Structural En~tineers REF. NO.: P201878.00 RIGHT OF WAY < DIRT SHOULDER 30.00' /6.00'~ 12.00' CENTERLINE >< >~ 30.00 RIGHT OF · , ~..oo, >< 6.oo, > DIRT SHOULDER AGGREGATE BASE ORCHARD AVENUE TYPICAL SECTION ORR CREEK TO BRUSH STREET RIGHT OF WAY RIGHT OF WA% < > CENTERLINE 30.00, ~< 30.00 VARIES 1' TO 12' < 2s.oo' >~ > EXISTING 3' ASPHALT CONCRETE 3" ASPHALT DIRT SHOULDER CONCRETE ~ AGGREGATE BASS EXISTING 8" CLASS 2 ORCHARD AVENUE AGGREGATE BASE TYPICAL SECTION FORD STREET TO ORR CREEK A - A EXHIBIT "5" RIGHT OF WAY I' 3° ASPHALT CONCRETE ~ CENTERLINE '.00' /x < 15.oo' 1.50' AGGREGATE BA~ BRUSH STREET TYPICAL SECTION FROM RAILROAD TO ORR STREET E - E RIGHT OF WAY ASPHALT CONCRETB ~.50' AGGRBGATE BASE RIGHT OF WAY CENTERLINE < ~s.oo. ; < / 12.50' -,, ., EXISTING 1.5.00' < ~:.so. > ROADWAY 2 ASPHALT CONCRETK I O.VERI"A Y7 RIGET OF WAY .. BRUSH STREET TYPICAL SECTION FROM APPROX. 500' EAST OF ORR STREET D D RIGHT OF WAY CENTERLINE RIGHT OF WAY ~s.oo. >< 1.5.00' I ~- ~XISTING' ROADWAY 1 F ] t- 5.0' ~/ 7.00' ~/ 7.00' ~ 5.0' ~ ~' ~"~ / / '1 / CONCRETE __ __ . __ _ ~ . 1.50' Off AGGREGAT~ BASE BRUSH STREET* TYPICAL SECTION FROM APPROX. 500' EAST OF ORR STREET TO ORCHARO AV~UE C C EXHIBIT "6" .- · EXHIBIT "7" " _ _... -2-~''~ I~ ~ I~ / ~ANE LANE LAN~ . TURN ~ LANE ~ 3' ASPHALT ' I / CON~ETE I ~.. BRUSH STREET FULL DEVELOPMENT FROM 'RAILROAD TO ORCHARD ST. CXNTKRLINE 30.00' ~ 30.00 ! , 5' J' .ORCHARO AVENUE FULL'"-DEVEI, O~UENT * " FORD STREET TO BRUSH STREET ls°O lel°J ]'))?) .............. ............... · .....-...- ...-...-...-...-.. )~selqns ,<q lsoo lelo. .'-'.'.'.'.' .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' ............... .............. · .....-.-.- .....-...-........ ............... ~ ~ ~ ~* ~ ~ ~ ,....~.................. ~ ~ ~ , ~ :.:.: ~ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:+ SJ~H leloJ L'.' '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' L'.' '.'.-.'.'.'.'.'.' ~ ........... L'.' '.','.'.'.'.'.'.'~ · - ~ · ..-.....-.-,-,- ....-................................................................................................-......................-..................................~............................................................................... ..............:. ................................................................................................................... .~.~-~ .~.~. ~. ~.~.~ '.'~ '.'. I.'.' ...~ -.-. :...- ...... ...... '.'~ '.'. I.'.: ....... · ..~ ~ .... ~...- -.-~ ,.... ,.... · ..~ -.-. ,.... · .'~ '.'. I.'.' ..~ .. ~.. .~ .... · ..~ -... .-.- ..... ~ ...~ ...- .... ...... ..~..... ~ .z~.. I"-' fiu~uue~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '"' ~'''' " ...~ .... ,-.-. ~ezmol u~) ~ ...~ ,.... ,.... ...... · ..2 ~... ...- ....... .-.~ ,.,.. ..., ..., ~ .... ~.... ....... ...... .-.: ... ...~ .....~.~ ...- ~.2. -~.~.~.~ , .... · .-.: ~ -... ~.... .... ,.. ........ ........ · .'1 .... ....... ...~ .... ..-. ...~ ~ :.- - ~ ..-. ...~ .... ,-.-; ...~ .... ,-... -'-~ -'.' I'.'- ~-~q :-~. .~.: Jo+O] n~qo~ pej ~ 'F:': ~ ~'~' ~ '~': la+o] qo~s 'L ~ [::::.:-::-:-: ,-.. ~ .... .... '~~ ........ .... u.' '.'. ." ;.... - .... ~ ....... ..... F... .~.~ ~.~.~ ........ ... ~OB .., [o+ol ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ :.:.:~v. .v. la+gl e~pn] '~ ~ '.v '.'. .v. ..... g .:--:.:--::: ~ ~ ....... ...... ,, .'.- ~ ..-. ~ ...., .. · ~ :::-:~ ~ ............. Rick Kennedy From: To: Cc: Sent: Attach: Subject: "Reinhard Ludke" <rludke@cdengineers.com> "Rick Kennedy" <ricknora@pacbell.net> <rickjs@cityof ukiah.com> Tuesday, May 21, 2002 12:14 PM COST PROPOSAL 0200415R2.xls; COST PROPOSAL 020515 R.xls; MEMO 020521.doc RE: Spread Sheet Rick, Attached here is the memo and revised spreadsheets that I faxed to Diana Steele & you this morning. Yes, I did find errors in the cell/formula that included B. Manning cells hours and rate products, and they match your calculation. I do not have Diana Steele email address Reinhard Ludke, S.E. Vice President C+D Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers 170 Columbus Avenue #240 San Francisco, CA 94133 415-834-2010 ..... Original Message ..... From: Rick Kennedy [mailto:ricknora@pacbell.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 10:47 AM To: rludke@cdengineers.com Subject: Spread Sheet Reinhard, Attached is my spread sheet per our conversation. Rick K 5/3O/02 Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Diana Steele, P.E. Director Public Works/City Engineer 707-463-6204 (fax) Reinhard Ludke, S.E DATE: SUBJECT: May 21, 2002 Orchard Avenue Bridge and Road Improvements Compensation model Spreadsheet ERROR IN CALCULATION Diana and Richard Kennedy, Richard told me this morning that he found errors in the compensation spreadsheet. I reviewed the spreadsheet formula and calculation and found errors in the formula. The file I used was in error. I believe that the attached two spreadsheets correct the error. CELL A J25 FROM 0200415R THE ORIGINAL 4/15/2002 PROPOSAL =(I 14'1540 )+( J 14 *J$40 )+(K 14*K $40 )+(L 14*L $40 )+(M 14*M$40)+(N 14'N$40 )+( O 14 *0540 )+(P 14 *P$40)+(Q14*Q$40)+(R14*R$40)+(S14*S$40)+(T14*T$40)+(U14*U$40)+(V14*V$40)+(W14*W $40)+(X14*$X41)+(Y14*Y$40)+(Z14*Z$40)+(AA14*AA$40)+(AB14*AB$40)+(AC14*AC$40)+(A D14*AD$40) CELL A J14 FROM 0200415R THE ORIGINAL 4/15/2002 PROPOSAL =(I 14'1541 )+(J 14'J$41 )+(K 14 *K $41 )+(L 14 *L$41 )+(M 14'M$41 )+(N 14'N$41 )+( O 14'O541 )+(P 14 *P$41 )+(Q 14'Q$41 )+(R 14'R$41 )+(S 14'S$41 )+(T 14 *T$41 )+(U 14'U$41 )+(V 14'V$41 )+(W 14*W $41 )+(X 14'$X42)+(Y 14'Y$41 )+(Z 14'Z$41 )+(AA 14'AA$41 )+(AB 14'AB$41 )+(AC 14*A C$41 )+(A D14*AD$41) REVISED A J14 FROM O200415R2 4/21/2002 =(I 14 '1541 )+(J 14 *J$41 )+(K 14*K $41 )+(L 14 *L$41 )+(M 14'M$41 )+(N 14'N$41 )+(O 14'O541 )+(P 14 *P$41 )+(Q 14 *Q $41 )+(R 14'R$41 )+(S 14 *S$41 )+(T 14'T$41 )+(U 14'U$41 )+(V 14 *V$41 )+(W 14*W $41 )+(X 14*X $41 )+(Y 14'Y$41 )+(Z 14 *Z$41 )+(AA 14'AA$41 )+(AB 14 *AB$41 )+(AC 14'AC$41 )+(A D14*AD$41) C:~WlNDOWS~Tern?orar]f Intemet Files~Content. lE5~W72DS3AZI~EMO 020521 .doc 170 Columbus Ave., Suite 240 · San Francisco, CA 94133 · Tel: (415) 834-20f0 Fax: (415) 834-2011 Memo May/21/2002 pg. 2 Compensation model 4/15/2002 Proposal 5/15/2002 Reduction difference Labor total w/error Labor total corrected $117,348 $104,244 $ 13,104 $128,508 $115,404 $ 13,104 Difference $11,160 $11,160 Attached here are the revised spreadsheets. Creegan + D'Angelo would like to be selected for this project based on the qualifications we represented to you and Rick on Monday. Robert and I understand the scope of work and we will complete the work requested on or before August 14, 2002. We reduced our total effort by 132 manhours based on the changed work scope we discussed with you. The attached compensation model shows the effort we believe will be required to provide the contract documents. We propose to use a lump sum fee contract for Tasks 1 through 4, which we will complete by August 14 if have an early Type Selection Meeting and can get Rick Kennedy submittal review and review meetings scheduled as we discussed. I am looking forward to working with the City of Ukiah on this project and trust that we can agree on a work scope and fee that is satisfactory to the City and Creegan + D'Angelo. Please call or email me if you need any clarification or additional information. email: dudke@cdengineers.com C:~WINDOWStTem?orm7 Intemet Files~ContenLE5~W72DS3AZI~4EMO 020521 .doc 170 Columbus Ave., Suite 240 · San Francisco, CA 94133 · Tel: (415) 834-2010 Fax: (415) 834-2011 CITY OF UKIAH MEMORANDUM Date: April 30, 2002 To; Diana Steele, Public Works Director/City Engineer From: Rick Kennedy, Project Manager Subject: Recommendation Concerning Consultant Selection for Orchard Ave Bridge Design Services Summary Based on the review of the information contained in the proposals submitted and discussions with outside references, it is recommended that Creegan & D'Angelo and Winzler & Kelly be invited to participate in a consultant selection interview for further consideration. It is evident that these two consulting firms are highly qualified to perform the design services that are required for the Orchard Ave Bridge and Related Street Improvements and their proposed design fees are comparable. It is also recommended that City staff meet with County staff to clarify agency design responsibilities or desires concerning this project prior to conducting the interviews. The objective of the consultant interview would be two fold; final selection and dialog with the consultants on how we may reduce the total cost for the design service. Discussion The four (4) proposals received were thoroughly reviewed and, based on the information presented, comparisons of hourly rates, labor effort, and fee by work tasks were made. Although Wildan submitted a very detailed proposal and are highly qualified to design this project, they were not included in the comparisons because their requested design fee greatly exceeded the City's resources and, in my opinion, the project size. Wildan's proposed design fee is in a range of 30% to 35% of the estimated project construction cost compared to a range of 15% to 20% as submitted by the other consultants. It was not possible to include Winzler and Kelly (W & K) in the labor effort comparison by labor classification because they did not include a detailed labor estimate by classification nor was it possible to compare all of Creegan & D'Angelo (C & D) hourly rates with those of the other consultants because they did not include a list of their hourly rates as requested in the RFP. C & D's hourly rates included in the comparison were taken from the detailed labor effort estimate. Based on the information presented in the proposals which consisted of similar projects completed and resumes of the proposed project team members, W & K, C & D, and Wildan are highly qualified and possess the resources to perform the bridge design services needed for the City's project. However, it does not appear, based on the information presented in their proposal and my discussions with two references, that Lars Andersen and Associates (LA & A) has adequate experience or resources to perform bridge design services needed for this project. LA & A reports completing a non-specified bridge design project for each of cities of Hayward, Clovis, and Del Rey Oaks. I spoke with Robert Bauman with the City of Hayward who is listed as a reference for LA & A and according to Mr. Bauman the project he believes that Mr. Mommer is referring to in his proposal is an arch culvert crossing within a waterway designed for Home Depot and reviewed by the City. This is not similar to or as sophisticated as our project. Mr. Bauman also stated that he was not aware that LA & A generally performed Capital Improvement Project (ClP) design work. He was under the impression that LA & A normally performed design work typical for land development projects. In fact, the information presented in LA & A's proposal slants towards land development work. Mr. Bauman added that the work performed by LA & A was very acceptable. I traded phone messages with Mr. Alan Weaver with the City of Clovis who is also listed as a reference for LA & A. Mr. Weaver could not recollect a bridge project designed by LA & A for the City of Clovis but added that they normally performed design work for land development projects for the private sector and performed it well. He was not aware of their CIP design work or history. References or client contacts for the City of Del Rey Oaks were not provided. As indicated in the attached Comparison of Fee By Work Task table, the estimated fee as submitted by W & K and C & D are comparable in total as well as by work task. The total estimated fee presented by LA & A is approximately $53,000 less than the fees submitted by the other two consultants. As indicated in the attached Comparison of Labor Effort By Labor Classification table, approximately 53% of the total design effort for LA & A is contributable to a computer/CDD engineer and technician as compared to 35% for C & D. The labor effort contributed by the Bridge or Structural Engineer is approximately 9% of the total effort by LA & A as compared to 25% for C & D. This difference in effort by the structural engineer is significant and I believe we can consider the 9% effort level by a structural or bridge engineer to be inadequate for this project. The design effort needed for this bridge project will not be a cookbook effort. As requested in the RFP, the work tasks were to include the design and preparation of contract plans and documents for the extension of Orchard Ave. including ultimate features, the interim improvement of Brush Street, and the final design for Brush Street. It was mentioned in the RFP that the immediate project included only the backbone construction of Orchard north of the bridge and that the ultimate features for both Orchard and Brush would be constructed as development occurred along their frontage. I had envisioned that both the County and City would desire an ultimate design for Brush to provide guidance to the both agency staff as well as to the developer's engineers as to the overall design desired as the project is completed in pieces. As what occurs in most instances when development occurs piecemeal, attention to future needs as to gutter drainage beyond the immediate project is ignored or not considered. The flatter the lay of the land the more critical the need to design for the overall picture. We should also consider at this time the ultimate storm drain system that will be needed. As development occurs the system could be expanded via a capital improvement fee program. It was also assumed that the construction of only the bridge without the extension of Orchard was unacceptable. If Orchard is extended under the project, interim work on Brush Street has to occur. Because the contemplated interim improvements to Brush Street were temporary and not per agency standards, it was requested that the ultimate design for Brush Street be shown on separate plans so as confusion would not result. The project construction documents for the immediate project would only include the plans for the interim work. The Brush Street ultimate design drawings would be a reference document for agency staff. Since the interim improvement for the extension would be in accordance with ultimate structural section and per standards, the ultimate improvements for Orchard could be superimposed on the project drawings without causing confusion. As the Agreement with the County evolves, it appears the County may accept the responsibility for the construction of Orchard extension and the interim improvement to Brush. If this is the case, does the County want the City to proceed with the design work of the street improvements north of Orr Creek? If the County prefers to design these improvements with their forces, we could potentially reduce the design fees by at least $15,000. Further discussions with County staff are needed. We will need street design work for that portion of Orchard between Ford Street and the bridge. C & D, W & K, and Wildan all recognized the need for pre-design effort. As noted in C & D's proposal, they have included effort for a bridge selection process which would consider single span and two span options. I believe this effort would be worthwhile. COMPARISON OF FEE BY WORK TASK FOR ORCHARD AVE. BRIDGE DESIGN SERVICES WORK TASK LA WK C & D Pre-Design None Stated $11,786 $24,732 40% Bddge Design $26,188 40% Road Design $10,656 40% Design Total $16,350 $35,916(1) $36,844 80% Bddge Design $15,630 80% Road Design $10,968 80% Design Total $22,425 $33,080 $26,598 Final Bddge Design $11,482 Final Road Design $4,824 Final Design Total $16,305 $20,806 $16,306 Hydraulic/Scour Analysis $9,000 $3,716 $7,000 Bidding & Award Services $4,875 $4,620 $2,700 Pre-Construction/Construction Services $5,585 $20,244 $10,168 Direct Costs Included in above Included in above $2,545 Total Project Fee $74,540 $130,168 $126,893 Notes: LA = Lars Andersen and Associates WK = Winzler and Kelly C & D = Creegan and D'Angelo (1) Includes $2,836 for permit assistance Z ~ IL! 5 ~ W 0 m 5 -~ >" w Ou_CI LI.i 0 > u.. 0 ~ 0 0 (O II HOURLY RATE COMPARISON FOR ORCHARD AVE. BRIDGE DESIGN SERVICES JOB TITLE LA WK C & D Principal Consultant/Engineer $125 $125 - $175 Associate Consultant $115 - $120 Chief Surveyor $90 $80 - $110 Structural/Bdd~le En~.lineer $116 Project Manager/Senior Project Engineer $70 $95 - $110 $156 Desitin/Staff Engineer $60 $90 - $100 $116 Junior Engineer $60 - $95 $88 Design Technician $45 $65 - $95 Technician $35 $45 - $60 Computer Design Engineer $55 $80 - $100 $88 - $90 Computer Design Technician $45 $60 - $75 Computer Assistant Technician $40 Construction Senior Mana~ler $85 Construction Management Technician $65 Construction Inspection $55 3 Person Survey Crew $155 $180 - $220 Clerical/Admin $30 $45 - $75 $55 Notes: LA = Lars Andersen and Associates WK = Winzler and Kelly C & D = Creegan and D'Angelo AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6g DATE: June 5, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO LEE HOWARD CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HALF STREET IMPROVEMENTS ALONG A PORTION OF THE WEST SIDE OF WAUGH LANE, IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $23,000 AND APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY: The City has required the developers of two projects fronting Waugh Lane to provide street improvements as part of their planning and building permits. The improvements consist of sidewalk, curb and gutter. The improvements also require the property owners to base and pave from the new gutter to the existing edge of pavement. These three adjacent properties front the east side of Waugh Lane, specifically 905,907 and 909 Waugh Lane. Lee Howard Construction Co. is under contract, with the property owners, to provide all the improvements for the three parcels. City Staff has reviewed the condition of the west side of Waugh Lane in the same location as the three subject parcels. The pavement and structural section are in complete disrepair in this location. Furthermore, if the existing pavement area is not replaced, the crown of the roadway will be offset from the center, creating an awkward and potentially unsafe condition. Staffs recommendation is to remove and replace the existing asphalt on the west side of Waugh Lane. Staff has contacted Mr. Howard to obtain a price for performing this work. Mr. Howard has provided the City with the price of $3.50 per square foot. This price is a competitive industry price. There are approximately 5,600 square feet of proposed asphalt improvements. This job was not competitively bid because Mr. Howard will be on site performing work, the coordination of two separate paving contractors on a job this small would be prohibitive. Staff did not anticipate this project at the time the original budget was adopted and thus an amendment is necessary to authorize the expenditure. Funds are available Fund 345, Off System Roads. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award contract to Lee Howard Construction Co. for the construction of half street improvements along a portion of the west side of Waugh Lane, in the estimated amount not to exceed $23,000, and approve amendment to the 2001/2002 budget authorizing expenditures of $23,000 in account 345.9653.250.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine contract should not be awarded and direct staff to leave the pavement on Waugh Lane in the current condition. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Diana M. Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Prepared by: Tim Eriksen, Civil Engineer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Contractor Proposal 2. Budg~Amendment Work Sheet aPPROVEd: L~.~_ ~ __~__ Candace Horsley, City~anager TO LEE HOWARD CONSTRUCTION CO. 3900 Parducci Road UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 (707) 462-6944 State Contractor's Lic. #280777 ESTIMATE ~)NE JOB NAME/LOCATION IDATE ! / THIS ESTIMATE IS FOR COMPLETING THE JOB AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. IT IS BASED ON OUR EVALUATION AND DOES NOT IN- CLUDE MATERIAL PRICE INCREASES OR ADDITIONAL LABOR AND MATERIALS WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED SHOULD UNFORESEEN PROBLEMS OR ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS ARISE AFTER THE WORK HAS STARTED. FORM 215-2 Available from ~ Inc., Townsend, Mass. 01470 i ESTIMATED ~'~~ ~-~-~. ~ ~__~ ~. /~__~,~ fD JOB COST ~ _ ,,~TTACMMENT'~ ITEM NO. 6h DATE: JUNE 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM KENNETH JOSEPH MABERY AND REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Kenneth Joseph Mabery was received by the City of Ukiah on April 19, 2002 and alleges damages related to power brown outs at 272 Cherry Street during the week of April 1-5, 2002. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the claim as stated and refer it to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION' Reject Claim For Damages Received From Kenneth Joseph Mabery And Refer It To The Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised' Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with' Attachments: Yes Claimant Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer c.~~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Kenneth Joseph Mabery, pages 1-5. Candace ~or'sley, City M~l~ager mfh:asrcc02 0320CLAIM NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFOR This claim must be presented, as prescrfbed by Parts 3 and4 of Division 3.6, of State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf. RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: CITY OF UKIAH Attn: City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 . CLAIMANT'S NAME: . , CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS:' Number/S/reet and/or Post Offi~ Bo~- Zi'p Code Home Phone Number Work Phone Number PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING.THIS c,'LAI~HOULD BE SENT (if different from above): Name Number/Streel and/hr Post Office Box City State (_ ) Telephone Zip Code 4. DATE OF THE ACCIDENT.OR OCCURRENCE: ,, I 6. '. GENE~L DESC~PTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (A~ach add~nal page(s), ff more space is needed: , , . _ . . .... ~ - '-' t-v' -- '' '- · ' . S~n/~ ~ ~mple~e~ ~ r~i'~ );~, ~~-[;n~s c~m;~3 ';n*~ mT'hom~ ~.r~ ~~. 7. ~mE(S),. ~ kno~,, o~ mY PUSUC EMPLO YEErS) ALLE~EDL Y CAUSING THE/NJURY OR LOSS:. WITNESS(ES), ff known (optional):' Na~e .. cz , em' 'E ~,. I ' -r" i Telephone . DOCTOR(S)/HOSPITAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREA TED: Name Address a. Telephone .0 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS so.far as it maybe known atthe ~me of presentafion ofthe claim: ~{_~. ex_ ('~_,~i ~ ) 'J- c7~- ~/~/~ -(~r-~)/ ~-[/ 11. STATE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED if it totals less than ten thoUSand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage or loss, insofar' as if may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed (for computation use #12 below). However, if the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shaft indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case (CCP § 85)." Amount. Claimed $ ~'~ ? :~/~C~ ... or Applicable Jurisdiction 12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS: a. Damages incurred to date:' Expenses for medical/hospital care: $ Loss of earnings: Special damages for:. Genera! damages: . ~ $ b. E~fimated prospective damages as far as known: · Future expenses for medical and hospital care: Future loss of earnings: Other prospective'special damages: $ .. Prospective general damages: $ This claim must be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to the person orto personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six (6) calendar months or 182 days affer the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is longer. Claims relating to any other Causes of action shall be presented not laterthan one (1) year'after accrual of the cause.~)f action. Dated: Received in the Office'of the City clerk this ', ~ day of //~ -~~.~ , 20 ~,~_. . ,' [ I / NOTE: This form of claim ' y onvenience only. ~ny other type of form nfEy be used if desired, as long as it · satisfies t~e requirements of the Government COde. The use of this form is not intended in any way to advise you of' your legal rights, or to interpret any law. ff you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, you should seek legal counsel of your choice at your own expense. Rev. 5/18/99 . . · · · =. _ , Y P , I · ITEM NO. 6i DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES AS FISCAL AGENT FOR NORTH COAST RAILROAD AUTHORITY DEPOT RENOVATION GRANT The North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) has received $168,000 in funding from the Mendocino Council of Governments, as part of federal monies associated with the Transportation Enhancement Application (TEA) grant allocations. The City of Ukiah wishes to enter into a contract with NCRA to act as the fiscal agent for the administration of the grant. As the administrator for the grant, the City would be compensated $18,000 for management of the project and payment of all fees to contractors. The renovation of the Ukiah depot and the development of a small pocket park on Perkins Street will go a long way toward improving the aesthetic appearance of this main artery into our City. The City serving as fiscal agent will enhance the satisfactory completion of the project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve agreement for services as fiscal agent for NCRA as part of TEA grant for renovation of Ukiah railroad depot. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Vote not to approve agreement and develop other strategies regarding how to improve the general appearance of the Ukiah railroad depot and Perkins Street. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Max Bridges, Executive Director NCRA Albert T. Fierro, Assistant City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Agreement for services as fiscal agent with May 21,2002 cover letter. APPROVED' mfh:ASRCityCouncil Candace Horsley, Citylanager May 21, 2002 Albert T. Fierro Assistant City Manager c/o City Managers Office City of Ukiah Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah CA 95482 Dear Mr. Fierro: Enclosed please find a copy of the Agreement for Services as Fiscal Agent entered into by the North Coast Railroad Authority and the City of Ukiah executed by Max H. Bridges, Executive Director. The Agreement requires the date signed entered on the first page and your signature on the last page attested to by the City Clerk. Please forward a copy of the fully executed Agreement to this office. If you need additional information, please contact Mr. Bridges at (707) 894-1595. Sincerely, Pamela Fishtrom Administrator North Coast Railroad Authority PO Box 279 Cloverdale CA 95425-0279 Enclosure AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES AS FISCAL AGENT This Agreement is made and entered in Ukiah, California, on ,2002 ("Effective Date") by and between the North Coast Railroad Authority ("NCRA"), an authority created by state statute within Sonoma, Humboldt, Trinity and Mendocino Counties, and the City of Ukiah ("City"), a general law Municipal Corporation. RECITALS: 1. NCRA has applied to the California Department of Transportation through the Mendocino County Council of Governments (MCCOG") for a Transportation Enhancement Activities ("TEA") grant of $150,000 to rehabilitate the Ukiah Train Depot ("Depof'), located on Perkins Street, in the City. Under the terms of the TEA grant, NCRA is required to provide local matching funds of Eighteen Thousand Dollars ($18,000), making the total available for rehabilitation of the Depot and administration of the grant One Hundred Sixty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($168,o0o). 2. As proposed in the grant application, the City would act as the fiscal agent for the grant funds, receiving, accounting for and disbursing the grant funds for the rehabilitation of the Depot, and would provide additional services as described below in the administration of the grant. 3. This Agreement is intended to establish the terms under which the City will provide fiscal agent and other services to NCRA in the administration the TEA grant. AGREEMENT: 1. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CITY. 1.1 City will: (1) select design professionals to develop plans and specifications and contract documents for the rehabilitation of the Depot; (2) approve contract documents between the Contractor and NCR& including plans and specifications for the rehabilitation of the Depot; (3) select a contractor to perform the rehabilitation work in accordance with contract documents; (4) provide a DBE plan, contract administration checklist on the approved Caltrans form 15A and an approved quality assurance program; (5) review progress payment applications from the contractor and a request for final payment under the construction contract. Payment by City shall not be deemed a representation or determination by City that the work covered by the payment was satisfactorily completed or complies with legal requirements. NCRA and Ukiah shall be jointly responsible for ascertaining that the work has been performed in accordance with contract documents and legal requirements. 1.2 City shall have no financial responsibility for the expenses of the rehabilitation project, even if the costs exceed the amount of the grant or claims arise during or after construction, except for costs resulting solely from City's failure to perform as required by this Agreement. 1.3 City will issue checks and maintain financial and other records pertaining to the receipt and disbursement of grant funds in accordance xvith generally accepted government accounting standards and the requirements of the grant or the California Department of Transportation. 1.4 City will preserve all records received or created under this Contract for a period of three (3) years after the termination of this Agreement, and shall make such records available for inspection, copying or audit by NCRA, MCCOG or the California Department of Transportation. 2. NCRA RESPONSIBILITIES. NCRA will: (1) cooperate with the City in the selection of contractors and the administration of the contracts, including the timely approval of City actions; (2) provide information and respond to the City's reasonable requests in a timely manner; and (3) retain ownership of the Depot and assume full responsibility for the completed project as well as the future administration, maintenance and repair of the rehabilitated Depot 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The City shall commence providing services under this Contract, when NCRA provides City with a written notice to proceed. The services will continue during until the rehabilitation of the Depot is completed in accordance with the construction contract documents, but in no event shall City be obligated to provide such services for the fee specified herein for a period of more than twelve (12) months from its receipt of a notice to proceed; except for the City's obligations under Section 1.5 of this Agreement. 4. TERM. Except for City's obligations under Section 1.5 of this Agreement the term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date, and end twelve months later, unless extended by mutual written agreement of the parties or terminated as provided in paragraph 9. 5. COMPENSATION. NCRA shall: (1) pay City Eighteen Thousand Dollars ($18,000) for the administration services provided under this Agreement, which shall ixiclude all staff time, associated overhead, use of City facilities and supplies; and any other exIx~n~s incurred by City in performing the services required of it by this Agreement; and (2) grant the City a permanent license (a) for a monument sign on the Ukiah depot property subject to design and location approval by NCRA, and (b) for access to and landscaping of the creek area and land north of the creek per "Creek restoration plans", attached hereto as Exlfibit A. Ukiah will maintain at its own cost above described improvements and landscaping. The license granted hereunder may be revoked by NCRA only if the property subject to the license is required for the operation of the railroad. 6. METHOD OF PAYMENT. The City shall deduct its fee from the total grant funds, including the NCRA match, of One Hundred Sixty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($168,000), upon receipt of the funds. It shall use the balance of One Hundred Fifty, Thousand Dollars ($150,000) for the costs of rehabilitating the Depot. 7. CONFIDENTIALITY. The City will follow the California Public Records Act in determining whether to disclose, provide access to or copies of documents it receives or creates in the course of performing under this Contract. 8. TERMINATION. This Agreement may only be terminated by either party based on a material breach of the agreement by the other party. Prior to terminating this agreement based on an alleged breach, the non- breaching party shall provide notice to the other party, describing the act or omission constituting the alleged breach and the steps required to cure the breach. If the party allegedly in breach of the Agreement fails to cure the breach within ten (10) days of its receipt of said notice, the non-breaching party may provide written notice to the other party that the agreement is terminated and of the effective date of the termination. If the particular breach cannot be cured within said ten (10) days, the non-breaching party may give notice of termination only if the party allegedly in breach fails to commence the actions required to cure the breach within said ten (10) days and fails to diligently and in good faith complete the steps necessary to cure the breach. NCRA shall pay City only for services performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination date. That amount shall be calculated by multiplying $18,000 by a fraction, the denominator of which is 12 and the numerator of which is the number of full months that have elapsed since the City received a notice to proceed from NCRA In such event, City shall refund the unused portion of the $18,000 to NCRA and shall deliver immediately to NCRA all finished or unfinished documents, reports and other information received or created by the City under this Agreement 9. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be changed only by a written amendment approved and signed by authorized representatives of both parties. 10. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or notation), without the prior written consent of the other party. 11. APPLICATION OF LAWS. The parties hereby agree that all applicable Federal, State and local rules, regulations and guidelines not written into this Agreement shall hereby prevail during the period of this Agreement. 12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is the express intention of the parties hereto that City is an independent contractor and not an employee, joint venturer, or partner of NCRA for any purpose whatsoever. NCRA shall have no right to, and shall not control the manner or prescribe the method of accomplishing those services contracted to and performed by City under this Agreement, and the general public and all governmental agencies regulating such activity shall be so informed. 13. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and any legal action concerning the agreement must be filed and litigated in the proper court in Mendocino County. 14. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of the Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way. 15. INTEGRATION. This Agreement contains the entire'agreement among the parties and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements, understandings, and representations among the parties. No amendments to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing by all of the parties. 16. WAIVER. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. No waiver shall be binding tmless executed in writing by the party making the waiver. 17. PARAGRAPH I-lEADINGS. The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this agreement. 18. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS. This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the Agreement between the parties. 19. NOTICES. Whenever notice, payment or other communication is required or permitted under this Agreement, it shall be deemed to have been given when personally delivered, telefaxed or deposited into the United States mail with proper first-class postage affixed thereto and addressed as follows: C/O City Managers Office City of Ukiah Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, Ca. 95482 FAX: 463-6204 NCRA Executive Director P.O. Box 279 Cloverdale, CA 95425 Phone: 707-894-1595 FAX: 707-894-1597 WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement on the date first written above. CITY OF UKIAH ATTEST: City Clerk NORTH COAST RAILROAD.,O Its: ~:" ,.3..- ~ ~ ~[~-~; 1~-'~~ . ITEM NO. 6i DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO COUNCIL REGARDING CONTRACT WITH B.C. SCHMIDT CONSTRUCTION INC. FOR INSTALLATION OF ACE AERIAL HANGAR DOOR IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,500 Pursuant to Ukiah City Code Section 1522, this report is presented to the City Council regarding the purchase of services between $5,000 and $10,000. The City has purchased a bi-fold hangar door for the Ace Aerial facility at the airport and installation is required. There are no qualified contractors in Lake and Mendocino Counties as recommended by the manufacturer for this project and thus a search beyond our region was necessary. Three bids were received in response to Staff's inquires: Herbert B. Meeker $8,871 Visalia, CA B.C. Schmidt Construction, Inc. Williams, CA $6,500 TESCO $5,400 Invalid bid San Ramon, CA TESCO was the lowest bidder by the bid deadline, however they have since asked to revised their bid to include a crane rental that was left out of their initial bid. Since this was change occurred after the bid deadline and TESCO cannot perform the work for its original bid, staff is entering into a contract with B.C. Schmidt Construction, Inc. who is the next lowest bidder. Schmidt has vast experience with this type of specialty work and was the only bidder to actually travel to Ukiah to take measurements and inspect the project site. The attention to detail we believe denotes the type of expertise this contractor will bring to the job. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding contract with B.C. Schmidt Construction, Inc. to install a bi-fold hangar door at the Ace Aerial facility on the Ukiah Regional Airport at a cost of $6,500. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: mfh:ASRCityCouncil N/A Don Bua, Airport Manager Albert T. Fierro, Assistant City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. B.C. Schmidt Construction contract. 2. Bids from Herbert Meeker and TESCO Candace Horsley, (~"~anager 85/28/2882 15:13 15384732749 SCHHIDT CONSTRUCTION PAGE 85 B C mmm t Post Office Box 1557 ,~25 Turner Road Williams, CA 95987 May 2012002 ,~ert rerr~ ~ c~ ~ c~ u.a. We speciaiize mainly in melai bulding/~ ereclio~ and concrete. We h;we erected a.number of ~fr.~ n'enufa~res buik~..We ca~ take a project from ~r~ging door~. Iarn in the process of omellng 8 tx. odmm at this Ume. ! have includecl a ~ ~ ~ ~ txojec~ to give you an idea Pieaeef~~b~m us ifyou have any clue~tlons. I look ~ to hemng from you. ' 05/20/2002 15:13 15304732749 SCHMIDT CONSTRUCTION PAGE 02 B. C. SCHIR%DT CONSTRUCT%ON %NC. PROPOSAL AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR City of ~ Proposal: Date of Propor~l: 5/20/2002 ~ Valid Until: 6/30/2002 B. C. Schmid~ Co--on Inc. agr~cs as follows: Artide ~ BeseriFtio~ ~md Lotaflo~ of Work. ConWactor agrees to perform the following work: ~ ATTACH~ 01~ Located ~t: X~ah ~ Artlde Z. ~ et Cempl~o~. Contractor shall ~ work hereunder with~ twenty (20) days at,er the receipt of written notice to proceed from Owaer ~nd shall compl~te tbe work within one lmadr~ and twe~y (120) worki~ days. A working day is defined a~ any day except Sattmlay% S~days, and legal holidays and e. xa~ days .on which the ~ior.is ~ed by condOr/oas l~Tond his control or by inclemeat weather or conditions normal labor and equipment ~orce requimt for such oper~oa(s). At the olxion of the Contractor. Ns agreemeat .shall be ~id unless =otic~ to ~ is received within ten (I0) working days following execution of the agreemem by Owner. Arl/de 3. The Co,tr~ct Price. Thc owaer shall pay thc contractor, a~ full compensation for all.the work pert'~ under this propoml and comauction c~aWact the sam of See A~t O~e . .. , , subjea ~o additiom and doductions lmmUam to ~orizea cba~e Article 4. Progress Payments, Paymenls of the Contract Price shall be paid m the manner following: 1. Contractor shall receive progress payments in proportion to the amount of work completed. All paymfm~ are due upon receilx. $650 upon tiigning of contra~ $2,600 upon hanging o~fdoor, $2,600 upon I~Oeting and $650 ~ completion. Any alteration or deviation ~rom the above specifications, including but not limited to any such alteration or ~eviaQon revolving addlMonal material, equipment, and/or labor costs, will be ~'uted only upon a wriuzn order for the same, sigued by Owner and Comracto~, ami if there is any charge for such alteration or deviation, the additional chaIge will be added to the contract pice of this contract. If payment is not made when due, Connactor may period in excess of thirty (30) days from the due date of the paymem stroll be deemed a material breach 0£this conuacc In addition, the following general provisions apply: All work shall be compl~ted in a workmanship like nunm~ and in compliance with all-al~licable laws, ordinances, statutes, rules, and ~egulafions of the Federal Cx~vernmmt, Sial, County, Muni~'es or their Agencies of Government and pmti~ly those regulations relating to hou~ and working 2. Coutm~or shall have the right to subco~ any portion of the work hereunder, alld all work performed by subcon .tractors shall be subject to all of the applicable terms and conditions of the contract doounents. 3. Conu-actor shall famish Owner,na~v~ releases or wavers of lien for all work performed or m~edals provided at the time next periodic paymem shall be due. 4. Contractor is reil~onsible for repairs or replacement from faulty materials and workmanship tha~ appear within the period of one (1) year from the date of completion of work under ~ contract. 65/26/2882 15:13 15384732749 SCHHIDT CONSTRUCTION PAGE 63 10. 13. 1¢. 15, 16, Conwactor shall ~ and hold Owne~ harmless agai~ all chims, dama/e suits, actions, recoveries andjudgmenis arising fi'om or out of any negligeoc~ of ConUactor, its agent~ empl~ees or subcontractor, in perfO~ lt~ work mxler ~ Conuac~ Con. clot ._e~, maimain such immauce as will prutect ii from claims umler woflmam's coml~ns~ion a~ and from claims fur dama~ because of bodiir injm~, ~ ckath, or im~y to ~ · which ~my ~rise fi'om mid.dining the ol:am~on of ~his coniract. A cergficale of such ~ce ~_~ll be filed whh the owner, if he so reques~ In the evem mb,Surface m: latent ltrysi~ condRions ~ mategally from ~hose indi~ in this Contract, COn~ctor Shall advise Owncr of the exisumce of such conditions and the parlies shall Co~ shall not be.held liable for any delay due to.circumstances beyond its control, includin& btu not limited to, Acts of God, or of the public enen!y, acts of auy govemmemal agency, in.either its Should either'pany bring suit'in court to enforee or interpret any of the terms hereof, or. for a brach thereo~ and/or to foreclose ~ mechanic's lien a~le to the work done he~zunder, ~ ptevnili~g. party shall be emitled to costs and reasonable attorn~s' fees, which may be set by'the court in the same action or in separate a~on brought for the pmpo~, in additi~ to any other r~Ri~ to which he utility conriec~ons, or other such similar items ~ for the performance of work hereunder. representative of the owner at the job site, or maybe served by ceriified mail directly to the address o~ the party shown on the reverse side of this contract This agree~ shall be lindi~ up~ ~md msu~ to the heirs, successors, and assigns of the paries h~o, ' Failure to e~orc~ a~ fiShts heretm~ shall not waive any fights in respea of other or fuun~ This Propos~ arid ~cfion Contract .~1~ l! be void if Owner is unable to demoasm~ to the sari .dacfion of the'Contractor pfio~ to commencemem of work his or her ability to make payments for If it ~ necessa~ fOr Commcmr to ~ the services of a~ attwney to collect any monies · pummm to us. is Contract, Owner shall pay said fees i~ addition to a~y monies owed or any dama~ R is undm~ood and agreed that each a~t every provision of this contrac~ including au~ alleged breach thereof, shall be imerraetcd in accordance with the laws of the State of California and this conUact shall be deemed to have been entered into at ...--Slate of Calii'omia, Counly of Colusa , Article 6. Comract Decuments. The conuact docunamts shall consist of this Agr~t~nt and Amclmmnt One, California Law requires the following mtcment to be included in a wfitt~ ccuatract when the comractor perfoms work as a prime contractor within the $la{e of California to which the wrlt~n contract ~: "Contractors are .required by law to be licensed, and reptlated by the Contractor~ State Lic~use Board which has jurisdiction to inh3tigate complaints ag,~st contractors if a complaint is filed within three years of the date of the alk, ged violatioa. ,~my q~io~ com:~ a contractor may be referred to the Registrar, Co~u-sciors State · License Board, P. O, Box 2600,'.Sncrmnento, California 95826." ' ' 85/28/2882 15:13 15384732749 SOHHIDT CONSTRUCTION PAGE 84 ATT&CRMZNT ONE to Proposal and Con.stmction contract ~ C~ of ~ ~d B. C ~~ Co~~ ~. ~ We ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~, x 12' Sch~ ~-fold ~r in y~ ~~~. We ~ rem~ ~ ~~ ~ ~d ~ &e ~-~ld ~r. Total Lump Sum Bid Price .for Base Bid: TOTAL Touch ap painting ~ bi-fold door hook-up All door material fo~ the bi-fold On ~e power Off-site r~moval of e~isting doors Proposal is based on all ,,,~ ~ial ~ shop fabricated. Field fabrication/modification will be charl~ at time and ms.isis rate, If Accelxable Please SiEn Original and Return BY Owlet B. C. $CHMIDT CONSTRUCTION, INC. 5525 Ttmler Road P.O. Box 1557 Williams, CA 95987 DA'lED: NOTICE TO OWNER OR TENANT: OEfcz (530) 473-5423 Fax (:5:30) 473.2749 Mobil (530) 681..0331 .... · ..... I si i /~., of California Contractor's License 1%, 763497 You bi~e thc ~ to mquir~ Cenua~tor to ~ve I pa~~ ~t~d l~Ylnnlt Igel0. Herbert B. Meeker, Builder .. ,, , P.O. Box 31 ! 1 Phone S59/732-6271 Visalia, CA 93278 Fax 559/685-0716 Email address meeker@rneekerloq~ s.corn Pager 559/73S-62 71 May 23, 2002 Albert Fierro Assistant City Manager City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 Fax: 707-463-6204 RE: Install Schweiss Bi-Fold Door Dear Mr. Fierro; We are proposing to provide the installation of the Schweiss Bi-Fold door in your hangar at the Ukiah Regional Airport. The work will be completed in a workmanlike manner and in accordance with the standard installation requirements and pertinent codes. We will install the necessary structural metal beams with columns and bracing for the door track and mounting connections. We will provide the 3' wide metal panels for covering the door and the necessary trim and flashings to complete the exterior of the door. We will provide the electrical work to the electric panel in the same building for the power to the motor on the door. We will install the door controls next to the door locations. We will remove our debris upon completion and review the door operation with the person in charge of the building. The amount for the above materials, labor and travel expenses to complete the door installation will be $8,871.00. To start the work a deposit of $1,000.00 is required for the materials we are providing and payment upon completion of the project. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this for your review. We can provide you a list of other customers we have provided Schweiss doors for. Thank you, Herb Meeker i";~. CALIFORNIA SALES OFF, I~, ;:';~: ~97~15~ F~: 925-97~1~10 . .,~ ~ ' 3 ESTABLISHED 1968 .... .~" ,~ , ~ . .....~ ".' :...'~ No. Confract Proposal 24 Hour Emergency Se~ce CA U~::ense Number 595277 SALESMAN TERMS · .{ NET FF~i~HT I-,O,B. N .~ME~ ITEM NO. 8a DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING DIVISION 1, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 2, SECTION 62 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE REGARDING COUNClLMEMBERS SALARIES At its May 15, 2002 meeting, the City Council introduced, by a 3 to 1 vote (with one member absent), an ordinance modifying the monthly salary for Councilmembers effective after the November 5, 2002 election. The ordinance is now ready for Council adoption. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the Ordinance Amending Division 1, Chapter 2, Article 2, Section 62 of the Ukiah City Code Regarding Councilmembers' Salaries. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine the salaries are not to be increased and do not adopt ordinance. 2. Determine ordinance requires modifications, identify necessary changes, and introduce revised ordinance. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA Candace Horsley, City Manager Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officert, tu~~ ~.~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Ordinance for adoption, page 1. APPROVED:~~%~ Candace Horsley, Cit!Manager mfh:asrcc02 0605CouncilSal ORDINANCE NO. &TTACHMENT._./ ..... ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE, CHAPTER 2, DIVISION 1, ARTICLE 2, SECTION 62 ESTABLISHING THE SALARIES FOR COUNCILMEMBERS The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE - FINDINGS AND DECLARATION The City Council of the City of Ukiah finds and declares that this ordinance is enacted pursuant to Government Code Section 36516 for the purpose of fixing the salary of the Mayor and Councilmembers of the City of Ukiah. SECTION TWO - AMENDMENTS Section 62 of Article 2, Chapter 2, Division 1 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: §62' SALARIES: Mayor and Councilmembers: The Mayor and Councilmembers shall be paid four hundred seventy-one dollars ($471.00) per month. Any amounts authorized and paid on behalf of such officers for retirement, health and welfare, and Federal social security benefits shall not be included for purposes of determining salary under this Section. SECTION THREE - EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall become effective thirty (30) days after it is adopted. Salaries of the incumbent Mayor and Councilmembers shall not be affected until a new Councilmember begins a new term of office. Introduced by title only on May 15, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku Councilmember Libby Councilmember Baldwin None Adopted on June 5, 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Phillip Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Ordinance No. Page 1 of 1 AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: 9a June 5, 2002 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY (MSWMA) ANNUAL BUDGET The City Council annually reviews and approves the MSWMA annual budget before its final adoption by the MSWMA Board. General Manager Mike Sweeney has provided the draft annual budget and report, which describes the various programs under MSWMA's purview as well as pertinent information for the Council's discussion. The proposed 2002/03 budget has approximately $10,000 more expense for salary increases than the 2001/02 approved budget. Staff recommends approval of the budget, as the programs under MSWA's control are well run and assist the City of Ukiah in meeting its state reporting requirements and recycling goals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve MSWMA's 2002/03 budget ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A MSWMA Candace Horsley, City Manager Mike Sweeney MSWMA's Annual Report and 2002-2003 Budget Candace Horsley, City ~nager 4:Can/ASR. MSWMA.060502 Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority A joint powers public agency Michael E. Sweeney General Manager P.O. Box 123 Ukiah, CA 95482 Telephone (707) 468-9710 Fax (707) 468-3877 sweeney~pacific.net May 3, 2002 To: City Managers Clerk of the Board of Supervisors From: Mike Sweeney RE: MSWMA Annual Report/Budget Review Enclosed please find copies of MSWMA's Annual Report/Budget Review for consideration by your Council/Board. Under the joint powers agreement, MSWMA refers the next fiscal year's budget to its member jurisdictions for review and comment prior to MSWMA's final adoption. This procedure was originally established in 1990 because MSWMA was funded by General Fund allocations from the jurisdictions, a practice that stopped in 1992. Nevertheless, MSWMA appreciates the opportunity to present its proposed budget and programs on an annual basis and receive any comments or recommendations, and provide any additional information that is requested. Consideration of the report by your Council/Board prior to June 15, 2002 would be appreciated. Please notify me of the date it will appear on your agenda so that I can be present. l}e3t regards, Mike Sweeney enclosures Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority Annual Report/Budget Review May, 2002 Commingled single-stream recycling was first recommended by the MSWMA Board of Directors in 1999, in recognition of its success elsewhere in the U.S. It has now been introduced in most of Mendocino County, yielding big increases in recycling volume. MSWMA continues to help the public make full use of the commingled programs as they are introduced by the franchised haulers. This photo of Willits residents Jennifer and Thomas Bender appears on the cover of MSWMA's Recycling Guide. HazMobile MSWMA' s mobile household hazardous waste program was featured in the November, 2001 issue of California County magazine as a model of rural intergovernment cooperation to provide a high level of service. Service is provided to Lake County and northern Sonoma County under Memorandums of Understanding. HazMobile collections are provided at 18 different locations, together with weekly service at the Ukiah base facility. Small business customers continue to provide a growing portion of the HazMobile's business. Lake County participation is increasing rapidly. In September, 2001, the HazMobile received the Program Excellence Award from the North American Hazardous Materials Management Association at its annual convention in Portland, Oregon. For rural counties, regional coopera' believed it, had the population base to suP- tion is a laudable goal that's often portapermanentStaii°fcertifiedpers°n- hard to realize in practice. But some' times the payoff Can be impressive' '~hat's what Mendocin° and Lake Coun- ties and their siX cities have shOWn with waste · · · their mobile household hazardoUS year oi P counties a level brought these Cato remote househOld hazardoUS waste service o[ unprecedented for rural Cal~ornia- that' s Count~, we never would ' ,,Without Lake " have got the prO.am o~ the ~onnd, ¢ichard Shoemaker, a count7 super~sor who was chagman of the ~endocino Solid ~anagement ~utho~t7 for i~ first Waste ,'We had ~ited reso~ces, seven years. "he says- we had to think out of the boX, nel to collect and conSOlidate househOld · . =+o .~hichincludes chemicals hazarOOUS wa=~,-," paint, motor banned from landfills such as oil, pesticides, antifreeze, batteries and more. But without their oWn staff, the coUn- ties continued to depend on outside con- tractors. These contractors charged steep mobilization costs ~o set up collections in this remOte region of 4,'/?4 square miles. At those rates, the counties could afford token number of household hazard- only a year. ouS waste collections per Lake- But together, biendocin° and cities___thought they could along with their cover support their oWn mobile team to both counties- The arithmetiC was pre- Calii°rnia Integrated Waste sented to the grant aPPli Management Board in a 1994 _ ,~. ~, ~n~,aal the tc California County magazine, November, 2001 Published by the California State Association of Counties MSWMA annual report - Page 2 HazMobile Customer Count Vehicle~,.,~ 7000 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 In 2001, the HazMobile experienced another 13% increase in participation. The fastest growth has occurred in Lake County. Sources of HazMobile funding, 2001 The MS WMA surcharge now covers only 40% of the HazMobile's costs. A "pass- through" fee is charged for small business hazardous waste and household waste in excess of the 15 gallon limit per vehicle per day, and Lake and Sonoma Counties are billed for the full costs of service to their residents. MSWMA annual report - Page 3 Illegal dump cleanup MSWMA responds to all roadside dumping complaints throughout Mendocino County. We also reimburse dump fees for volunteer cleanup activities, post "No Dumping" signs, and plan large-scale cleanup work using state grant funding. Jail inmates are used regularly to assist in dump cleanup. MSWMA helps the County Abandoned Vehicle division in dismantling trailers left on roadsides. MSWMA also coordinates the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day in Mendocino County, mobilizing hundreds of volunteers. Illegal Dump Cleanups 1999 2O0O 2001 ~Y1SWMA technician David Gibson working on Devil's Slide near Boonville. MSWMA annual report- Page 4 Sidewalk Recycling MS WMA has used grant funds from the state Department of Conservation to buy sidewalk recycling units for Willits, Ukiah and MacKerdcher State Park. The durable units provide a convenient place to recycle beverage containers next to the trash receptacle. This grant program provides annual funding for any eligible beverage container recycling activities. i£1 eoCtadepaga! MSWMA signed a contract in November, 2001 with the Califomia Human Development Corporation to provide Spanish-speaking outreach worker Sam Kircher to increase the level of knowledge about solid waste, hazardous waste and recycling among Spanish- speaking residents. A vigorous campaign is underway including radio appearances, literature, visits to ranches, and special events. Excerpt from Spanish-language recycling guide. Appliance hazardous waste service To reduce costs to the public, MSWMA provides free removal of refrigerants and oil from appliances at all disposal sites in Mendocino County. This has helped reduce illegal dumping of refrigerators. The work is done by MSWMA's hazardous waste technicians, who have obtained EPA certification to handle the ozone-depleting refrigerants that are present in refrigerators and freezers. MSWMA annual report - Page 5 Electronics Recycling ELECTRONICS 'i RECYCLIN6 Televisions and computer monitors NOT RASH were banned from landfill disposal in March, 2001 due to their high ~ concentrations of lead and other [ heavy metals. MSWMA expanded its electronics recycling program by making arrangements for all county disposal sites to set up electronics recycling and collect the necessary fees to cover the cost. MSWMA consolidates the electronics into a semi-trailer for shipment to an electronics recycler in Utah. All electronics are recycled in the United States and none are shipped overseas where there have been environmental and safety problems. Currently, MSWMA is shipping about 15 tons per month. Jail inmates are used to help with loading. A fee increase was approved by the MSWMA Board in January, 2002 to help cover the direct recycling costs charged to MSWMA by the recycling company. Handling is subsidized by MSWMA and the disposal site operators. , m lot o~e week Sept:1 _,_, ,,~mnestl/ eros~ .,r;s wilhou~ cha~e. ~is is · spec~ _,.~ .a ~eir o~u ~-- ~elp householgS c~.- -- tires per pecan per da~_. .Maximum size: 37" diameter' No fin'* ~8o fl~ deole~ m~Y po~cipote Grants MSWMA administers used oil block grants, beverage container recycling grants, and tire recycling grants which are obtained from the state. MSWMA provides an annual free tire recycling event at three locations in the county using state matching grant funds. MSWMA has jointly applied with Lake County for a household hazardous waste grant which would be used to fund electronics recycling costs so that the fees of $10 to $40 per unit could be waived MSWMA annual report - Page 6 Staffing MSWMA has four full-time employees: a General Manager and three Hazardous Waste Technicians. There is no clerical or accounting staff. MSWMA funds are deposited with the Treasurer of the County of Mendocino. MSWMA also employs one part-time Hazardous Waste Technician, two part-time Recycling Specialists, and obtains part-time services under contract for a Spanish-language outreach worker. From February to June, 2002, MSWMA obtained an average of 32 hours per week of services from California Conservation Corps members who had hazardous waste training. There was no charge to MSWMA. The CCC staff assisted at HazMobile collections so that our technicians were freed for other work. Governance MSWMA is a joint powers authority formed in 1990 by the County of Mendocino and the Cities of Ukiah, Fort Bragg and Willits. MSWMA's Board of Directors are: Bruce Burton, City of Willits (chair), Michele White, City of Fort Bragg (vice-chair), Eric Larson, City of Ukiah, Tom Lucier, Board of Supervisors, and Patricia Campbell, Board of Supervisors. Funds As of May 2, 2002, MSWMA's fund balances were: General Fund: $280,261.68. Working capital for MSWMA's operations plus reserves for contingencies. Depreciation Fund: $54,000.00. Reserve for replacement of vehicles and equipment. Reserve Fund: $359,887.31. Set-aside for costs of relocation of HazMobile base facility. This fund was established with the net proceeds of sale of the North State Street property in Ukiah. Surcharge The core funding for MSWMA is a surcharge on solid waste disposal. This was set at $6 per ton in 1992, and has been reduced three times since then to its present level of $4.50 per ton. When adjusted for inflation, the surcharge has declined even more to a current value of $3.73 in 1993 dollars. The surcharge is supplemented by state grants and fees charged for hazardous waste service. No funding comes from the General Funds of the member jurisdictions. MSWMA annual report- Page 7 MSWMA Expenditures by Program, 2001 Oil Tank Acquisitions 6% Tire Recycling 2% Recycling Outreach 2O% Illegal Dump Cleanup 6% Refrigerant Removal 6% Electronics Recycling 10% HazMobile 5O% 2002-03 Budget The 2002-03 budget was given tentative approval by the MSWMA Board of Directors on February 18, 2002, and referred to the member jurisdictions for comment. The budget is generally the same as the previous year's. The largest change comes in electronics recycling costs and income, which are both increased but offset each other. The budget contains a 2% cost-of-living increase for MSWMA employees, except for the General Manager, who receives no increase. Personnel costs are also increased due to the vesting of an additional HazMobile Technician for MSWMA's SEP-IRA pension program. MSWMA annual report- Page 8 MENDOCINO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY 2002-2003 PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR BUDGET INCOME Revised 2001-02 Proposed 2002-03 Electronics recycling income 30,000 67,000 HHW service 87,000 87,000 Interest 32,000 20,000 Recycling Block Grant Revenue, misc. Sales, compost bin Surcharge Tire Grant income Used oil block grant income TOTAL INCOME EXPENDITURES Advertising Audit Compost bin purchases Electricity 32,596 5,200 3,360 245,000 5,200 71,000 511,356 5,000 3,000 3,000 350 37,000 Electronics recycling costs Fuel 31,719 5,000 3,000 249,000 10,000 48,198 520,917 3,000 3,000 3,000 350 67,000 5,000 5,000 Health insurance 11,232 12,984 70,000 11,000 HHW disposal, expense HHW supplies Illegal dump fees & other costs Liability insurance Miscellaneous Office supplies Oil grant expense Payroll expense, regular Payroll, oil grant Pollution insurance 3,200 9,000 2,500 5,800 33,600 155,300 37,400 13,625 Postage 1,200 Printing 5,000 32,596 4,000 150 7,200 7,000 2,300 9,000 16,000 Recycling Block Grant expenditures Rent Sales tax Telephone/communications Tire grant expenditures Training fees Transfer to depreciation reserve Transfer interest to Reserve Fund Trash disposal Vehicle maintenance Vehicle mileage Worker's compensation insurance TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,000 5,000 4,700 8,912 510,065 NET +1,291 70,000 11,000 3,200 8,000 2,500 5,000 18,717 168,659 25,241 13,700 1,000 5,000 31,719 4,020 150 7,200 10,000 2,300 9,000 10,000 800 5,000 4,700 9,000 520,240 +677 ITEM NO: 9t, DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTERPRETATION OF UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE DEFINITION OF "SIGN" AND DETERMINATION OF POSSIBLE SIGN ORDINANCE VIOLATION - RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION / 294 WEST SMITH STREET, UKIAH SUMMARY: The owner of the Rainbow Construction Company building located at 294 West Smith Street recently placed six large signs/banners/flags on top of the roof. The signs/banners/flags are made of a very light colorful material, contain the familiar rainbow logo of the company, and are designed to move gently in the wind. When these devices were brought to the attention of the Planning Staff, it was determined that they appeared to be consistent with the Ukiah Municipal Code's (UMC) definition of a "sign", and therefore were illegal because the UMC specifically prohibits signs to be placed on roof tops. When this matter was brought to the attention of the property owner, he respectfully disagreed that they were signs. He has concluded that they are "art" rather than signs, and therefore can be legally placed on top of his building. After reviewing the Ukiah Municipal Code, the owner is of the opinion that the devices could also be considered "corporate flags" and therefore be deemed legal according to the UMC. The purpose of this Agenda item is to ask the Council to review the definitions contained in the Sign Ordinance, and determine if these devices are "signs", "banners", or "corporate flags." If they are determined to be "signs", they are illegal. If the Council determines they are "banners", they can only be placed on the building for short periods of time during special events. If they are determined to be "corporate flags" they may not be in violation of the Ukiah Municipal Code. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review the definitions of "Sign", "Banner Sign", and "Flag" and determine what the devices on top of the Rainbow Construction building are. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: Peter Richardson, Rainbow Construction Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, and David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1. Applicable Ukiah Municipal Code (Sign Ordinance) sections Candace Horsley, City I~anager DESCRIPTION OF RAINBOW CONSTUCTION "SIGNS": The Rainbow Construction "signs" are approximately eight-feet tall, vertically narrow, and very colorful. They contain the Rainbow construction "rainbow" logo, and are designed to move slightly in the wind. DEFINITION OF SIGN: Section 3200.55 of the Ukiah Municipal Code defines "sign" as follows: "Sign" shall mean a visual communications device used to convey a message to its viewers. A Sign shall mean and include every advertising message, announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, insignia, surface or space erected or maintained in view of the observer thereto for identification, advertisement or promotion of the interests of any person, entity, product or service." The Ukiah Municipal Code defines "roof sign" as "any sign erected upon, against or directly above a roof or top of or above the parapet of a building." Section 3226(L) PROHIBITED SIGNS lists "signs which are located on or project over the roof of a building or structure." Comment: If the Council determines that the devices are "signs" according to the above definition, then they are illegally placed on top of the building. DEFINITION OF BANNER: The Ukiah Municipal Code defines "banner sign" as a "temporary sign composed of lightweight material either enclosed or not enclosed in a rigid frame, secured or mounted so as to allow movement of the sign caused by movement of the atmosphere." Section 3226(D) PROHIBITED SIGNS lists banners, pennants, searchlights, twirling signs, signs on sidewalks, balloons or other gas-filled figures...signs described above may be permitted at the opening of a new business or for special events with prior approval of the Director of Community Development only for a total period not exceeding thirty (30) days. Comment: If the Council determines that the devices are "banners", then they can only be displayed during special events for a maximum of 30 days. DEFINITION OF FLAGS: The Ukiah Municipal Code does not include a definition of "flag." However, Webster's Dictionary defines a "flag" as "a piece of fabric of distinctive design that is used as a symbol (as of a nation) or as a signaling device." Section 3226(E) PROHIBITED SIGNS states that flags other than those of any nation or corporation are prohibited. Comment: If the Council determines that the devices are "corporate flags", then they may not be in violation of the Sign Ordinance. However, while the Code does not specifically limit the number of corporate flags, it seems logical that the intent is to allow a corporate flag to be displayed at individual corporate offices. In this case, if the devices are determined to be corporate flags, Rainbow Construction is displaying six of them. CONCLUSION: The owners of Rainbow Construction recently placed six large colorful devices on top of their building not knowing that they could be in violation of the City Sign Ordinance. The devices display the company logo, and while they do not resemble a traditional rectangular "flag", the owners believe they are artistic "corporate flags." Undoubtedly, some people may have the opinion that the devices look nice. Others may have the opposite opinion, concluding that the devices are too "loud", and conflict with the character of the surrounding built environment. However, this is not purely a subjective issue, and not a debate as to whether or not the devices look nice or not. The issue is defining what they are, and whether the code allows them to be displayed "on top of the building ". If they are determined to be "signs", they are in violation of the Code. If the Council determines they are "banners", they can only be placed on the building for shod periods of time during special events. If they are determined to be "corporate flags" they may not be in violation of the Ukiah Municipal Code. If the Council determines they are "corporate flags", Staff urges the Council to determine if the spirit and intent of the Code is to allow corporations to fly _aa corporate flag or as many as the corporation desires. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS/SOLUTIONS: . . . Find that the devices are "signs" and order their removal from the top of the building. Find that the devices are banners and allow them for a 30-day period associated with special events. Find that the devices are corporate flags and decide if the spirit and intent of the Code is to allow all six flags to be displayed. Find that the devices are something other than signs, banners, or corporate flags, and provide direction to staff. SIGN VARIANCE: If the Council determines that the devices are in violation of the Ukiah Sign Ordinance, Section 3235 of Article 9 provides a "Sign Variance" procedure that potentially could provide relief to the property owner. However, the findings required to approve a Variance are often difficult, and require that there are special circumstances applicable to the property that warrant the granting of the Variance, that the granting of the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege, and that the granting of the Variance would not be detrimental to surrounding property owners. RECOMMENDATION: Review the definitions of "Sign", "Banner Sign", and "Flag" and determine what the devices on top of the Rainbow Construction building are, and provide direction to Staff. 3200.52: ROOF SIGN: "Roof sign" shall mean any sign erected upon, against or directly above a roof or top of or above the parapet of a building (see graphic illustration section). (Ord. 756, {}2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3200.53: ROTATING SIGN: "Rotating sign" shall mean any sign or portion thereof which physically revolves about an axis. (Ord. 756, {}2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3200.54: SHOPPING CENTER: "Shopping center" shall mean a unified commercial development on a minimum site of two (2) acres occupied by a group of five (5) or more separate businesses occupying substantially separate divisions of a building or buildings fronting on a privately owned common mall or parking lot, rather than on a public street. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3200.55: SIGN: "Sign" shall mean a visual communications device used to convey a message to its viewers. A sign shall mean and include every advertising message, announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, insignia, surface or space erected or maintained in view of the observer thereof for identification, advertisement or promotion of the interests of any person, entity, product or service. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3200.56: SIGN, IN-WINDOW: "In-window sign" shall mean any sign painted on the inside or outside of a window or any sign erected or hung on the inside of a window, the purpose of said sign to be seen by persons outside of the building. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3200.57: SIGN PROGRAM: "Sign program" shall mean an integrated system of signs proposed for one or more businesses, usually for a shopping center or group of uses on a single parcel. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, § 1, adopted 1983) 3200.11: BANNER SIGN: "Banner sign" shall mean a temporary sign composed of lightweight material either enclosed or not enclosed in a rigid frame, secured or mounted so as to allow movement of the sign caused by movement of the atmosphere. (Ord. 756, {}2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, {}1, adopted 1983) 3225: GENERAL SIGN PROVISIONS: mo Bo Co Signs attached under a marquee shall have a vertical clearance of eight feet (8') between the existing or future grade of the finished sidewalk. Such signs shall be limited to four (4) square feet in area on each side if a double-faced sign; a single-faced sign shall be limited to four (4) square feet in area; one sign per occupant. No sign shall be located so as to create a safety hazard by obstructing vision, or shall interfere with or resemble any authorized warning or traffic sign or signal. A projecting sign shall have a minimum clearance of eight feet (8') above the existing or future grade of the finished sidewalk, and a minimum clearance of fifteen feet (15') above an area used for vehicular movement. Do These regulations shall apply only to those signs which are located outside of buildings or which are directly affixed to the inside of a window. Where signs are affixed to or painted on a window, such signs shall not exceed twenty five percent (25%) of any window area, and such signs shall be counted as part or all of permitted sign area except as allowed in §3227 of this Chapter. Eo Fo Go Temporary construction, development and subdivision sales signs are permitted in any residential zone providing the total aggregate area for all such signs does not exceed thirty two (32) square feet, and providing that no single-face sign exceeds twelve (12) square feet. Sign height for any given sign may not exceed ten feet (10'). Signs will be permitted to remain for a maximum period of one year, but must be removed upon completion of project. Temporary construction, development, subdivision sales, lease and real estate signs are permitted in any commercial or industrial zone, if freestanding. The total aggregate area for all such signs may not exceed sixty four (64) square feet, and no single-face sign may exceed thirty two (32) square feet. Sign height for any given freestanding sign may not exceed ten feet (10'). Signs will be permitted to remain for a maximum period of one year but must be removed upon completion of sale, lease or project. Murals are allowed subject to review by the Planning Commission as a regular agenda item. Criteria upon which murals will be evaluated as both art and advertising are: compatibility with surrounding environment and community in general; appropriateness to site; relationship to use of building upon which it is placed; impact on motorists and traffic Ho Jo hazards; advertising potential. Written messages are discouraged. Any area determined to be advertising and allowed to remain in the mural shall be counted as part of the allowed parcel signage. Awning signs are allowed subject to review by the Planning Commission as a regular agenda item, and securing an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department. Sign area shall be calculated as defined in ~3200.()5. These shall not be considered as projecting signs. Governmental, educational, civic or religious special event signs may be posted up to twenty (20) days prior to the event and taken down at least two (2) days after the event. Size shall not exceed thirty two (32) square feet and there shall be no more than four (4) such signs. Signs shall be approved by the Planning Director. This Section shall not be applicable to handbills or small posters for said events. Signing for a project requiring a site development permit or use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as part of the permit application process. Any and all signs, lights, banners, flags or other advertising devices placed on an occupant's property for a maximum of sixty (60) consecutive days to announce the opening of a new business. Although no sign permit is required, the Director of Community Development shall review and approve plans for such signing to ensure that it offers no hazard to the safe movement to traffic and also that it does not block permanent identification signs on neighboring properties. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) 3226: PROHIBITED SIGNS: The following signs are prohibited within the City: A. Flashing, rotating, animated, blinking and moving signs. Bo Miscellaneous signs and posters and the tacking, pasting or otherwise affixing of signs of a miscellaneous character visible from a public right of way. Signs located on the wall of buildings, barns, sheds, trees, poles, posts, fences or other structures are prohibited unless provided for under other provisions of these regulations. C° Any sign affixed to any vehicle or trailer on a public right of way or public property unless the vehicle or trailer is intended to be used in its official capacity and not for the sole purpose of attracting people to a place of business. Banners, pennants, searchlights, twirling signs, signs on sidewalks, balloons or other gas-filled figures. Signs described above may be permitted at the opening of a new business Fo Go or for special events with prior approval of the Director of Community Development only for a total period not exceeding thirty (30) days. Flags other than those of any nation or corporation. Portable or wheeled signs, unless used for real estate purposes, in which case the sign must be placed on the offered property. Any sign that utilizes visible guy wires, angle irons and iron frame structures, unless construction is otherwise impossible. H. Signs emitting audible sounds, odor or visible matter. Jo Ko No Signs which purport to be, or are an imitation of, or resemble an official traffic sign or signal, or which bear the words "stop", "go slow", "caution", "danger", "warning" or similar words. Signs, which by reason of their site, location, movement, content, coloring or manner of illumination, may be confused with or constructed as a traffic-control sign, signal or device, or the light of a road or emergency equipment vehicle. Outlining of a building by means of exposed neon tubing, exposed incandescent lighting or other artificial lighting or an equivalent effect is prohibited. Signs which are located on or project over the roof of a building or structure. Off-premise signs shall not be permitted within the City limits except real estate "open house" signs not exceeding six (6) square feet placed on private property with permission of the property owner (directional type). Such signs allowed only during hours of open house. Comer Properties: Signs from ground level to eight feet (8') in height shall be prohibited in the area formed measuring at the property line a distance of thirty feet (30') from the point of intersection of the two (2) streets and connecting at these lines in triangular fashion. (Ord. 756, {}2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, {}1, adopted 1983) 3235: SIGN VARIANCES: Where practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships and results inconsistent with the general purpose of this Chapter may result from the strict application of certain provisions thereof, a variance may be granted as provided in {}9231 et seq. of the Ukiah Municipal Code. Economic hardship shall not be considered a practical difficulty, unnecessary hardship, or a result inconsistent with the general practice of this Chapter. Economic hardship is defined as the actual expense of removing the nonconforming sign or causing a conforming sign to be erected. Historical and architectural significance based upon age, design, construction materials and other criteria as determined by the City Council shall be utilized in determining appropriateness of variances. The granting of a variance shall require a statement of findings by the Commission noting the facts of the particular sign, not applicable to other signs generally which justify issuance of a variance. (Ord. 756, §2, adopted 1981; amd. by Ord. 822, §1, adopted 1983) AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. DATE: June 5, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: REVIEW, DISCUSSION, AND FORMATION OF COMMENTS CONCERNING THE MENDOCINO COUNTY DRAFT UKIAH VALLEY AREA PLAN SUMMARY: Mendocino County has prepared an "Area" Plan for the unincorporated area in the Ukiah Valley. It used the City of Ukiah General Plan as a foundation for the Area Plan because it includes possible goals and policies for the unincorporated valley. It also includes possible land use designations that were essentially prepared by County Planning staff and endorsed by the City/County representation on the Ukiah General Plan Steering Committee. The Mendocino County Planning Commission has completed its review of the Area Plan and has formulated a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The County Planning and Building Services Staff is seeking input from the City regarding the goals, policies, and land use designations contained in the Plan. The purpose of this Agenda item is to discuss the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) and formulate comments for the County's consideration. Staff urges the Council to focus on the "big-picture" issues as summarized in the May 30, 2002 correspondence received from the County Planning Staff (attachment #2). (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) and formulate comments for consideration by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not prepare comments on the UVAP and provide direction to Staff Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan (previously distributed) 2. Correspondence received from the County Planning Staff, Dated May 30, 2002 3. Planning Commission Minutes, dated March 27 and April 10, 2002 Candace Horsley, City Mal~ager APPROVED: UKIAH VALLEY AREA PLAN vs. UKIAH GENERAL PLAN: The Mendocino County Planning Commission made changes to the text and map for the unincorporated area outside the City limits from what was established during the Ukiah General Plan process. The primary changes include establishment of a Ukiah Urban Boundary that is slightly different from the "new" Sphere of Influence established in the City General Plan; elimination of the Vision Statement", elimination of the requirement for Habitat Conservation Plans in the Hillside District, elimination of the "rim trail" and "river trail" concepts for the valley; elimination of a joint City-County park and recreation entity; elimination of the Economic Development Element; elimination of the concept of a valley-wide design review board and substitution of language calling for the development of similar design and landscaping guidelines; and changes to the land use designations of parcels in close proximity to the City. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed UVAP and formulated a number of comments (minutes attached). While the Commission did not have the benefit of correspondence prepared by the County Planning Staff, it nevertheless forged ahead and commented on various aspects of the proposed Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Review the proposed Ukiah Valley Area Plan, correspondence received from the County Planning Staff, and the Planning Commission comments, and prepare formal City comments to the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. ~TTACHMENT_~_ MENDOCINO COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ukiah City Council DATE: May 30, 2002 Planning and Building Services, Pamela Townsend, Senior Planner ~ Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan (#GP 20-98) The purpose of this memorandum is to assist the City Council in commenting on the draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) by highlighting major differences between the City of Ukiah's General Plan and the UVAP as recommended to the Board of Supervisors by the County Planning Commission. The UVAP is currently under review by the Board of Supervisors in accordance with its commitment in 1992 to consider the City of Ukiah's General Plan as an area plan for the Ukiah Valley. The UVAP was modified by County staff in accordance with the Board's direction in 1999 to reduce information that pertains primarily to the City and provide an increased County perspective, increase consistency with the County General Plan, update information and increase clarity in format and content. While the City of Uldah's General Plan was intended to meet the broad legal requirements of a general plan, the UVAP will constitute only one element of the County's General Plan, thereby allowing the County more latitude in determining the range of issues to be included in the UVAP. County staff believes that the UVAP as revised maintains the general policy direction of the City's General Plan, consistent with the purpose of a joint City-County plan for compatible land use policy adjacent to the City and in areas with shared resources or common interests. At the conclusion of the Board's review, the County intends to prepare a new environmental document on the plan tentatively agreed to by the Board, followed by hearings for final adoption. Upon adoption, the City is urged to consider whether the changes made by the Board of Supervisors warrant review and potential amendment of the City's General Plan. The most critical changes are listed below. Revisions of secondary interest are provided in Attachment A. The Area Plan Element 1.03 The Planning Area The "Ukiah Urban Boundary" (Figure l-D) is added encompassing lands around the City which the County has determined are appropriate for urban growth.~ Policies in the UVAP such as OC-15.3.1 and LU-1.1.3 direct urban growth into the Ukiah Urban Boundary rather than the City's Sphere of Influence2 (SOD because the County does not have direct control over the SOI, which includes areas such as the western hills that are inappropriate for urban densities. The Vision Element 2.01 The Community Visioning Process The Board of Supervisors has tentatively determined to delete this chapter in order to eliminate ambiguity over the interpretation and use of the Vision Statement.3 The Ukiah Urban Boundary includes lands adjacent to the City classified for urban densities in the County General Plan. The SOI is as shown in the City of Ukiah General Plan, to be recommended for adoption by LAFCo. The Board of Supervisors has reviewed Section 1.01 through 3.06 of the January 3, 2002 draft UVAP. - / Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 2 Open Space and Conservation Element 3.02 Hillside Development Habitat conservation plans: Policies and measures proposing the preparation of "habitat conservation plans" which have been the subject of litigation in other areas of California are proposed for deletion. Parks And Recreation Element 8.02 Financing Recreation Facilities Valley-wide Financing for park and recreationfacilites: Goal PR-1 and related actions are modified to advocate investigating financing methods for park and recreations services, rather than making the decision to form a joint City-County park and recreation entity at the outset. Goal PR-1 may also encompass park maintenance and security issues; therefore Goal PR-2 and related actions are recommended for deletion. 8.04 Hiking, Mountain Bicycling and Equestrian Trails Valley Rim and Russian River trails: The City's General Plan envisioned the creation of a trail system, focusing on the Russian River and Valley rim. In lieu of Goal PR-6 and related actions, a simplified program to expand the Valley's existing trail system for hiking, mountain biking and equestrian use is proposed, emphasizing connection to trails on public lands. References to rim and Russian River trails and methods for obtaining trail lands such as ballot initiatives or conditioning development projects were vigorously opposed by the public and are recommended for removal. Circulation And Transportation Element The detail of the Circulation and Transportation Element has been reduced to provide a simplified yet ratiOnal method for defining, maintaining and expanding the transportation system and to increase consistency with County regulations and practices. Economic Development Element Elimination of element: The Economic Development Element is recommended for deletion due to the lack of substantive programs, possible outdated nature of its content, and recognition of other ongoing economic development efforts. Given that economic development plans tend to be programmatic reflecting changing economic trends, an Economic Element is likely to become quickly outdated. The Preliminary Work Program for the County General Pan Update directs that economic development issues will be provide a foundation for land use policy in the Update. Measure ED-1.1.1 and ED-1.2.2 are retooled as Measures OC-16.3.1 and LU-1.1.2. Community Design Element 12.01 Design Guidelines Design and landscaping guidelines: This section is revised to require the preparation of design and landscaping guidelines to enhance visual appearance, taking into account differences in land use and communities within the Valley. Guidelines adopted by the City will be considered in City-County transition area, the gateways, and along US 101, State Street and railroad corridors. This approach contrasts with the City'.s General Plan, which calls for a combined City-County design review committee and landscape program establishing consistent guidelines for development throughout the Valley. Land Use Element 13.02 Relationship between Area Plan Policies and Land Use Classifications Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 3 Compact development themes: The Land Use Element summarizes the central theme of the UVAP promoting compact development. Goal LU-1 and associated actions in the UVAP are added to provide clear direction for compact development and livable, sustainable communities. The UVAP and City's General Plan both locate urban uses in the Rural Communities (Calpella, The Forks and Talmage). The City's General Plan also directs urban uses to the Sphere of Influence, while the UVAP substitutes the Ukiah Urban Boundaryn as wells as other locations that accommodate resource dependent uses or recognize existing commercial or industrial development (Measure LU-1.1.3). Both plans reduce rural subdivision densities to a maximum of one unit per acre, however, the UVAP provides additional development potential in the eastern hills, while being more protective of lands on the Valley floor and north of Ukiah, west of US 101 for resource uses. Land use policies in the City's General Plan protective of agricultural lands have been moved to other sections of the UVAP or incorporated into the text. Housing related measures in the City's General Plan have been deleted, but may be considered for incorporation into the County's revised Housing Element. The "master plan area" concept in the City's General Plan has been eliminated from the UVAP. 13.03 Discussion of Land Use Maps The County Planning Commission retained the classifications on the existing County General Plan Land Use Map unless UVAP policies or other compelling arguments warranted a change, rather than working from the Land Use Maps in the City's General Plan. The most noteworthy changes compared to the City's General Plan are discussed below, with their locations keyed to the attached map. A. Lovers Lane area: The City's General Plan designated the Lovers Lane area as a "master plan area" while the UVAP does not include this classification. B. Planned Development classification: The UVAP adds the Planned Development Combining Classification (PD), which is applied to lands in the eastern hills classified Rural Residential - 1 acre minimum as well as the Vista Del Lago area classified RMR-20. The City General Plan assigns the Existing Lot Size classification to the eastern hills north of Vichy Springs Road while the UVAP retains the classification in the text, but does not assign it to any lands on the Land Use Map. C. Suburban Residential/Medium and High Densi _ty Residential classifications: The UVAP substitutes the County's existing Suburban Residential (SR) classification for the Medium and High Density Residential (MDR, HDR) classifications in the City's General Plan because the SR classification encompasses the densities allowed by the MDR and HDR classifications. Thus, while such areas lie north and south of the City, the practical effect of this modification is minimal, especially given that the subject areas adjacent to the City are substantially developed. D. Calpella and The Forks Rural Communities: The boundaries of the Calpella and Forks RC are modified in the UVAP when compared to the City's General Plan. The heavy industrial areas north of Calpella and The Forks (lumber mills, gravel operation) are retained in Industrial rather than RC, in order to decrease the future potential for incompatible land uses.5 The UVAP retains Agricultural lands as a separator between The Forks and Calpella. The boundary of The Forks RC has been extended to the south in the-UVAP,6 while the City's General Plan designates this area as North State Complex. E. Brush Street area: The entirety of the Brush Street 'triangle" area is proposed to be classified Commercial in the UVAP. In contrast, the City's General Plan designates sOme lands adjacent to the railroad tracks as Industrial. Both plans include the North State Complex. RC allows industrial, residential or commercial zoning. The northern portion of property owned by Mendocino Forest Products which is currently undeveloped. Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 4 F. Lands south of Ukiah Municipal Airport: The Commercial classification currently assigned by the County General Plan to lands south of the Ukiah Municipal Airport is proposed to be retained in the UVAP. The City's General Plan classified the lands Industrial consistent with adjoining land in the City in order to reduce intensity in the airport flight path. The Industrial classification currently assigned by the County General Plan to lands between US 101 and the railroad, southerly of the Airport, developed in a variety of industrial or heavy commercial uses, is proposed to be retained in the UVAP. The City's General Plan classified the lands Agricultural consistent with adjoining private land east of US 101. G. Isolated Industrial on Talmage Road: The Industrial classification assigned in the County General Plan to an existing industrial operation east of US 101, north and south of Talmage Road, is proposed to be retained in the UVAP. The City's General Plan designates the area Agricultural and Rangelands. H. Ci_ty property south of Landfill: Land owned by the City south of the Landfill (location of gun club) is classified Public Lands in the City's General Plan; however, the existing Rangeland classification is retained in the UVAP. City staff concurred with this change on the basis that the land may be sold. Rural Residential and Remote Residential classifications: The Rural Residential (RR) classification in the City's General Plan (1 to 40 acres) was revised in the UVAP to retain the RR-1, 2, 5 and 10 acre minimums found in County General Plan. The Remote Residential (RMR-40/80) classification in the City General Plan was revised in the UVAP to retain the RMR-20 and RMR-40 classifications found in the County General Plan. This apples to all lands shown as RR or RMR on the map. Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 5 ATTACHMENT A Comparison of Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan and City of Ukiah General Plan The following modifications to the drag Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP)7 are of secondary but also noteworthy importance. Open Space and Conservation Element 3.04 The Russian River and Its Tributaries Stream and creek resWration: Measure OC-8.5.1 advocating participation in the City's stream and creek restoration process is deleted because it has been indicated by City staff that these plans will be completed prior to adoption of the UVAP.s Conversion ofriverfront land: Goal OC-! 0 and related actions are revised to prohibit conversion of land in the 100 year floodplain classified RL or AG, rather than prohibiting conversion of riverfront land, which is ambiguous. 3.05 Water Resources Grading regulations: The Board of Supervisors has tentatively deleted Measure OC-12.2.1 requiring the adoption of grading regulations because this measure duplicates policy in the County' s General Plan. Contaminated stormwater runoff: New Measure OC-12.2.5 would require the City and County develop a program to reduce contaminated stormwater runoff, including retrofit of collection systems serving high use facilities that discharge to the Russian River. Measure OC-12.2.3 is concurrently broadened. 3.06 Agriculture Goals, and related actions have been strengthened and substantially revised to reduce ambiguity and increase consistency with other revised actions in the UVAP. Lands classified AG or RL: Measure OC-15.3.4 as revised strengthens protection of lands classified AG or RL by addressing deficiencies in existing policy in the County General Plan. Right to Farm: Measure OC-15.3.7 provides a specific directive to record the Agricultural Nuisances and Disclosure Ordinance (right to farm) as a condition of discretionary projects located within 300 feet of AG or RL land, when conflicts could occur. The City's adoption of these measures would further the protection of agricultural lands. Ag diversification: Measure OC-16.3.1 was moved from the Economic Development to this section. 3.07 Air Quality AQMD educationalprograms: Goal OC-21 and related actions supporting education programs of the Air Quality Management District are recommended for deletion because they are not directly land use related and do not depend on inclusion in the UVAP for their implementation. Other changes relocate existing policy, reduce redundancy or delete existing practices. Historic And Archaeological Resources Element 4.01 Historic and Archaeological Resource Protection Program Archaeological sensitivity map: The map (Figure 4-A) is deleted because parcel specific data useful for project reviews cannot be represented without compromising resource protection and areas of sensitivity are constantly updated as new surveys are conducted.9 January 3, 2002 draft UVAP. The County has been participating in their preparation. Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 6 Historical resources in the City: Detailed information on historical resources in the City was deleted from the Element per the Board of Supervisor's directive to reduce material pertaining only to the City. Safe .ty Element 5.01 Geologic Hazards and Seismic Safety Earthquake Fault Zones and other faults: Measures SF-I.I.2 through SF-1.2.2 restricting development in Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones above that mandated by State law, as well as near other active and potentially active faults outside the Earthquake Fault Zones, are recommended for deletion because compliance with State law provides sufficient protection. 5.02 Dam Inundation, Flooding and High Groundwater Development in the FEMAfloodplain: Measure SF-2.1.3 is added requiring the County to work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency to update the 1983 flood maps for the Ukiah Valley, taking into account existing and projected cumulative development. SF-2.3.4 places a responsibility on the developer to address cumulative impacts and show what steps were taken to minimize fill and encroachments in the floodplain. 5.04 Disaster Preparedness Section 5.04 was added to the UVAP by the County in consultation with the Mendocino Emergency Services Authority to recognize the role of emergency services planning. Energy Element 6.01 Transportation and Related Energy Use Vehicle fleet energy efficiency: Goal EG-2 and related actions pertaining to energy efficiency of the County's vehicle fleet are recommended for deletion as peripheral to land use planning, in favor of their consideration during the County's General Plan Update. 6.03 Building Design Adaptation of State energy standards to UMah Valley: Measure EG-5.1.1 is recommended for deletion because County staff could not identify how the State energy codes could be modified as pertains to the Ukiah Valley. Airport Element 7.03 Long Term Issues and Opportunities Airport combining district: Measure AE-1.1.2 is recommended for deletion because the County is in the process of adopting compatible airport combining districts, and this measure and AE-1.1.1 are redundant. Parks and Recreation Element 8.03 Future Park Needs South of [Vashington Avenue Park: Goal PR-3 and related actions to develop the park within 5 to 10 years using in-lieu fees are recommended for deletion. Riverside Park: Goal PR-4 and related actions are modified to focus on maintaining the compatibility of Riverside Park with adjoining agricultural uses, rather than initial park master planning. Goal PR-5 and related actions are modified to assist in evaluating the need for recreational facilities rather than the development of a new community center. 9 The Sonoma State University Northwest Inventory concurs in deleting the map. Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 7 Community Facilities Element 9.01 Water Services Information in this section has been updated based on the Drinking Water Adequacy Assessment report produced by the California Department of Health Services. 9.02 Sewer Services Compliance with sewage disposal regulations: Policies CF-4.1 and CF-4.2 and associated measures reflect State mandates and are recommended for deletion. Sewer extensions into rural areas: Policy CF-4.3 and related measures are modified to emphasize the protection of water quality, rather than the extension of sewers into rural areas with water quality problems. Measure CF-4.3.3 reflects existing practice and is recommended for deletion. 9.03 Public Health and Medical Care Elimination of section: This section is recommended for deletion as unrelated to land use policy. Actions in this section do not rely upon inclusion in the UVAP for implementation. 9.04 Public Facilities For the Community Elimination of section: This section is recommended for deletion, consistent with modifications to Goal PR-5 supporting the efficient use of existing facilities. 9.05 Public Education School facility and land use compatibility: The section is modified to emphasize the compatibility of school facilities and surrounding land uses, rather than thc provision of school facilities in general. Measures CF-8.1.1 and CF-9.1.1 are recommended for deletion as unrelated to land use planning. Measure CF-8.1.1 is added to discourage incompatible uses adjacent to public schools. CF-8.2.2 is specific to the County zoning code. Circulation And Transportation Element 10.1 The Existing Road System Simplify approval criteria: The excessive detail in this section is eliminated, while maintaining its essential provisions. Measure CT-2.2.2 encompasses many of the approval criteria set forth in other measures proposed for deletion. Road improvements and budget coordination: Measures CT-2.4.1 is modified to emphasize coordination of County road improvement planning and budgeting with the UVAP. Measures CT-2.4.2 and CT-2.4.3 requiring the County to initiate and complete road upgrades within specified time periods are unrealistic and are proposed for deletion. Intersection controls: The substance of Measures CT-3.3.1 through CT-3.3.5 and CT-3.2.2 is combined within CT-3.2.1. Community programs to reducepeak hour traffic: CT-3.4 and related measures are peripheral to land use planning and recommended to be deleted, in favor of consideration in the County General Plan Update. 10.2 Future Roads and Circulation Patterns Brush Street interchange: A Brush Street interchange (southbound only or full interchange) is recommended in Table 10-H and Measure CT-5.1.3. Coordination of future road improvements: CT-4.1.1 as modified providesa general directive to coordinate the UVAP with County road priorities, rather than mandating specific time frames for improvement. Redemeyer Road and Orchard Avenue extensions: New measures include CT-4.1.2 which establishes the Redemeyer Road extension as a high priority and CT-4.1.3 which urges City-County cooperation in Memorandum to Ukiah City Council 8 extending Orchard Avenue. These measures are consistent with LU-1.1.4 and LU-1.1.5 (Chapter 13) addressing comprehensive planning for development in the eastern hills and Brush Street area. 10.03 Alternative Transportation Bicycle safety programs: Policy CT-7.4 and Measures CT-7.3.5, CT-7.4.1 and CT-7.4.2 conceming bicycle safety are proposed for deletion, in favor of consideration in the County General Plan Update. MTA programs: A number of measures under Goal CT-9.1 supporting Mendocino Transit Authority are proposed for deletion because these activities are not directly land use related and can be conducted without inclusion in the UVAP. 10.05 Neighborhood Traffic Management Neighborhood traffic mitigation: Measure CT-11.1.1 is modified to be more relevant to the County by eliminating a requirement for a neighborhood traffic management, but requiring that development projects fully mitigate traffic impacts on neighborhood character and integrity. 10.06 Road Abandonment Elimination of section: This section is recommended for deletion, in favor of consideration during the County General Plan Update. Community Design Element 2.06 Special Design Issues Above'ground towers: Policy CD-8.2 and Measure CD-8.2.1 are added to minimize visual impacts from above-ground towers. Artificial light: Goal CD-11 and related actions add a new section to reduce the impacts of artificial light; this issue is also germane to the City. Land Use Element 13.01 Development Issues Nonconforming uses: In the UVAP nonconforming uses must be re-established within one year as provided in the County General Plan, rather than two years as set forth in the City's General Plan. 13.03 Land Use Classifications and Discussion of Land Use Maps Use of County land use classifications: One of the central goals of the City-County planning process was to maintain the County's land use classification system as much as practical. Minor revision to the UVAP precisely conform the "intent, general uses, minimum parcel size, and maximum dwelling density" provisions of the land use classifications to the same classifications in the County General Plan. ,160 RMR40 RL161 B " PL ~ke Mendocino RL'160 18 PS H RL160 innovative approach in dealing with the "key components for preserving quality neighborhoods, density issues, and perhaps smaller units." She recommended the Commission be more proactive in identifying those areas that are suitable sites for secondary units and/or additions to a dwelling before "allowing control." It was noted high rents must be charged to offset the cost of construction for secondary units. Mr, Stump desired to present the proposed discussion pertinent to the Regulations to the City Council for direction. IOA. UKIAH VALLEY AREA PLAN: Introduction of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan recommended by the Mendocino County Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors. Formal City Planning Commission discussion and recommendation development scheduled for April 10, 2002. Planning Director Stump reported staff received the November version of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP) as proposed for modification by the Mendocino County Planning Commission in January 2002 whereby the Planning Commission received a copy for tonight's discussion. Yesterday, he received another version of the Plan dated January 3, 2002, and he was unsure whether it was the same version. He intends to move forward with the formal Planning Commission discussion and recommendation/ development of the Plan on April 10, 2002. He will check with the County Planning Department as to which UVAP version is correct. He recommended the review/discussion focus on the land immediately adjacent to the City and the accompanying land use designations, and City/County issues such as maintaining congruent design review elements in the valley, among other issues. The adopted Ukiah General Plan called for the City and the County to develop a Joint Design Review Board to review projects in order to maintain the merited design and architectural continuity. The County has now suggested that such a B(3ard may be impractical, stating a more beneficial approach would be to develop and implement similar design guidelines as opposed to initiating a body to oversee design issues. He again recommended focusing on the planning elements associated with those areas in the County located near the City boundaries as well as important regional planning concerns. A bdef discussion followed regarding the two UVAP versions. Commissioner Pruden briefly elaborated on her involvement with the formulation of the Ukiah General Plan .and the Ukiah Valley Area Plan. She noted there are various sections of the UVAP that are considered incomplete or lack certain information, such as the Historical Archeology Resource Element, noting the historical component for the City is much different than for the rural areas. The rural areas have two components the City does not have that include the Pomo areas and ranch history. She further noted another difference is the City has implemented a creek/stream restoration/improvement plan as recommended in the Ukiah General Plan, which the County, in her opinion, needs to further address in the UVAP. The City has prepared and implemented a lot of its General Plan requirements/recommendations encompassing many analyses and plans whereby the County has not. The County needs to be brought current on the City's implementation plans, as the City has completed many of its short-term goals. A major concern is the interface between the City and County on'our boundaries and how the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page tO March 27, 2002 City basically extends from Burke Hill to the Forks area, ensuring there are compatible developmental standards and land uses. The UVAP is formulated to be extremely protective of the Valley's agricultural lands and boundaries. The City will be forced to not look in the agricultural areas outside the City boundaries for any kind of expansion, should the UVAP be .adopted as a legal document. The City will have to look within the developed urban areas north and south on State Street if the City decides to commercially and residentially expand its development. Application of increased density would be an issue for such expansion in the event UVAP is implemented encompassing the strict agricultural provisions. In other words, the City will be forced to make future expansion and development concessions should UVAP be adopted. ..Commissioner Loewenstein expressed interest in the former Masonite property and inquired regarding the reference to "NC" as a land use designation. Commissioner Pruden responded the "NC" refers to the North State Complex, and this land use classification extends from the Masonite site to the Forks. The County is viewing this area for increased sales tax revenue generation and commercial development. The County has a strong economic interest in this particular corridor. There was a bdef discussion regarding present development in the area near the former Ken Fowler Auto and Truck facility. Commissioner Wallen commented the City boundaries or Sphere of Influence is very small in comparison to the vast amount of land contained within the Valley. The City has no control and/or jurisdiction over the areas outside the City boundaries noting that the City is significantly affected by the events that occur outside of its boundaries. City history has not allowed for expansion of its boundaries and it is important for the boundaries to grow allowing the City to be in a better position to participate and provide influence in the decision-making process for appropriate growth and development in the Valley. Commissioner Pruden stated the City has never been able to successfully pass an annexation, noting that the residents south of Beacon Lane have elected to not be annexed into the City. Commissioner Wallen noted the City and Valley have changed dudng the last 10 years, and there are improved incentives to living within the City boundaries in terms of services and other associated benefits. A bdef discussion followed regarding the problems associated with the growth potential in a valley that is predominately pro agricultural. There was also a discussion concerning the projected and reasonable growth expectations in connection with the City's Sphere of Influence. It was noted the Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO), a State agency sanctioned by the County, is responsible for annexation determination. LAFCO has supported the concept that the City should govern the urban areas and the County should govern the rural areas. The fact is there has been no annexation proceeding. Commissioner Pruden inquired regarding an update on changing the City's Sphere of Influence with LAFCO. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ! ! ' March 27, 2002 Mr; Stump stated the application requirements include the update of a Master Service Element to accompany the application in which the City has never had. It is a requirement that has come into being since the last City annexation process many years ago. Money was allocated, as part of last year's Budget, to have the Master Services Element prepared, but after conferring with LAFCO, it was determined that the document could be prepared "in-house." Staff has begun the process of preparing the document, but the complex Valley water issues have hindered the progress. Staff will, however, continue to move forward with formulation of the Master Services Element. It is anticipated that the Ukiah General Plan and Ukiah Valley Area Plan compliment one another so that future City and Valley growth/development, in terms of land use designations, zoning, and architectural compatibility, is well planned. It was noted the Planning Commission will hopefully entertain a beginning discussion relevant to the Ukiah Valley Area Plan at the regular April 10, 2002 meeting. 9. OLD BUSINESS N/A 11. pLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS Planning Director Stump regularly provides the Commission with project updates. He noted the City Council approved the Western Hills Constraints Analysis Study and agreed with the Planning Commission on the Preliminary Approach pertinent to the Mixed Use Regulations for the AlP. 12. pLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioners Wallen/Correll and Chairman Chiles commented on their recent attendance at the Planning Institute in Monterey noting it was a beneficial and educational experience. They provided examples of general planning issues confronting other cities, along with the discussion of proposed solutions and/or innovative approaches to development problems. Commissioner Pruden attended the grand opening of the Gibson Court development noting it was an impressive project. There were comments regarding the problems associated with the Applebee's project obtaining a liquor license. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjot/~ed at 9:1 ..3, p.m. J oe,~ les, ~C'h a'i"~a'~ ,,.-.~. c~thy ~a~dly, Recordi~ Secreta~ MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1:2 March 27,. 2002 P"UBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:15 p.m. 9. NEW BUSINESS Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan - Review and formulate draft comments to the County Board of Supervisors. It was the consensus of the Commission to selectively review and provide general comments subsequent to the individual chapters without making specific editorial changes. Commissioner Pruden noted new material/information should be added, ensudng the document is current. Commission Pruden made the following comments and/or recommendations to the Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP): Chapter 3, Opens Space and Conservation, Section 3.02, Hillside Development The Hillside development .section needs to insert information indicating the City of Ukiah has prepared and adopted the Western Hillside Constraints Analysis Study. Chapter 3, Section, 3.04, The Russian River and Its Tributaries Page 9 of this section states in part, "The City of Ukiah has resulted in the conversion of streams and creeks to channelize and tunnel drainage facilities," recommended softening the language to include the words, "to some degree," since the statement is not entirely accurate as written. She noted, the section regarding the information on the Russian River and its tributaries should be updated, noting that habitat restoration has been active and that large sections Of the River have been completed within the Valley floor, along with associated studies. Chairman Chiles noted this same language may be written into the' Ukiah General Plan and must be updated and/or clarified. It was noted all documents containing information relative to habitat and stream/river restoration should be updated. Chapter 3, Sections 3.05 and 3.06, Water Resources, A,qficulture The lengthy discussion relevant to Water Resources is inadequate. The recommendation was to incorporate the Water Resource and Water Quality sections relative to the community facilities discussion or vice versa, as it is preSently broken into two elements whereby the discussion is not complete in either of the two sections. Also, all new information and data/statistics relative to the two sections should be updated noting the Russian River is a fully allocated dyer dudng the summer months. There is no discussion concerning the existence of private wells or the reservoir systems in the Water Quality section, suggestive that all water systems are pressurized and delivered through the vadous water districts. Commissioner Correll noted the document to be very agriculture protective on all information/discussion relative to development of agricultural land, agricultural MINUTES OF THE PLANNING CQMMISSION Page ? zone changes, and agricultural water issues. He noted agriculture does have an effect on air and water and this issue is not adequately addressed in the UVAP document. He noted lands on flood plane that are rich. in soil Should be left as agriculturally zoned areas. However, he favored rezoning and/or converting small pieces Of agricultural land that are not located on the flood planes or contain rich soil be utilized for housing developments as a viable alternative to the housing shortage issue. Chapter 3, Section 3.06, Agriculture This section requires a paragraph addressing the historical perspective pertinent to the Valley's agricultural community as a whole. Chapter 3, Page 32 There is a lot of discussion relative to agriculture and air quality viability in the implementation measure section, but there is no discussion concerning the planting of more trees for .continued oxygen generation and the associated benefits of increased landscaping for providing cleaner air. Chapter 4, Historic and Archaeolo.qical Resources, paRe 1 A paragraph should be added regarding Pomo and Ranch HiStory sites. type of history differs from that of urban development history. This Commissioner Loewenstein commented on the deletion of figure 4-A, Areas of High Archaeological Sensitivity on page 1 and the subsequent reference on page 2, noting the information has significance. The deletion of this particular section takes away a major tool for assessing the impact of a project. He noted that designating the areas with the potential for cultural sensitivity allows for areas where "site specific analysis" would be appropriate. Deletion 0f the map would relieve project proponents from the responsibility of doing dgorous environmental review. Commissioner Pruden replied the County's response would be that a lot of areas of Pomo sensitivity are not public record because they' are considered sacred sites. Maps of "sensitive areas" are virtually non-existent because public records do not reflect this type of information, so proposed development of such sites is handled differently. Mr. Stump stated the County may have a process in place where there is an automatic field review requirement and that a map denoting areas of high archaeological sensitivity is not necessary. He further stated the above- referenced map is a valuable tool to the City Planning Department. It was noted by the Commission the UVAP document appears to be a "choppy product" with all the proposed language/statement deletions, it was also noted there was the elimination of many goals, policies, and implementation measures, and some of these eliminations were questionable. The City, for instance, is consistent and responsible for upgrading particular goals and policies relevant to planning/design elements and development issues. It was further noted that the language pertinent to "community involvement" was completely eliminated because the County Planning Department does not like to use citizen advisory groups. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 April 10, 2002 Chairman Chiles commented the entire Vision Statement has been "narrowed to virtually nothing." Commissioner Pruden understood eliminating information that pertains more to the City than the County, but did not favor striking information throughout the document that can potentially benefit everyone in the Valley, and suggested inquiring with the County as to the reason for the deletions. It was noted the County's discretionary review process is the same as the City's and, therefore, projects triggering special archaeological/cultural site analysis would be subject to the Northwest Information Center Review. Mr. Stump stated the County routinely collects development fees to cover the cost of the Northwest Information Center Review regarding archaeological/cultural sites.. Chapter 5, Safety, Section 5.01, Geologic Hazards and Seismic Safety The Ukiah Valley is zoned number "four" for earthquakes, which is not identified in the document to reflect the Uniform Code seismic requirements. Commissioner Wallen commented the document should show a significant inactive fault or "inferred fault" for the western portion of the Valley, and this side of the Valley historically has experienced major landslides. He noted a dashed line on most US Geological Survey Maps would identify this fault. The County has taken a "very superficial" look at the geological conditions in the area. Many implementation measures have been deleted concerning this subject. Chapter 5, Pa.qe 7, Flooding As A Result of Storms The document does not adequately address that the southem canyon portions of the Valley have historically received substantial structural damage to houses as a result of storm conditions. Chapter 6, Energy It was unknown why significant information was eliminated from the Energy element of the UVAP document. Commissioner Loewenstein referenced the 100-Year Old Flood Zone Map, noting it is one of the few maps that does not have City and County streets imposed on top of it, making it difficult to identify the extent to which developed areas are located within the flood zone. Chairman Chiles responded the Map should not be looked at in a Street-by- street context, but the Ukiah Valley area viewed as a whole. Commissioner Loewenstein stated it does not matter where the flood is if the streets and buildings are unidentifiable. Chapter 6, Goal EG-4, Implementation Measure EG-4.1.1 Pa,qe 4 The language has been eliminated that reads, "The land development code shall require that all development stdve to provide a'canopy coverage at matudty of MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 Apdl 10, 2002 fifty percent (50%) for all paved areas parking lots," noting the City requires 50 percent specifying a certain time frame, which has'been omitted from UVAP, making the information in the section incomplete. A short-term time frame is incorporated, but it pertains to implementation of the measure and not for the time it takes for the trees to grow, adding to the incompleteness of the information. This particular developmental standard should coincide with the City's standards, ensudng the trees mature at the same time. Cha~)ter 7, Airport There is no reference and/or discussion concerning general aviation in this section, which should be implemented, since it a component cf airport operations. Cha~)ter 8, Parks and Recreation It was noted some of the information in this section is considered to be "stale dated," referencing page 6, Future Park Needs. The information was taken from the Ukiah General Plan that has since been updated. New information should reflect the newly proposed Grace Hudson School and the Ukiah Valley Cultural and Recreation Center facility. Commissioners Loewenstein and Wallen questioned why Mendocino College is shown on a County and Federal Park and Recreation Land map, referencing figure 8-A on page 2. Mendocino College is not a park/reCreation facility even though there is documentation indicating the College does offer some recreational uses. It was noted the UV^P document does not reference other recreational facilities, recognizing uses the local schools provide. Chairman Chiles commented regarding page 3, City of Ukiah Parks and Recreation, first sentence, that reads, "The City of Ukiah provides a variety of neighborhood and community parks, a museum, the Civic Center, athletic fields, and recreational programs used by City and Valley residents, as well as other visitors," recommending changing the language to reflect visitors to the Valley, instead of implying City residents must visit their own parks. He further commented on page 5, Financing Recreation Facilities Valley-wide, that reads, "Residents of the Ukiah Valley and populated areas beyond Redwood and Potter Valleys all use recreation facilities within the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley" and "In addition, new residential areas lacking new community and neighborhood parks may place greater demands on existing park and recreational facilities and activities," inquiring why the language that reads, "unincorporated portions of the Valley," was eliminated. He stated, in his opinion, the language should be remain as stated. His interpretation for the elimination of the aforementioned language would be that the County does not want to be included in the growth inducing demands relative to existing facilities and/or take an active part in development of new facilities. He. noted the County does not want to take part and/or discuss the creation of a park district. Commissioner Pruden responded the County may not be interested in taking an active part in the establishment of new recreational facilities, as the County has no parks and recreation budget and no director. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page l0 Apdl 10, 2002 Commissioner Loewenstein noted discussion for the establishment of a trail system has been completely eliminated from the UVAP document. Commissioner Pruden noted, referencing the section on goals, policies and implementation measures, policy PR-1.1.1, the County will join with the City to investigate methods for financing park and recreation facilities and services. Chairman Chiles responded the County will join with the City to investigate methods for financing, but not the feasibility for creating park and recreation facilities and services. It was noted more of an effort should be made on the part of the County to assist the City with creating joint park and recreation facilities, or to at least allow an option for the development of a Joint Park District. The Commission recommends there be more of an "interface" between the County and the City on park/recreation issues. There was a brief discussion relevant to the recreational facilities and/or accommodations at Lake Mendocino, but it was noted the City has been ultimately responsible for the cost of maintenance and development of parks and recreational facilities/programs for City/County residents as well as visitors to the community. Commissioner Pruden commented regarding page 20 of Chapter 8, noting there, is a typographical error on Goal PR-7, Enhance the safe movement of bicycles within the City and surrounding areas, referring to the City in the policy when the reference should be to the County, and requires clarification. She noted the document does not discuss in the entire Bicycle Plan how to interface the bicycle lane program between City and County jurisdictions. Commissioner Correli commented the document infers the County is not interested in promoting growth and development within the Valley, only in maintaining the existing developments. The document eliminated any information/encouragement relative to bdnging in new businesses to the Valley and, furthermore, deleted certain residential zoning designations indicating a lack of interest or indifference. Chapter 9, Community Facilities and Services, PaRe 10 The document completely eliminated the discussion relative to the Public Facilities for the Community, including information regarding public and private facilities for meeting and general use,.some of which are owned by a particular district incorporating no jurisdiction Or those located in the County. Elimination of the public facility information provides for no facility statistics as well as any discussion pertinent to public facilities for the community multi-purpose events and functions. Public facilities are necessary in the County, as the community should not have to rely upon the City to provide accommodations for public meetings. Chapter 10, Circulation and Transportation, PaRe 1 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ! 1 April 10, 2002 The information provided in this chapter appears to have been taken from a "traffic flow book," and there is no discussion concerning the interface between City and County circulation and transportation issues, which is a critical component. A bdef discussion followed regarding traffic and circulation statistical data strongly indicating impacts to various intersections. There is also no discussion concerning the population increase within the City limits that impact and contribute to traffic/circulation problems. It was noted an earlier version of the UVAP addressed growth factors and traffic issues in the City. It was further noted the City has not grown in terms of size and it is reaching build-out capacity. Commissioner Wallen commented on the problem relative to the traffic section, noting the County does not address the issue that the City is expanding north and south due to the east and west development terrain restrictions. The City is becoming longer and longer whereby transportation problems are not considered in this regard. The Valley is expanding .north and south and destroying agricultural land whereby the City is being poorly developed in terms of an appropriate planning approach. The reason is that the County possesses a strong commitment toward agricultural land preservation, which is an important concept, but must be realistically evaluated in terms of allowing for positive growth potential. Commissioner Pruden did not favor the elimination of the entire section regarding Economic Development element because documentation supporting economic improvement is necessary for securement of grants. Chapter 12,' Community Design, Goal CD-l, Implementation Measure CD-1.1.1 Pa.qe 1 The language that reads, "Consider the design guidelines adopted by the City in City-County transition areas," should be strengthened to include State Street and the areas from Boonville Road to the Forks, at the minimum. Chairman Chiles replied the document refers to the gateway and scenic corridors, recognizing such areas as providing visitor first impressions. Commissioner Pruden stated the document addresses transition areas, but the reality is that the transition areas are North and South State Street, which are not aesthetically pleasing. It was noted the word "shall" must be implemented in the document, making certain that design guidelines for development are consistent and followed for the purpose of enhancing the visual character of the Valley. Chapter 13, Land Use Commissioner Loewenstein commented one of the most significant deletions from the UVAP is all reference to medium-density and high-density residential housing whereby the City is burdened with the task of developing/providing all affordable housing for the Valley. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ]_2. April 10, 2002 It was noted the City is the hub of urban development and the County is concerned with rural development, which encompasses iow density. After the City developed new terminology for land use classifications, the County reverted to its former land use zoning classification terminology. The County implemented such terminology as Suburban Residential (SR) as well as other land use categories that the City never included in its land use classification terminology. The County does have Planning Development (PD) zoning designations. .Chapter 13, Pa.qe 14 The (SR) land use classification description resembles Commercial Neighborhood (CN) more than it does for R-1 or R-2 zoning classifications. The County discussion does not adequately address land use classification issues, especially along State Street or acknowledge the possibility that such areas could possess commercial frontage encompassing residential behind them, as does the City, should the. County desire to maintain its current land use classifications. It was noted the CoUnty does not apply and/or particularly recognize the mix-use concept. Chapter 13, Pa.qe 14 Commissioner Loewenstein stated it appears multi-family dwellings are acceptable in the SR zoning classification encompassing a density of one unit per 1,500 square feet of lot area. Commissioner Pruden addressed the limited area classified as SR zoning to include the neighborhoods south of Beacon Lane to the Norgard Lane/Plant Road area, noting this zoning classification should be further developed to encompass the concept of land use designations containing commercial frontage with residential located behind. She noted the discussion is really about CN zoning classification in terms of land use' designations for the southern portion of the Valley. A brief discussion followed regarding the County's obsolete land use classification terminology. Commissioner Correli recognized potential County areas from parcel maps that could be "broken down" from large parcels and re-zoned for residential development, provided that the land is geologically sound. He proposed that the north/south corridor be re-zoned where possible to include the breaking down of "little pockets of agriculture land" into smaller developable residential units of land to lessen the burden of the housing shortage problems in the City limits. He stated the UVAP document is not acknowledging the growth concept or considering practical zoning classifications. In other words, the County is "out of the growth business and into the maintenance/preservation of land business," leaving the City to provide for growth and development issues as well as contend with providing public services. Commissioner Loewenstein noted the SR zoning classification is immediately adjacent to the City limits, presumably the only area potentially developable for MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ]3 Ap_HI 10, 2002 affordable housing accommodations that could reduce some of the City's responsibility for providing services and other living necessities for such residents that would otherwise be dependent upon the City. The SR classification appears to be the only real urban designation with the potential to accommodate some residential development. Chapter 13, Pa,qe 21 Commissioner Pruden agreed with how the County classified "Range Land." However, the North Stated Complex (NS) should be designated for mixed-use rather than for industrial/commercial use. Commissioner Pruden stated the Valley residents enjoy the "rural flavor," but the document places a tremendous amount of pressure on the City to provide for growth and services to its residents. She noted the areas of Caipella and Talmage have the potential to be "very nice villages" possessing the capacity for accepting higher urban concentrations, and desires to keep those "green stdps" open so that the areas do not look like a continuous chain of development. The Talmage and Calpella areas would be able to accommodate a lot more development, becoming very nice "residential satellites" encompassing their own services without having to utilize City services/facilities. It was noted the above-referenced areas could be re-zoned to accommodate growth and development. It was further noted the County is concerned with growth "sprawl" but there are ways to increase the density in areas without the appearance of developmental "sprawls." Commissioner Correll recommended the County better define agricultural land, preserving the best and most fertile land and flood plain zone areas for agricultural purposes. This would leave the less productive land or less desirable land incorporating other types of land terrain that may be more conducive for residential development. There was a general discussion regarding increased agricultural competition generated from other counties and the potential effects it may have on the Valley's future agricultural land. It was noted that agriculture represents approximately ten percent of the state's economy. Tom Water, Ukiah, stated the water availability issue has been a contributing factor to the problems associated with growth in the Calpella area. Commissioner Wallen expressed concern about looking at various spectrums of growth and making compromises between agricultural land, transportation flow issues, and residential development, noting the importance and application of implementing effective planning and re-zoning practices. Residential development has been primarily west of the Russian River whereby no consideration has been given for development east of the River. The push for development has been progressively north and south, destroying good agriculture land. To the contrary, preservation of prime agriculture land is actually being encouraged on the eastern side of the Russian River with the north/south freeway flow. He cautioned without carefully planning the potential MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page ]4 " April 10, 2002 $-/I for east/west development, the Valley will become one solid corridor of housing from Calpella to Burke Hill. Commissioner Loewenstein supported the concept of the County applying progressive planning techniques and adopting current zoning terminology for appropriate growth and development to discourage massive quantities and/or long solid streams of aesthetically displeasing housing developments throughout the Valley. Commissioner Pruden noted the County has neglected to acknowledge good land use planning by not considering the mixed-use concept for the commercial areas such as the North State Complex and the redevelopment areas south, which is a key component to assist with the housing shortage problem. Commissioner Loewenstein noted if the City has to bear the responsibility of providing all the affordable housing, public services, and parks and recreation for the entire Valley, that the City should be able to annex the North State area as a source of tax revenue in order to effectiVely provide such services. Additionally, it was noted the document must be written to encourage new businesses for the area as well as to accept growth and/or ~urban sprawl" by appropriately reviewing and applying effective planning and zoning techniques/concepts. The Planning Commission is encouraged to continue providing further discussion and comments/input relevant to the UVAP document. The above-referenced Planning Commission comments will be presented to the City Council for review. The Commissioners thanked Commissioner Pruden for her valuable input and comments to the UVAP document. '10. NEW BUSINESS N/A 11. ..P. LANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS Planning Director Stump provided a brief synopsis of upcoming projects and discussion of current studies and/or revision of existing regulations. He also provided an update on the Gobbi/Riverside Park project. He noted there was sufficient budgeted funding for Planning Commissioners to attend planning seminars. 12. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Loewenstein commented he was uncomfortable attending a meeting with RHL Design representatives relevant t° the proposed Safeway Fueling Station project, noting that any discussions can be conducted during the public hearing for the project. Chairman Chiles commented on the proposed Second-Unit Regulation revisions stating he supports the concept that second unit development be single story projects in order to avoid problems within neighborhoods. He referred to the Granter second-unit project as an example that generated neighborhood problems. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 " April 10, 2002 --/,z.. ITEM NO: 9d DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING INTEREST IN DEVELOPING MIXED COMMERCIAL-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND SETTING OF DATE FOR JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SUMMARY: Staffwas recently approached by two different landowners who expressed an interest in developing mixed commercial-residential projects within the City. Both land owners had progressive visions of integrating attractive affordable housing with small to medium sized commercial land uses. These visions included elements such as strong pedestrian orientation, creek restoration, abundant landscaping, unique architecture, and the development of a "village" setting. Staff is very receptive to these development/redevelopment concepts, and is excited about the prospect of working with these property owners to develop creative projects that fulfill community needs and improve the aesthetic and environmental qualities of our City. The purpose of this Agenda item is to inform the Council of these preliminary discussions and set a date for the annual City Council/Planning Commission meeting to discuss broad community planning and development issues, problems, and alternative solutions. The last joint meeting was held on January 31,2001. Staff is recommending the joint meeting be scheduled for July or August; there is a fifth Wednesday in July (31st). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set date and time for the joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Determine joint meeting is not to take place and take no action to set date and time. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None APPROVED: CandaCe Horsley, City ITEM NO. 9~ DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID TO RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CIVIC CENTER ADDITION IN THE AMOUNT OF $979,800 The City of Ukiah received two bids for the construction of the new Civic Center addition at 411 Clay Street. The Notice to Bidders was issued on April 25, 2002 and published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on April 28 and May 5. Notice was sent to all contractors identified on the City's Qualified Contractors List as well as five Builders Exchanges. The building is approximately six thousand square feet and will house Electric Utility staff, Information Technology Services, utility billing equipment, Purchasing and paper storage, and Police evidence. In response to the Notice to Bidders, staff received bids from Rainbow Construction in $979,800, and Cupples Construction in the amount of $992,569. The Architect's estimate was $850,000. Several issues were raised by both bidders at the bid opening, regarding the validity of the respective proposals submitted by each bidder. Cupples Construction has subsequently submitted a formal letter of protest (Attachment # 5) contending Rainbow's bid forms were non-compliant with the bid specifications as the forms were removed from the Specification Booklet, and that Rainbow's roofing subcontractor is not licensed to apply the specified roofing material. Rainbow has verbally submitted a protest that Cupples violated the Public Contracts Code, as the required list of subcontractors submitted with Cupples bid did not identify each category of work to be done by each subcontractor. (continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: AWARD BID TO RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC CENTER ADDITION IN THE AMOUNT OF $979,800 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine award of bid to Rainbow Construction is inappropriate and award bid to next lowest bidder. 2. Determine award of bid to either bidder is inappropriate, reject all bids, and direct staff to reissue Notice to Bidders Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Manager Prepared by: Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Notice to Bidders 2. Bidders List 3. Proposal from Cupples Construction 4. Proposal from Rainbow Construction 5. Cupples Letter of Protest APPROVED: L._~ ..._",,,,,A,~,...~,_~ Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager AWARD OF BID TO RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CiViC CENTER ADDITION IN THE AMOUNT OF $979,800 June 5, 2002 Page 2 The City Attorney has reviewed the bid documents and respective protests submitted by both contractors. It is the City Attorney's opinion that while some of the issues raised by the bidders are valid, the City may seek other remedies to the violations and is not required to reject the bids solely on the basis of the issues raised by the bidders. He has stated that the City should treat both bids as valid for the purpose of awarding the contract. It should be noted that the subcontractor listed by Rainbow Construction for roofing has been verified by the roofing manufacturer as a qualified installer of the specified product. Both Rainbow and Cupples are local firms with significant experience in projects similar in size and scope to the proposed addition. Rainbow has completed several significant public projects and most recently was awarded the bid for construction of the new Grace Hudson Elementary School. Rainbow was also the General Contractor for the construction of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. Cupples Construction has also completed several significant projects in this area. Most recently Cupples completed the addition and remodel of the Grace Hudson Museum. While the Museum project was undertaken by the Sun House Guild, City staff participated in overseeing the project. It was staff's experience that Cupples Construction demonstrated a high level of experience and expertise in project management and quality construction. The City Council has three options in considering this item. As the City Attorney has determined that the bids are valid for the purpose of awarding a contract, the Council may proceed with awarding the bid to the lowest bidder, reject the Iow bid and award the contract to the next lowest bidder, or reject all bids without prejudice and direct staff to reissue the Notice to Bidders. Rejecting the Iow bid requires the Council to determine that the Iow bidder is either not responsible or is incapable of completing the project. Staff does not believe that determination could be made based upon Rainbow's record. Staff is also not recommending rejection of the bids as the rebid process will delay the project several months, pushing construction into winter. Also, rebidding does not guarantee the City will receive additional or lower bids in the future. As Rainbow's bid in the amount of $979,800 is the lowest responsible bid, staff is recommending the Council award the bid for construction of the Civic Center addition to Rainbow Construction. LD/ZIP1 Bid Award Addition.Asr CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NOTICE TO BIDDERS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF UKIAH CIVIC CENTER 411 CLAY STREET ADDITION Specification No. 02-06 ATTACHMENT._L NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed standard proposals for CONSTRUCTION OF UKIAH CiViC CENTER 411 CLAY STREET ADDITION will be received at the Office of the City Clerk, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah California 95482-5400 until 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday May 22, 2002 at which time, or as soon thereafter as possible, they will be publicly opened and read. Bids shall be addressed to the City Clerk and shall be endorsed "CONSTRUCTION OF UKIAH CIVIC CENTER 411 CLAY STREET ADDITION." Bids are required for the entire work described herein. No fax bids will be accepted. Plans, Specifications, and Special Provisions may be inspected and/or copies obtained from Director of Community Services, City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482-5400. A non-refundable fee in the amount of $50 is required for the purchase of all plans and specifications. No bid will be considered unless it is made on the forms furnished by the City and is made in accordance with the details of the Special Provisions. Each bidder must be licensed as required by law. All bidders are required to attend a walk through site inspection on Thursday, May 9 at 9:00 a.m. Further information regarding the work or these specifications can be obtained by calling Larry DeKnoblough at (707) 463-6221 or at fax phone (707) 463- 6204. The City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to determine which proposal is, in its opinion, the lowest responsible bid of a responsible bidder and which it deems in the best interest of the City to accept. The City Council also reserves the dght to waive any information not matedal to cost or performance in any proposal or bid. Pursuant to provisions of Section 1770, including amendments thereof, of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, State of California, has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages for straight time, overtime Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays including employer payment for health and welfare, vacation, pension and similar purposes. Copies of the General Prevailing Wage Determination (applicable to the work), for the locality in which the work is to be done can be viewed on the Intemet at http://www.dir, ca.gov/dlsr/pwd/. The prime contractor for the work herein shall possess a current, valid State of California Contractor's License appropriate for the work. Pursuant to Section 4590 of the California Government Code, this contract includes provisions that allow substitutions of certain types of securities in lieu of the City withholding a portion of the partial payments due the Contractor to insure performance under this contract. By order of the City Council, City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, State of Califomia. Dated: ,2002 Marie Ulvila, City Clerk City of Ukiah, California PUBLISH TVVO TIMES /,~ 'i 5--- ATTACHMENT_~_. 41~ Clay Street Addition Cons truc tion of the U k iah Civic Center NUHBER COHPANY ADDRESS PHONE NO. FAX NO. 1 Marie Ulvila eib/Clerk 2 North Coast Builders Exchange- Fort Bragg 3 Sacramento Builders Exchange 4 North Coast Builders Exchange- Lakeport 5 North Coast Builders Exchange- Santa Rosa 6 North Coast Builders Exchange- Ukiah 7 Rick Cupples 501 St. Marys Avenue Cupples Construction Hopland~ CA 95449 744-1905 8 Parnum Paving 1324 S. State Street 467-4100 467-4141 9 Post Office Box 559 Valley Paving Ukiah, CA 485-7505 485-8747 10 Alan Breese Project Manager 11 Robert Clark P.O. Box 167 Calpella 485-0806 485-7820 12 Ukiah Heating and Cooling P.O. Box 872, Ukiah 462-6864 13 Chuck Pittman Ukiah, CA 14 Ferranti Construction 485-0095 15 Bush Construction 2020 Industry Road 462-8749 16 Post Office Box 126 459-5442 459-3557 Water Construction Willits, CA 95490 411 Clay S tree t Addition Construction of the Ukiah Civic Center NUPlBER COMPANY ADDRESS PHONE NO. FAX NO. 17 Post Office Box 2769 Rainbow Construction Ukiah, CA 468-5504 462-81!1 18 Rainbow Construction Same Same Same Post Office Box 375 !9 A to Z Construction Calpella 485-9650 485-9652 20 2! Mendocino Post Office Box 15!7 22 Construction Willits, CA 95490 459-2377 459-0644 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 3! 32 BIDDING SCHEDULE In case of discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. A. BASE BID ITEMS For all work necessary for the construction of the new 411 Clay Street building addition, complete, including but not limited to all demolition and grading, foundations, site and building utilities,- rough and finish carpentry, interior and exterior finishes, electrical, plumbing and mechanical, fire sprinkler system, communication system, all paving, drainage, flatwork, landscaping, site lighting surrounding the building, all utilities for a complete installation, a lump sum price of: .. . . . v o,,a s ?. A. B. . Ao B. C. ALTERNATE BID ITEMS For construction of new metal canopy structure adjoining building addition, including but not limited to structural members and sheet goods and flashing, for a complete installation, a lump sum price of: ?-.",'-x~'~ --~'~v,.o,,;,-~c¢.,,-,~ ~--.~) ------ ...... dollars $ ~ ~ ~.OD For installation of alternate paving cross-section comprised of 3" AC over 7" of aggregate base, in all contract work areas, in lieu of 2" over 6" included in Base Bid Item __ above, for a complete installation, complete, a lump sum price of: ADDITIVE/DEDUCTIVE UNIT PRICE BID ITEMS For additional paving, 2" AC over 6", including sawcutting, demolition of existing, disposal, subgrade preparation, aggregate base and asphalt laying and compaction and all related work, a unit price of: $ ~,~o-~ per sq. ft For additional paving, 3" AC over 7", including sawcutting, demolition of existing, disposal, subgrade preparation, aggregate base and asphalt laying and compaction and all related work, a unit price of: $~;~.OO per sq. fl For City sidewalk replacement, including but not limited to demolition and disposal, subgrade preparation, layout, concrete formwork, placement, finishing and protection of concrete, cleanup, a unit price of: $ '~ \.~ per sq. ft 23 We, the undersigned, further agree, if this proposal shall be accepted, to sign the agreement and to furnish the required bonds with satisfactory surety, or sureties, within fifteen (15) calendar days after written notice that the contract is ready for signature; and, if the undersigned shall fail to contract, as aforesaid, it shall be understood that he or she has abandoned the contract and that, therefore, this proposal shall be null and void and the proposal guaranty accompanying this proposal, orthe amount of said guaranty, shall be forfeited to and become the property of the City. Otherwise, the proposal guaranty accompanying this proposal shall be returned to the undersigned. Witness our hands this day of Licensed in accordance with an a(;t proovidipg for the registration of California Contractors License No. ~'~ (~ ~_.. , expiration date THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE NUMBER AND EXPIRATION DATE STATED HEREIN ARE MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. Signature of bidder or bidders, with business addresses: Notice: In the case of a corporation, give below the addresses of the principal office thereof and names and addresses of the President, Secretary, Treasurer. TO: FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract, hereby certifies that he orshe has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair Employment Practices requirements of the Special Provisions contained herein. CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC CENTER ADDITION (Signature of Bidder) Business Mailing Address: Business Location: (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page prior to submitting his or her proposal.) 25 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. Witness my hand this ,,~ / Sig~d~ness Addr~ CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents that he or she has/has not, participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to either the equal opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that he or she has/has not, filed all required compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance pdor to subcontract awards. Signature and address of Bidder: -, Date (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity for implementing Execulive Orders 10925 and 11114.) 26 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS __ In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the total bid and (b) the portion of the work to be done by each subcontractor. 27 STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he or she has done and to give references that will enable the City Council to judge of his or her experience, skill and business standing and his or her ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. 28 SIGNATURE(S) OF BIDDER Accompanying this proposal is ~, ~.~('~.~-.~ ~ ~~ (insert the words "c~'sh ($)", "cashier's check" or "bidder's bond", as the case may be) in an amount equal to at least 10 percent of the bid. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as principals are as follows: IMPORTANT NOTICE: If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, provide the legal name of corporation and also the names of the president, secretary, treasurer and manager thereof. If a co-partnership, provide the true name of firm and also the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If bidder or other interested! person is an individual, provide the first and last names in full. Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors: License No. ~)~ ~'~ , License Expiration Date Signature(s) of Bidder: ~--~ ~~~-~ Business address: Place of residence: NOTE: If bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall be set forth above together with the signature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership; and if bidder is an individual, his or her signature shall be placed above. If a member of a partnership, a Power of Attorney must be on file with the Department pdorto opening bids or submitted with the bid; otherwise, the bid will be disregarded as irregular and unauthorized. Dated: BIDDER'S BOND KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, CUP?I~S Ai~ SONS CONS'I'~UC~ION, INC. that we, _ __, as PRINCIPAL and DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY _, as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Ukiah in the penal sum of lO PERCENT (10%) OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF TME DID o1' the Plincipal above named, submitted by said Principal to the City of Ukiah, as the case may be, for the work described below, for the payment of which sum in lawiul money o! the United States, well and truly Io be made, ~o the City Clerk to which said bid was submitted, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, admmistratols and successors jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. In no case shall the " ( I1'' liability el~lhe surcb/hereunder exceed the sum o! $..T..~.E-J~'[ OF .T_HE TOTAL i:,~,,(]u~,~T OF THE BID THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLiGATiON IS SUCH, that whereas Ihe Principal has submitted the above mentioned bid to the City of UkJab, as aforesaid, for certain construction specifically described as follows, fur which bids are to be opened al the Office of the City Clerk, Ukiah C~vic Center, 'Ukiah, Calilomia, on 5,-99-.021or CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC CENTER ADDITION NOW, THEREFORE, If the aforesaid Principal is awarded The contract and, within the time and manner required under lhe specilicalions, alter the prescribed forms afc presented to him or her [or signatu[es, enlers into a written contract, in the prescribed term, in ,3ccordance with lhe bid and files 1we bonds with the City of Ukmh, erie to guaranlee faithful performance and the other to guarantee payment for labo~ and matefi~ls, as required by law, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise, it t;hall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals on this 21_S~ ~ day of [vLA.¥ ., A.D..?__DD2. CUPPLES AND SONS CONSTRUCTION, INC. _DY: Princq'~al .(Seal) (Seal) _(Seal) ~.(Seal) . D E_VE_LOgE-R ~~--T-Y--AN D-I-NDE-MN ! T-Y--COMP-~N-Y--(seal) ~-_ c --~.~"-~-~'777 ~' --"'" Surety RICHARD A. JAFFEE ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Add[ess: 3100 OAK RD. STE 260 ..]L&LILUT__CILEE~ 9-~ 30 BIDDING SCHEDULE A'rTACHMENT_~_.._ In case of discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. 1 BASE BID ITEMS A, For all work necessary for the construction of the new 411 Clay Street building addition, complete, including but not limited to all demolition and grading, foundations, site and building utilities, rough and finish carpentry, interior and exterior finishes, electrical, plumbing and mechanical, fire sprinkler system, communication system, all paving, drainage, flatwork, landscaping, site lighting surrounding the building, all utilities for a complete installation, a lump sum price of: ALTERNATE BID ITEMS Ao B. For construction of new metal canopy structure adjoining building addition, including but not limited to structural members and sheet goods and flashing, for a complete installation, a lump sum price of: For installation of alternate paving cross-section comprised of 3" AC over 7" of aggregate base, in all contract work areas, in lieu of 2" over 6" included in Base Bid Item ~ above, for a complete installation, complete, a lump sum price of: . A. a. C. ADDITIVE/DEDUCTIVE UNIT PRICE BID ITEMS For additional paving, 2" AC over 6", including sawcutting, demolition of existing, disposal, subgrade preparation, aggregate base and asphalt laying and compaction and all related work, a unit price of: For additional paving, 3" AC over 7", including sawcutting, demolition of existing, disposal, subgrade preparation, aggregate base and asphalt laying and compaction and all related work, a unit pdce of: For City sidewalk replacement, including but not limited to demolition and disposal, subgrade preparation, layout, concrete formwork, placement, finishing and protection of concrete, cleanup, a unit price of: $ ~jl...~ persq, fl. $ 7:5 per sq. ft. persq, ft. 23 [. We, the undersigned, further agree, if this proposal shall be accepted, to sign the agreement and to furnish the required bonds with satisfactory surety, or sureties, within fifteen (15) calendar days after written notice that the contract is ready for signature; and, if the undersigned shall fail to contract, as aforesaid, it shall be understood that he or she has abandoned the contract and that, therefore, this proposal shall be null and void and the proposal guaranty accompanying this proposal, orthe amount of said guaranty, shall be forfeited to and become the property of the City. Otherwise, the proposal guaranty accompanying this proposal shall be returned to the undersigned. Witness our hands this day of MAy 21, , 2002. Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of California Contractors License No. 71.5671 , expiration date .11-30-03 THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE NUMBER AND EXPIRATION DATE STATED HEREIN ARE MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. Signature of bidder or bidders, with business addresses: --~CHARDSON ~9~ ~_ SMITH ST_/PO BOX ?769 UKIAH, CA 95482 Notice: In the case of a corporation, give below the addresses of the principal office thereof and names and addresses of the President, Secretary, Treasurer. SEE ATTACHED -] 2~ RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION RCMC, Inc. a California Corportion Rainbow Construction a dMsion of RCMC, Inc. PO Box 2769 294 West Smi~ Street U '-kiah, CA 95'482 Phone: 707468-5504 Fax: 707-462-8111 Lic.# B 715671, Exp. 11/03 $oave Concrete Constructrion a division of RCMC, [nc. PO Box 2769 294 West Smid~ Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Phone: 707/468-5504 Fax: 707/462-8111 Lic.# A-C8 751975, Exp. 7/02 CORPORATE OFFICERS: Peter A. Richardson, President 311 Sanel Dr. Ukiah, CA 95482 707/462-9772 ss#: 571-02-3971 CA Driver's License #: N0120834 D.O.B. 5-11-54 Douglas Y. Anderson, Secrerary/Tre~urer 910 W. Clay St. Uk~ah, CA 95482 707/468-9441 ss#: 205-56.3664 CA Driver's License No.: A4841809 D.O.B. 1-31-61 James Lambert, Vice President 25500 Poonkinney Rd. Covelo, CA 95428 707/983-8020 ss#: 552-784813 CA Driver's License No.: SO090247 D.O.B. 9-11-50 Helon L. Chichester, Vice President PO Box 452 Little River, CA 95456 707/937-2164 ss#: 569-88-5831 CA Driver's License No.: A0707662 D.O.B. 8-13-51 Cliff McClure, Vice President 644 Walnut Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 707/462-7306 ss#: 565-64-6317 CA Driver's Licetue No.: M0785888 D.O.B.: 12-25-46 Richard Moser, Vice President 212 N. Spring Street Ukiah, CA 95482 707/463-6942 ss#: 603-90-0335 CA Driver's License No.: B7258805 D.O.B. 8-3-66 Michael Soave, Vice President 1529 East Hill Road Willirs, CA 95490 707/459-4755 ss#: 374-66-4042 CA Driver's License No.: V7055377 D.O.B. 12-4-55 FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION TO: CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract, hereby certifies that he orshe has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair Employment Practices requirements ofthe Special Provisions contained herein. CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC CENTER ADDITION ~RICHARDSON Business Mailing Address: RCMC, INC, DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION ?0 BOX 2769 I~TAH: ~A 95aR2 Business Location: 294 W. SMITH ST. UKIAH. CA 95482 (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page prior to submitting his or her proposal.) RCMC, INC, DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION 25 _.] .] .] WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this cOntract. Witness my hand this__2O..C~_ day of HAY , Signature of Bidder, with Business Address: ~HARDSON UKIAH; CA 95482 CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents that he or she has/has not, participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to either the equal opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that he or she has/has not, filed all required compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance prior to subcontract awards. Signature and address of Bidder: ~RDSON Date 5-20-02 294 W. SMITH ST. UKTAH, ~A c~5487 (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity for implementing Executive Orders 10925 and 11114.) 26 RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the total bid and (b) the portion of the work to be done by each subcontractor. SEE ATTACHED E_ RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION 27 STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he or she has done and to give references that will enable the City Council to judge of his or her experience, skill and business standing and his or her ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. SEE ATTACHED RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION 28 SUB~RADE S.ITEWORK UNDERGROUND, PAINBOW CONSTRUCTi O N LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS SUBCONTRACTOR ..... LOCATION LANDSCAPING FENCING REINFORCING STEEL CONCRETE STRUCTURAL STEEL CARPENTRY~ INSULATION ROOFING PLASTER CERAMIC TILE ACOUSTICAL TR~TUENT. FLOC" COVER: N~S PLUMBING 'T"~::: .T'~ ~-. ) ~ ~ ., HVAC/SHEETMETAL. ,, ELECTRICAL · : · Project Resume Upperlake Union High School, Upper[ake, CA; Aspen Street Architects; $2,411,000.00 general contract 10,347 sqf~. 2 new buildings and all site work; fully bonded and insured, on schedule; '42% complete. First Baptist Church of Ukiah, Current Ukiah, CA; Design Build with Corcoran and Corcoran Architects; $2,645,000 Design-Build general contract; 12,000 sqff. nvo story worship and community activities £acility; fully bonded and insured, on schedule 100% complete. College of the Redwoods, Current Fortuna, CA; Nichols, Melburg and Rossetto Architects; $9,529,000 general contT'act; 40,000 sqft. New Library and Learning Resource Facility; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule; 85% complete. Sonoma Cutrer Winery, Phase VI, Current Windsor CA; Zucco Fagent Associates, Structural Engineers; Owner financed negotiated concrete and framing project consisting of a 50,000 sqft. Underground winery addition; $2,800,000 concrete and $350,000 framing; 75% Complete. Clearlake Senior Community Center, March 2002 Clearlake, CA; Eduardo Martinez Architect; $1,798,000 general contract; 11,000 sqft. New Community Center; Fully bonded and Insured; On schedule; 100% complete. Jefferson Elementary School, September 2001 Cloverdale, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $898,000 Modernization general contract; Fully bonded and insured; on schedule; 100% complete. Ukiah Transfer Station, June 2001 Ukiah, CA; $750,000 Cast in Place concrete subcontract; New waste transfer facility in Ukiah; Fully Insured, Completed on Schedule. Del Norte County Juvenile Detention Facility, May 2001 Crescent City,, CA; KMD Architecture; $5,2000,000 New building construction and site work general conu'act; 22,000 sqft. Detention facility'; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. Ken Fowler Auto Center, April 2001 Ukiah, CA; Design-build with Richard Ruff Architect; $2,833,000 New Auto Dealership Design-Build General Contract; 34,000 sqft new commercial building; bonded and insured; Accelerated completion. Williams Communications FacilitY, February 2001 Manchester, CA; The Gensler Design Group; $685,000 Concrete, Steel and Carpentry subcontract; New 8, 000 sqft. Fiber Optic Telecommunications Facility; Fully insured; On Schedule. Safeway Santa Rosa, January 2001 Santa Rosa, CA; Nadet Architects; $796,000 Concrete and Framing Subcontract; 55,000 sqft. Shopping Center remodel; Fully insured; On schedule. Kelseyville High School Gym, January 2001 Kelseyville, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; 5750,000 Remodel General Contract; Gymnasium and Locker room remodel; On Schedule. Nokomis Elementary School, December 2000 Ukiah, CA; AXIA Architects; $1,644,000 Moderni:atiot~ general contract; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. Fully bonded and insured; On Schedule. Thurston Chevrolet, November 2000 Ukiah, CA; $270,000 Concrete Subconn-act; New 34,000 Auto Dealership foundation, showroom floor and site concrete; On schedule. Project Resume Brookhaven School, October 2000 Sebastopol, CA; Quattrocchi K~vok Architects; $3,222,000 New building construction and site work general contract; 8,000 sqft. Multipurpose building; concrete tilt-up construction and frame work preformed with our own forces; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. El Molino High School, July 2000 Forestville, CA; Bowles, Kendrick and Lemanski Architects; $654,000 Science building modernization general contract; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. Sonoma County Airport Hanger Buildings, June 2000 Windsor, CA; Shutt Moen Associates; $854,000 New building construction and site work general contract; 27,000 sqft. Metal buildings; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. Sonoma Cutrer Winery, Phase V, May 2000 Windsor CA; Zucco Fagent Associates, Structural Engineers; Owner financed negotiated concrete and framing project consisting of a 50,000 sqft. Underground winery addition; $1,900,000 concrete and $250,000 framing; Completed on Time, No claims filed. Sonoma Air Attack Base Facility, April 2000 Sonoma County Airport, Windsor, CA; Lionakis Beaumont Design Group; $1,500,000 New building consu-uction and site work general contract; 3,000 sqfr. Building including runway and loading pit improvements; All framing and concrete work performed with our own threes; Fully bonded and insured; on schedule Los Guilucos Court Security Project, March 2000 Santa Rosa, CA; County of Sol~ol-na Architecture Division; $410,000 Security remodel general contract; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule. Lolonis Vineyards Dam and Spillway, November 1999 Redwood Valley, CA; North Counties Engineering; $175,000 Concrete subcontract; 1,000 cy Structural and shotcrete inlet structure and spillway; No claims filed. Meadow View Elementary School, September 1999 'Santa Rosa, CA; TLCD Architecture; $2,829,000 New building construction general contract; 34,000 sqft. 6 buildings. Bellview Union School District. Beverly's Fabric Store, August 1999 Ukiah, CA; Design-Build; $585,000 New building construction and site work general contract; 7,100 sqft. Retail fabrics store; All framing and concrete work performed with our own forces; Full,,, ir~sured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Lake County Juvenile Hall Remodel, July 1999 Lakeport, CA; Nacht and Lewis architects; $470,000 Security remodel genera[ contract; 3,000 sqft. Conversion of non secured area to detention cells; On schedule; Fully bonded and insured; No stop notices; Completed on time. Redwood Elementary School, July 1999 Fort Bragg, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $1,685,000 Modernization general contract; Fully bonded and insured; On schedule; 100% Complete. Parkside Elementary School, May 1999 Sebastopol, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $1,945,000 New Building construction and site work general contract; 7,300 sqfr. Library and multi-use buildings; All framing preformed with own forces; Fully bonded and insured; 100% Complete. Sonoma Cutrer Winery, Phase V, 1999 Windsor, CA. Owner financed negotiated concrete and flaming project consisting 50,000 sq.ft, underground winery addition. $1,900,000 concrete and $250,000 framing. Cloverdale Intermodal Facility, March 1999 Cloverdale, CA; Thompson & Associates; $1,300,000 New Project Resume building construction general contract; 4,200 sqft. Transportation facility and rail platform; All flaming and concrete work preformed with own forces; Fully insured; No stop notices. Albion School, May 1999 Albion, CA; Paul Douglas, Architect; $1,200,000 New building construction and site work general contract; 6,100 sqft. Classroom building. Mendocino Unified School District. Albertson's, March 1999 Ukiah, CA; $3,300,000 Commercial remodel general contract; 65,000 sqft. GrocetT store addition and remodel; All framing and concrete work performed with our own forces; Fully bonded and insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Porter Street Barbecue Restaurant, January 1999 Ukiah, CA; Sam Todd Architect; $370,000 New building and site work general contract; 3,600 sqft. New restaurant and barbecue pit, all framing and concrete work preformed with our own forces; No claims filed; Completed on dine. Food 4 Less, November 1998 Ukiah, CA; $2,500,000 New building construction general contract; 58,000 sqft. Grocery store; All framing and concrete work preformed with own forces; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed time. Lake County Tribal Health Center, November 1998 Lakeport, CA; Wyatt-Rhodes Architects; $300,000 Site work and erecting of Temporary Tribal Health Facility; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Duncan Peak Winery, November 1998 Hopland, CA; $330,000 Concrete tilt-up subcontract; Owner financed 20,000 sqft. Wine storage cellar; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Kelseyville High School Dry Rot Repair, October 1998 Kelse¥-,,ille, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $400,000 Reconstruction general contract; 1,800 sqft. Complete reconstruction of lobby and restrooms. Kelsesville Unified School District. Frank Zeek Elementary School, July 1998 Ukiah, CA; AXLA Architects; $1,298,000 School modernization general contract; 10,800 sqft. Modernization. Ukiah Unified School district. Healdsburg Junior High School Cafeteria, July 1998 Healdsburg, CA; Ross Drulis Architects; $1,900,000 New building and site general contract; 9,000 sqft. Multi-Use room and cafeteria. Healdsburg Unified School District. Redwood Valley Middle School Modernization, June 1998 Ukiah, CA; AXIA Architects; $1,385,000 Modernization general contract; 12,400 sqft. School Modernization. Ukiah Unified School District. Gualala Water Company Systems Improvements, June 1998 Gualala; Waters Construction Company; $103,000 Building Trades Subcontract; Three block buildings and site structures; 1,200 sqft.; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Healdsburg Junior High School Modernization, February 1998 Ross Drulis Architects; $2,540,000 modernization general contract; 32,000 sqfr. Modernization and rehabilitation. Healdsburg Unified School District. Willits High School, December 1997, HTI Architects; $997,000 Modernization general contract; 7,500 sqft. Locker room and classroom modernization. Willits Unified School District. Worldmark Resort at Nice, December 1997 Nice, CA; Quiring General; $1,600,000 Framing subcontract; Fast Track subcontract; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Project Resume Safeway, October 1997 Ukiah, CA; Tilton Pacific Construction Company; $668,000 Building and site construction; Concrete subcontract; $173,000 Framing subcontract; 60,000 sqft. Grocet-y store Fast Track Subcontracts; Fully insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Dana Gray Elementary School, September 1997 Fort Bragg, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $739,000 Modernization general corm'act; 8,000 sqft. School modernization. Fort Bragg Unified School District. Eagle Peak Middle School, August 1997 Ukiah, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects, $9,400,000 New building and work site general contract, 60,000 sqft. - 9 Buildings, Wood Frame & Concrete Tilt-up; All Framing & Concrete Work Performed with our own forces; Fully bonded and insured, Completed on time. Santa Rosa High School, May 1997 TLCD Architecture; $1,880,000 New building general contract; Completed on time; 7,500 sqft. New cafeteria addition. Santa Rosa City High School district. Brookside Marlene Estates, March 1997 Ukiah, CA; Community Development Commission of Mendocino County; Trumbo & Associates Architects; $1,074,000 New building and site work general contracting; 21 Unit multi- family [ow income housing project; Fully bonded and insured; No stop notices; Completed on dine. Santa Rosa Railroad Depot Restoration, January 1997 Santa Rosa, CA; Glen David Mathews Architect; $405,500 restoration general contract; 6,000 sqft. Extensive remodel and museum grade restoration; Fully bonded and insured; Completed on time. Medo-Lake Credit Union, October 1996 Ukiah, CA; Facility Design Group; $300,000 interior remodel general contract; 4,500 sqft. Commercial remodel; Fully bonded and insured; No claims filed; Completed on time. Windsor Civic Center, March 1996 Windsor, CA; Robinson Mills & Williams Architects; $1,400,000 Remodel general contract; 20,000 sqft. 3 buildings; Extensive remodel; Fully bonded and insured; No stop notices; Completed on time. Mendocino County Administration Center, June 1996 Ukiah, CA; Jonathan Byer Architect; $5,600,000 New building and modernization general contract; 40,000 sqft. Ne~v/35,000 sqft. Remodel; new building construction and extensive remodel; Fully bonded and insured; Completed on time. Pomolita Middle School, August 1995 Ukiah, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects; $2,800,000 Moderni:ation general contract. Ukiah Unified School District. Yokayo Elementary School, 1995 Ukiah, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects; $1,030,000 Modernization general contact; 15,000 sqfr. Extensive remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Ukiah Regional Conference Center, 1994 Ukiah, CA; Carlstrom Architects; $1,200,000 Remodel general contract; 20,000 sqft. Extensive remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Calpella Elementary School, 1994 Ca[pella, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects; $200,000 Modernization general contract; 12,000 sqft. Remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Hopland Elementary School, 1994 Hopland, CA; Witter Jeffi'ies Architects; $420,000 Modernization general contract; 12,000 sqft. Remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Project Resume Fort Bragg Middle School, 1993 Fort Bragg, CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $730,000 Moderni:ation general contract; 12,000 sqft. Remodel and renovation; Fully bonded and insured. Point Arena High School, 1993 Point Arena Unified School District; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; Fire alarm and communication renovation; Fully bonded and insured. Oakhill Middle School, 1993 Clearlake, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects; $1,450,000 New construction and site work general contract; 11,000 sqft. Classrooms additions; Fully bonded and insured. Mendocino Community School, 1992 Mendocino CA; Quattrocchi Kwok Architects; $840,000 New construction and site work; 5,000 sqfr. New building construction; Fully bonded and insured. Lower Lake Elementary School, 1991 Lower Lake, CA; Witter Jeffries Architects; $95,000 Moderni-_atio~ general contract; 3,000 sqft. Remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Walnut Elementary School, 1990 Clearlake, CA; Heiser & Associated Architects; $1,400,000 New construction and site work general contract; 20,000 sqft. New multi-use and classroom buildings; Fully bonded and insured. San Hedrin Continuation High School, 1989 Willits, CA; Gerald Matson Architects; $520,000 New construction and site work general contract; 8,000 sqft. New classroom building; Fully bonded and insured. Laytonville Elementary School, 1989 Laytonville, CA; Reynolds, Ruono & Chamberlain Architects; $184,000 Framing subcontact; 2,000 sqft. Kindergarten classroom remodel; Fully bonded and insured. Round Valley High School, 1988 Round Valley Unified School District; Marshall & Lee Architects; $219,000 Modernization general contract; 4,000 sqft. Renovation to Ag building; Fully bonded and insured. SIGNATURE(S) OF BIDDER Accompanying this proposal is BTT)nF.R.~ RO]~n (insert the words "cash ($)", "cashier's check" or "bidder's bond", as the case may be) in an amount equal to at least 10 percent of the bid. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as principals are as follows: IMPORTANT NOTICE: If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, provide the legal name of corporation and also the names of the president, secretary, treasurer and manager thereof. If a co-partnership, provide the true name of firm and also the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If bidder or other interested person is an individual, provide the first and last names in full. SEE ATTACHED Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors: License No. 715671 , License Expiration Date [ 1-30-03 Signature(s) of Bidder~ Pg.T.g R~7i CHARD S ON RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION NOTE: If bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall be set forth above together with the signature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidderis a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership; and if bidder is an individual, his or her signature shall be placed above. If a member of a partnership, a Power of Attorney must be on file with the Department pdor to opening bids or submitted with the bid; otherwise, the bid will be disregarded as irregular and unauthorized. Business address: 294 W, SMITH ST. Place of residence: TmTA~_ ~A 95482 311SANEL DR. UKIAH, CA 95482 Dated: 5-20-02 RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION 29 RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION, a division of RCMC, Inc (a California Corporation) Incorporated on July 1, 1995 Rainbow Construction PO BOX 2769 294 West:Smiff~ Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Phone: 707/468-5504 FAX: 707/462-8111 California Contractor's License No. B 715671 Expiration Date 11/30/03 CORPORATE OFFICERS: Peter A. Richardson, Presidem Douglas Y. Anderson, Secretary/Treasure James W. Lambert, Vice President Helon L. Chichester, Vice President Clifford M. McClure, Vice President Michael Soave, Vice President Richard M. Moser, Vice President 10:47 FEOM-RCMC ?0?4628111 BIDDER'S BOND' KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS, that we, ~ Cons~ction, a division of RQv/C, 'mc. T-633 P.003/003 F-Z51 , as PRINCIPAL and Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company , as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Ukiah in the penal sum of 10 PERCENT (10%) OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE BID of the Principal above named, submitted by said Principal to the City of Ukiah, as the case may be, for the work described below, forthe payment of which sum in lawful money of the United States, well and truly to be made, to the City Clerk to which said bid was submitted, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators and successors jointly and ~e_verally, firnply, by.these presents, In no case shall the liability ofthe surety hereunder exceed the sum of $ 30%0 amount.. D3.ct THE CONDITION OF THIS OBUGATION IS SUCH, that whereas the Principal has submitted the above mentioned bid to the City of Ukiah, as aforesaid, for certain construction specifically described as follows, for which bids are to be opened at the Office of the City Clerk, Ukiah Civic Center, Ukiah, California, on (DATE} for CONSTRUCTION OF CIVIC CENTER ADDITION NOW, THEREFORE, If the aforesaid Principal is awarded the contract and, within the time and manner required under the specifications, after the prescribed forms are presented to him or her for signatures, ertl:ers into a written contract, in the prescribed form, in accordance with the bid and files two bonds with the City of Ukiah, one to guarantee faithful performance and the other to guarantee payment for labor and materials, as required by law, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,.we have hereunto set ourhands and seals on this 1 6~h day of May A.D. 2002 .- , ._, Rainbow Construction, a divisicn of N2M~, /nc. _(sea0 (Seal) _(Seal) .(Seal) (Seal) _(Seal) Address: 187 ~ BI'~. ~ 1;I~a,CA' 95403 3O CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Sonoma ISS, on 05/16/02 , before me, Kelly L. Cole Date Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public") personally appeared Mike Feeney Attorney-in-Fact Name(s) of Signer(s) [] personally known to me [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence KELLY L. COLE COMM. 1273529 NOTARY PUBLIC CALIFORNIA so. oMA cou. My Comm. Expires Aug. 11, 2004 to be the person(s) whose name(s)is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WlTN, ES/S my hand and_offic~l seal. Place Notary Seal Above ' - --~.¥n~tu-~ of Notary Public -- OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached..l~o. cl.~ment Title or Type of Document: PIG Document Date: 05/16/02 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer-- Title(s): [] Partner_ Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here 1997 National Notary Association - 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402 - Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 ' %SlPaul POWER OF ATTORNEY Seaboard Surety Company St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. Power of Attorney No. 23022 Certificate No. 1085674 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Seaboard Surety Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of New York, and that St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company and St.. Paul Mercury Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and that United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Maryland, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Wisconsin (herein collectively called the "Companies"), and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint Robert H. Durler, Mike Feeney. J. D. West and Thomas F. Feeney Santa Rosa California of the City of State , their true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to sign its name as surety to, and to execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, undertakings, contracts and other written instruments in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law. IN WITNi~iSS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instrument to be signed and sealed this 211d day of Janllary ,2002~. ee State of Maryland City of Baltimore Seaboard Surety Company United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company ~g!....$1t~v..i~j JOHN F. PHINNEY, Vice President THOMAS E. HUIBREGTSE, Assistant Secretary On this 2nd day of January , 2002 , before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeared John F. Phinney and Thomas E. Huibregtse, who acknowledged themselves to be the Vice President and Assistalat Secretary, respectively, of Seaboard Surety Company, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company, St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, and Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc.; and that the seals affixed to the foregoing instrument are the corporate seals of said Companies; and that they, as such, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained by signing the names of the corporations by themselves as duly authorized officers. In Witness Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and official seal. My Commission expires the 13th day of July, 2002. REBECCA EASLEY-ONOKALA, Notary Public 86203 Rev. 7-2000 Printed in U.S.A. NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT Note: Bidder shall execute the affidavit on this page prior to submittinq his or her bid. To City Council, City of Ukiah' The undersigned in submitting a bid for performing CONSTRUCTION OF CiViC CENTER ADDITION by contract, being duly sworn, deposes and says: that he or she has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with such contract. Si n~..~}~ of Bidder - PETER RICHARDSON Business Address: RCMC, INC. DBA RAINBOW CONSTRUCTION 294 W. SMITH ST. UKIAH, CA 95482 Place of Residence: 311SANEL DR. UKIAH. CA 95482 NOTARIZATION Subscribed and sworn to before me this c~/~ day of /~a~ / Notary Public in and for the County My Commission Expires ,~OL/~,/~e , State of California. Comm. # 1242478 NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORffiA Msndocino County """" My Comm. Expires Nov. 19, 2003 l~aY-21-02 TUE 12:52 PI~ OITY OF UKIaH FaX NO, 7074636204 P, 01/01 ADDENDUM NO. 2 UKIAH CIVIC CENTER 411 CLAY STREET ADDITION PROJECT SPECIFICATION 02-06 Addendum Issue: May 20, 2002 Bid Due Date: May 22, 2002 (Bid opening date, time and location are unchanged) PART I- GENERAL ! SCOPE This Addendum forms a part of the Bidding and Contract Documents and modifies the Project Spedrfications as described below. 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Bidder shall acknowledge receipt of this Addendum in the space provided at the end of this document and include a copy with submittal of bid. PART II - PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS AND BID DOCUMENTS Addendum No. 1 is issued primarily to amend Section 09680- CARPET, specifically part 2.02- Materials, line B.I., deleting reference to conference moms and revise the minimum weight. Also hereby amended is Section 09680, Line B.2., deleting the words "Lobbies" and '~to The Specifications are hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Line B.I., Offices: Minimum 40oz per sq. yd. weight, 5/16' thick, and 2. Line B.2., Corridors, and Cledcal Areas: Minimum 40oz per sq. yd. weight, 5/16" thick. END OF ADDENDUM NO. 2 Bidder acknowledges by signature below that the information contained in this Addendum has been carefully considered in preparing Proposal. Bidder shall include a signed copy of this Addendum at the time proposal is submitted. Signed: Date: _ 5' } 22.J 2.. / ADDENDUM NO. 1 UKIAH CiViC CENTER 411 CLAY STREET ADDITION PROJECT SPECIFICATION 02-06 Addendum Issue: Bid Due Date: May 20, 2002 May 22, 2002 (Bid opening date, time and location are unchanged) PART ! - GENERAL SCOPE This Addendum forms a part of the Bidding and Contract Documents and modifies the Project Specifications as described below. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Bidder shall acknowledge receipt of this Addendum in me space provided at the end of this document and include a copy with submittal of bid. PART II - PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS AND BID DOCUMENTS Addendum No. '~ is issued to provide all plan holders with the questions, responses and revisions resulting from We May 9 project site walk through. Also included in this Addendum are a revised hardware schedule, and substitution of the roofing underlayment wl~ich are hereby Incorporated into the Specifications and Details. In addition, this Addendum hereby deletes the sample Payment Request Form included in the Specifications and Details. This form was Intended to provide a generic example only. Any reference to a specific con~ctor within the form is inadvertent. Pay requests shall be submitted on a form to be agreed upon by the owner and contractor and in accordance with all requirements defined in Section 10 of the Specifications and Details. . Attachment #1 includes all questions, responses and revisions resulting from the May 9 project site walk through. Attachment #2 provides a revised hardware schedule, Attachment # 3 p~ovides an acceptable substitution for the roofing underlayment. , Delete sample Pay Request Form END OF ADDENDUM NO. 1 Bidder acknowledges by signature below that the informatior~ contained In this Addendum has been carefully considered in preparing Proposal. Bidder shall include a signed copy of this Addendum at the time proposal is submitted. Specification 02-06 Addendum No. 1 May 18, 2002 May 22, 2002 CON I'RUCTION, INC. 501 St. Mary's Avenue Hopland, CA 95449 (707) 744-1905 FAX (707) 744-9271 ATTACHMENT.,., · MAY 23 2002 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEFARTMENT Mr. Larry DeKnoblough City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue UKIAH, CA 95482 Dear Mr. DeKnoblough, We appreciated the opportunity to bid on your Civic Cemer Addition project. You and Richard Ruffwere very helpful in addressing our pre-bid questions. Our bid response complies with the plans and specifications. That is: The entire specification book was incorporated as part of our bid response, as detailed in Section 1, Proposal Requirements and General Conditions, Paragraph 1-03, Proposal. No pages were removed from the Special Provisions nor were additional pages added unique to our business. A licensed roofing subcontractor, pre-approved by Duro-Last, Inc., was listed on our Subcontractor List, complying with Section 07533, Flexible Sheet Roof'mg System, Paragraphs 1.1.B. 1 and 1.2. (see enclosed Duro-Last, Inc. approved installer list provided by Chris Hemphill, Duro-Last, Inc.) We have assembled a team of professionals anxious to get started and build the quality finished product you deserve. And to that end, we ask that you assure all licensing and certification is valid, and you make your selection of the General Contractor based on the lowest qualified bidder meeting the guidelines of the plans and specifications. We look forward to working with you and your staff on this important project. Sincerely, Rick Cupples Cupples & Sons Construction, Inc. ,05/18/2002 J1:41 FAX 925 $29 8250 C P ~ DURO LAST A n C Roofing Inc. Ken Alton Ownm' 1400 Petaluma H'E Road Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Sonoma Bill Femte~ Roollng Bi~ Fenner Owner 1171 Mountain Pine Road Cbverdate, CA 95425 Sonoma 716481 E.I'. Roofing Tefk Tofkelsen Pms'~ent 754 North Bush Street Ukiah. CA 95482 Mendocino 747195 Ex,o: 03/18/00 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CL'~,,'$ 5F-PARTMENT Phone: 707-575-1675 Fax: 707-57~-1910 Phorte: 707894-4919 Car Phone: 707-695.4S898 Pager: 707-329-7670 Phone: 707..468-8339 Fmc. 707-462-2644 I. lenris Roo~g Steve Hemis President 741 ~Blvd F~alurn~, CA 94953 220964 RoolI~ Serdeee In,:. Steve Amend 4155 Santa Rosa Ave Santa Rase, CA 95407 522416 Phone: 707-763-1535 Fax: 707-763-2357 ~ Phone: 707-584-9750 Fax: 707-585-1828 Car Phone: 707.4798450 Steve Robmts Owner 5255 Built, hill Drive UkJah, CA 95482 CS9603532 Phone; 707-462-9125 Fax: 707-4624432 Car Phone: 7l)7-489..0921 Pager:. 707-466-2554 *1- 05/15/2002 11:41 FAX 925 82.9 UnderCover Roofing Bruce Cottrell Owner 196 Court Street LJkiah, CA 95482 undemov~r~jps.n~t undercover~,~.net C-39 542127 Exp: 03101199 Phone: 707-462-020.5 Fax: 7'07.462-1771 Car Phone: 707-272-8014 Home Phone: ?o7.483-1635 Pager:. 707-463-9754 AGENDA ITEM NO: 9f MEETING DATE: June 5, 2002 S U F,t F,1 A RY REPORT SUB.1ECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING JULY 3, 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING The first City Council meeting in July is scheduled for the evening of July 3rd, the night before the Thursday, July 4m holiday. Staff has determined that there are no crucial items to bring forward at that meeting, and is asking for Council's approval to cancel the July 3rd Council meeting. RECOHHENDED ACTION: Approve cancellation of July 3, 2002 City Council meeting ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine July 3rd meeting is to be held and take no action to cancel Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved: Candace Ho-rsl~y, Ci~Manager 4:Can/ASR..luly3.060502 AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: 9g June 5, 2002 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE BALLOT MEASURES FOR THE NOVEMBER 2002 ELECTION The Council has discussed and considered several issues for possible inclusion on the November 2002 ballot. Though several topics have been discussed, there has not been a decision by Council to place a particular item on the November ballot at this point in time. Staff is bringing this item to the Council for final determination as to whether the Council wishes to go forward with any measure for the November ballot. RECOMMENDED ACT];ON: Discuss potential ballot measures and take necessary action to place issue(s) on November 2002 election ballot ALTERNATIVE COUNCZL POLTCY OPTTONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Attachments: N/A City Council Candace Horsley, City Manager None Candace Horsley, City~anager 4:Can/ASR. Ballot. 060502 ITEM NO. 9h DATE: June 5, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR EMPLOYEE BARGAINING UNIT- FIRE UNIT The City Manager and City negotiators have met with representatives of the Fire Unit over the past several months to discuss negotiation items for the contract term from October 1, 2001 - September 30, 2005. The negotiations have resulted in a mediated agreement with the Fire Unit. Staff recommends consideration of the Fire Unit Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and adoption of the Resolution approving the MOU for the period of October 1, 2001 through September 30, 2005. The proposed Memorandum of Understanding is being submitted for Council's review and discussion in closed session with the City Manager. If the City Council approves the agreement in closed session, then adoption of the attached resolution in open public session would be necessary. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider MOU and adopt resolution approving Memorandum of Understanding for the Fire Unit for the term of October 1,2001 - September 30, 2005. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: . Do not adopt resolution. Refer to Staff for amendments. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Melody Harris, Personnel Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution Adopting Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Ukiah and the Fire Unit APPROVED; ~---'"' Can"h'dace Ho'rsley, C~y I~nager 3:MOU~SRMOU.FIR RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADOPTING MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF UKIAH AND THE FIRE UNIT WHEREAS, the Employee/Employer Relations Officer has met and conferred in good faith with representatives of the Fire Unit; and WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding for the term of October 1, 2001 - September 30, 2005 has been agreed to; and WHEREAS, said Memorandum of Understanding has been presented to the City Council for its consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Memorandum of Understanding is hereby adopted and the Employee/Employer Relations Officer is authorized to enter into this Agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of June 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Phillip Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk 3:mou\resmoufire