HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-03 PacketITEM NO. 3a
MEETING DATE: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL VIEWING OF FIRE PREVENTION SAFETY TRAILER
Available for City Council's purview is the new Fire Prevention Safety Trailer that was
presented to the fire chiefs of Mendocino County by Soroptimist International. Our local
Soroptimist service group worked long hours to fundraise for the completion of this Fire
Prevention Safety Trailer, which houses a replica of a bedroom and kitchen and allows
for training of our youth in what to do in case of fire. The City of Ukiah donated
$31,000 through a FEMA grant for the construction of the trailer, and through local
fundraising, Soroptimist raised over $17,000 to be able to complete this project. Chuck
Yates, of the City's Fire Department, will provide a quick tour of the trailer in front of
the Civic Center fountain.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Tour Fire Prevention Safety Trailer
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizens Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachment:
N/A
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager~J~'"'-
Chuck Yates, Acting Fire Chief
None
Approved: ~~~
C~'~dace H~3rsley, c~/Manager
4: CAN/AS RTrailer. 032902
TION
WTtEREAS, Small Wonders State Preschool and the Redwood Empire Association for the
Education of Young Children, in conjunction with the )~rationalAssociation for the Education of
Young ChiIdren, are ceIebrating the ~Veek of the Young ChildApril 7-13; and
WHEREAS, this celebration will include a children's parade and children's art sho~v in
do,vnto~vn merchanu ~vindowsl and
VV~-IEREAS, by calling attention to the need for high-quality earIy chiIdhoodser~ices for all
children and families within our community, these groups hope to improve the quality and
availabiIity of such ser~ces~, and
VVHEREAS, the future of our community depends on the quality of the early childhood
experiences pro~ided to young chiIdren today~' and
WTtEREAS, high quality early childhood ser~ices represent a worthy commitment to our
children's future.
NO V~, THEREFORE, I, Philh'p Ashi&u, Mayor of the City of Ul~'ah, on behalf of my fellow ~
City CounciImembers, PhilBaldwin, Kathy Libby~ Roy Smith, and~ric Larson do herebyprocIaim
April 7-13 as the
VVEEK OF THE YOUNG CHILD IN UKIAH
and urge ail citizens to recognize and support the needs of young chiIdren in our community.
Philh'p Ashiku, Mayor
Date: April3, 2002
WHEREAS, the Court Appointed Special Advocates, or CASA, of Mendocino ~
County, in association with the National CASA Association speaks for the best interests
of abused and neglected children who are involved in the juvenile courts; and
WHEREAS, more than 4,300 reports of abuse or neglect were made in our county
in the year 2000; and
WHEREAS, through a national effort, Ukiah community members are
encouraged to join together to raise awareness throughout the month of April for those
children fallen victim to abuse and neglect; and
WHEREAS, this effort will give abused and neglected children in our
community, and around the country, a chance for a safe and positive future.
WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah prides itself for giving back to the community and
contributing to the quality of life among its citizens; and
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Phillip Ashiku, Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of
my fellow City Councilmembers Phil Baldwin, Kathy Libby, Roy Smith, and Eric Larson,
proclaim April 2002 as
UKIAH CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION
AND AWARENESS MONTH
in this city, and in doing so, urge all citizens to join in a national effort to raise awareness
and help prevent child abuse and neglect.
April 3, 2002
Phillip Ashiku, Mayor
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, every year many workers across America are injured or disabled by
workplace injuries and occupational disease; and
WHEREAS, strong safety and health protections, high employment standards,
and the elimination of perilous conditions should be guiding principles for each
employer and employee; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah strives to provide a safe work environment for its
employees and has initiated many programs and procedures to reduce workplace
injuries and hazardous situations; and
WHEREAS, all employers and employees are encouraged to rededicate
themselves to improving safety and health in every American workplace; and
WHEREAS, acknowledgment of these factors by recognizing those who have
suffered from workplace injuries is a dramatic method of educating our community
about this issue. .
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Phillip Ashiku, Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of
my fellow City Councilmembers Phil Baldwin, Kathy Libby, Roy Smith, and Eric Larson,
proclaim April 28, 2002 as
WORKERS MEMORIAL DAY IN THE CITY OF UKIAH
in recognition of workers injured, and disabled on the job and inform all residents of the
valley about the gathering and pot luck picnic beginning at noon at Alex Thomas Plaza
on April 28 put on by the working men and women in Mendocino County to observe
this special day.
~ ·
Phillip Ashiku, Mayor
VVHER~S~ poetry has been a ~itaI element of the human spirit since before the written
~vordand the essence o£bard~ an/muses for centuries~ Iaunching armies into hattie, espous~ the
~R~ verse h~ been ~e b~is for e~Ig menraI ~mn~rics and ~e [oundanbn
learning and understan~ deh~hting bo~ young and olde ah~e: and
~EH~ U~i~ spelled bac~ard is *~ai~u ~ a MedievM form of Japanese poetr~ still
~R~ ApriI is ceIebrared ~ National ~oerr~ Month throughout this grand Iand
cities and to~s large andsmM~, and
~EH~ ~e Ci~ o[ U~i~ h~ joined ~e gro~ng league o[Poet Lauream program
sponsors to heighten public awareness o[~e benefiu of poetr~
~0 ~ THEHEFOH~ ~ Philh~ ~hi~u, Mayor of ~e Ci~ of U~i~, on behMf of m? ~llo,v
Ci~ Councilmember~ Phil~aldwin, ~yLibb~ ~oy Smi~, andEric ~rson do herebyprocIaim
POETR YMONTH IN UK H
and urge ~l citizens m attendscheduIedpoetry rea~gs ~roughout our communi~ participate in
the ~oem of the Da~' program at ~e U~iah Librar% join ~e region ~ Poet ~ureates in their
special session at ~e Grace Huron Museum~ and learn poetrTpowen which can ~owen into a
Date~ April ~ 2~2
Philh~hi~u, Ma~or
ITEM NO. sa
DATE: APRIL 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION BY ARMAND BRINT, CITY OF UKIAH POET LAUREATE,
REGARDING POET LAUREATE PROGRAM
At its meeting of June 20, 2001, the City Council appointed Armand Brint as the City of
Ukiah's first Poet Laureate and requested details of the Poet Laureate program be formulated.
Mr. Brint wishes to present the recommendations of the steering committee to the Council, and
also read a poem as a commencement of the festivities for April as National Poetry Month.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:Receive presentation of Poet Laureate Program and poem
reading by Armand Brint, City of Ukiah Poet Laureate.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
Yes
Poet Laureate
Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer
Candace Horsley, City Manager
None
APPROVEEX._~~
Candace Horsley,
mth:asrcc02
0403POET
Manager
6a
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
City Clerk Marie Ulvila ~~_~' ~.L~,~'Z'~.~
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes: March 20, 2002
DATE: March 28, 2002
As you may be aware, I have been away from my office for a week. Every
attempt will be made to provide Council with the draft minutes of the March 20,
2002 City Council meeting no later than Tuesday, April 2, 2002.
Memos: CC031502 - Minutes
8a
Item No.
Date: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the Preparation and Filing of a
Petition for Change in Place of Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and of the City
Entering into a Cost Sharing Agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County
Water District, and the Calpella Water District.
REPORT: The City of Ukiah, as a requirement of the State Water Resource Control Board,
must submit a Petition for Change in Place of Use. The petition is required to identify water
utilized by Willow County Water Agency, Millview County Water Agency, Calpella Water
District and the City of Ukiah, through the emergency intertie. Each of the Water Districts is
also required to submit a petition for change in use, relative to the transfer of water through
the emergency intertie. Rather than each Water District submitting a separate petition, staff
believes it would be more cost effective to prepare a single petition that would cover all users
of the emergency intertie. A meeting was held with the Water Districts and a representative
of Wagner & Bonsignore to describe the proposal for a joint petition. All Districts agreed that
a joint petition would be the most cost effective method of meeting the requirement, in
addition to giving the Districts flexibility relative to transfer of water. Wagner & Bonsignore
will prepare and submit the petition on behalf of all parties.
Total cost for preparation and filing of the petition would be approximately $15,000. It
was agreed that the cost of the project be shared by each district based on its number of
water connections. As a result, the City of Ukiah's share of the project would be
approximately $7,500. It was agreed that Wagner & Bonsignore would bill the City of Ukiah
for the project. The City would then bill the individual Districts for their share of the costs. As
noted in the proposal from Wagner & Bonsignore the petition is subject to the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the filing of the petition may require
the preparation of an environmental document. The proposed project cost, does not include
the preparation of any environmental documents.
( Continued on Page 2 )
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the Preparation
and Filing of a Petition for Change in Place of Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and
a Cost Sharing Agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District,
and the Calpella Water District.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Approval and Define Alternative.
Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachment: 1) Wagner & Bonsignore Proposal
Candace Horsley, City'lVlanager
( Page 2 )
In the event this document exceeds the abilities of city staff, a request for additional funding
will be presented to the Council.
Staff recommends that the City Council approve retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for
the preparation of the Petition of Change in Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and
participation in a cost sharing agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County
Water District and Calpella Water District.
Nicholas F. Bonsignore, P.E.
Robert C. Wagner, P.E.
Paula J. Whealen
Monique Robbins, P.E.
Ryan E. Stolfus
WagnerSd3Onsignore
Consulting Civil Engineers, A Corporation
March 12, 2002
Mr. Darryl Barnes, Director
of Public Utilities
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Mr. Dave Redding, General Manager
Willow County Water District
151 Laws Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Mr. Tim Bradley, General Manager
Millview County Water District
308! N. State Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Re: Petitions for Change in Place of Use
Dear Messrs. Barnes, Bradley and Redding:
It was nice to have an oppommity to meet with you last week regarding the place of use
issue for your respective appropriative water rights. We understand that the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has directed the City of Ukiah (City), and Millview and
Willow County Water Districts (Millview and Willow) to correct their respective places of use
named in their appropriative water fights. The' corrections are required.because the City,
Millview and Willow have executed Interconnection Agreements to serve water to each other
during certain emergency situations. Further, we understand that the City, Millview and Willow
are also serving water to areas outside the places of use allowed by their water fights.
The statutory process for changing the place of use for an appropriative water fight permit
or license is initiated by filing a petition with the SWRCB. An engineered map must accompany
the petition delineating the requested lands. The petition is subject to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the action may require the preparation of an
environmental document (either a Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact
Report).
44/.' North Third Street, Suite 325, Sacramento, California 958140228
Ph: 916~qI/,'1-C~50 Fx: 916448-3866
Mr. Darryl Barnes
Mr. Tim Bradley
Mr. Dave Redding
March 12, 2002
Page 2
As we discussed, we believe it would be the most cost effective and expedient for the
entities to prepare a joint map and petition package requesting the changes in the places of use.
The map would include the individual places of use for the City, Millview and Willow. We
understand we will also need to include the place of use of Calpella County Water District since
Millview has the ability to serve water to Calpella.
Our office would be happy to prepare these Petitions for change in place of use for
submittal to the SWRCB on your behalf. We anticipate our work to include coordination with
representatives from the City, Willow and Millview for identifying the individual places of use,
preparation of the required petitions, environmental information form and the engineering.map to
accompany the petitions. We will prepare an Initial Study Checklist pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act to determine the type of environmental document required for the
petitions. We expect it will be necessary to meet with the SWRCB staff prior to and at the time
of submittal of the petition package.
We plan to complete this work prior to July 1, 2002 (as agreed to by the SWRCB in
correspondence to you) and that it will require a budget in the range of $12-15,000. This amount
does not include the required SWRCB and Department of Fish and Game filing fees~ or any
environmental document that will need to be prepared. If the parties decide to accept this
proposal, we understand that you will need to develop cost sharing agreements for the division of
project costs and that the City of Ukiah will assume responsibility for billing the participants and
payment of invoices.
Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this matter. We look forward to
having the opportunity to work with each of you.
Very truly yours,
WAGNER & BONSIGNORE
~SULTING C~RS
ea~
COUW024.DOC
~ The SWRCB's petition filing fee is $100 per application and the Department ofFish and Game will require an
environmental fee of $850 l~om each entity.
Wae er&Bonsi ore
Co'fi~ultinl~ Civil Enl!~ineers, A Cor~6ration
ITEM NO:
DATE: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH A STRUCTURE OVER 50 YEARS OLD
LOCATED 744 SOUTH STATE STREET, UKIAH
SUMMARY: The owner of the property located at 744 South State Street has applied for a Demolition
Permit to demolish the Mr. Frostie's commercial building on the site. The structure was built in 1948, is
in disrepair, and the owner would like to demolish it. The structure is over 50 years old, and therefore,
according to the Ukiah Municipal Code (UMC), the City Council must conduct a public hearing to review
and consider the historical and architectural significance of the structure.
On March 13, 2002, the City Demolition Permit Review Committee considered the application and
Historical Profile prepared by Judy Pruden, and unanimously found that none of the criteria in UMC
Section 3016(E) (attachment 4) applied, and therefore the structure is not historically or architecturally
significant. However, the Committee found that the ice cream cone sign on the building may be the
original 1948 "Frosty Shoppe" sign, and concluded that every attempt should be made to salvage it.
Staff is prepared to discuss the mechanics of salvaging the sign with the contractor and property owner
prior to issuance of the Permit. Based on the recommendation of the Project Review Committee, Staff is
recommending approval of the Demolition Permit.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Demolition Permit for the structure located at 744 South State
Street based on the finding the structure does not have historical or architectural significance.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not approve the Demolition Permit, and provide
processing direction to staff as to the structure's future disposition.
Citizen Advised: Noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code
Requested by: Inglenook Partners, Property Owner
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Demolition Permit Application
Location Map
Historical Profile (Pruden)
Ukiah Municipal Code Section 3016
Demolition Permit Review Committee Minutes, Dated March 13, 2002
CEQA Exemption
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, C~'ty lanager
~u
80:1
IlWU;ld ONIQllng
NOliVDIlddV
6gz, g-gglz (/.0/_) 'hd
E~8izcj6 ¥0 'HVI>IN
'BAV AblVNIIAi=IS 00~
AdOO ~IOIO=JdSNI
PLOT PLAN
Address: Assessor's Parcel No:
Property Owner:
Instructions to Applicant
This form need not be used when plot plans drawn to scale of not less than 1"=20' are filed
with permit application (each building site must have a separate plot plan).
Provide the following information in the space below: Location of proposed construction and
existing improvements; setback dimensions, show easements, street frontage and sewer
service elevation. Show location of water, sewer, gas and electrical service lines. Specify
the use of each building and major portion thereof.
INDICATE NORTH IN SQUARE
'SCALE "= '
I/We certify that the proposed construction will conform to the dimensions and uses shown above and that no changes will be made
w~ng approval.,. ~-~ , .~
Signature of Owner(s) or Authorized Representative ' ' ~-
KAYO
~OOL
PROJECT SITE -
DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION
744 SOUTH STATE STREET
MR. FROSTIE'S
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
March 11, 2002
TO:
Demolition Review Committee
FROM: 3udy Pruden, Chairman
SUB.1ECT: 744 SOUTH STATE STREET
In the 1800's State Street was the original stagecoach road that served Ukiah. Later State
Street became the famous Redwood Highway 101, in the 1920's. The road has been
widened several times and early pictures show it to be a two-lane, tree-lined road. With the
beginning of the automobile culture, State Street became our main commercial corridor with
numerous auto camps, cafes, ice cream-juice bars, and gas stations.
Originally known as the "Frosty Shoppe" an ice cream shop, 744 South State Street was
originally built north of the Rock Shop near the Gobbi-State Street intersection in 1948. After
the 1950 Ukiah Grange fire, the shop moved to its current location. The Getchell family
owned the business from 1948 to about 1973. Mrs. Getchell, who is still alive, indicated the
Iow-overhead and strong demand for ice cream and other fast-foods made it "a cash-flow"
for her family.
The building has been remodeled and the equipment updated. The structure has retained its
original look, however, there are no unique or special architecture. The building has some
salvage value for materials and equipment. The historical interest lies in its commercial past,
which is interesting but not a significant contributor to our commercial history. The one item
that does need to be saved is the ice cream sign. It is thought to be the original "Frosty
Shoppe" sign. T,be held-poage library is willing to receive it as a donation or the owner may
choose to save/or sell it. There is a very active market for commercial memorabilia in
Mendocino C/~ nty.
R:DEMO:KK
,.
3016: MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE:
mo
Bo
Co
Do
The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to applications for building permits is
modified to require in an application to demolish a building, the date when the building was
first constructed, if known.
The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to permit issuance, is modified to require
that, as to buildings constructed fifty (50) years or more prior to the date of application, the
Director of Planning or his/her designee shall determine whether:
1. The building is an accessory building such as, but not limited to, a garage, storage shed, or
carport, whether attached or detached to a main building; except that certain accessory
buildings, such as carriage houses, which are presumed to have historic or architectural
significance shall be subject to further review as provided in subsection D of this Section,
unless the building is subject to demolition under subsection B2 of this Section.
2. Immediate demolition of the building is necessary to protect the public health or safety
and the failure to immediately demolish the building would constitute a serious threat to the
public health or safety.
If subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, no further review shall be
required under this Section and the permit shall be issued in accordance with the provisions
of the Uniform Building Code.
If the Planning Director finds that neither of the exceptions in subsection B 1 or B2 of this
Section applies to the building, the demolition permit shall be subject to further review in
accordance with this Section. The Planning Director shall transmit the proposal to the
Demolition Permit Review Committee, or other official reviewing body established by the
City Council, for review, comment, and a recommendation to the City Council. Once the
Demolition Permit Review Committee formulates a recommendation concerning the
disposition of the proposed demolition permit, the Planning Director shall schedule and duly
notice the matter for a public hearing and decision by the City Council. The public noticing
shall indicate the day, time, place, and purpose of the public hearing, and how additional
information about the subject matter can be obtained. The public noticing shall be
accomplished in the following manner:
1. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten (10) days prior to
the hearing.
2. Mailing or delivery at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the owner(s) of the subject
property, or his/her agent, and to the project applicant, if the applicant is not the owner.
Uo
Fo
Go
3. First class mail notice to all owners (as shown on the latest available Mendocino County
Tax Assessor's equalized assessment roll) of property within three hundred feet (300') of the
subject property.
In reviewing proposed demolition permits, and formulating recommendations to the City
Council, the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall consider any information provided
during the meeting, and shall use the following criteria. The structure:
1. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving
example of its kind; or
2. Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political,
aesthetic, or architectural history; or
3. Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, State, or national history.
If the Demolition Permit Review Committee finds that any of the criteria listed in subsection
E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition, it shall recommend denial of
the demolition permit to the City.
1. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to subsection D of this Section
to consider the recommendation of the Demolition Permit Review Committee, and to
determine if any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building
proposed for demolition. If the City Council determines that any one of the criteria apply, it
shall make a corresponding finding to that effect.
2. At the hearing, the applicant shall have the opportunity to present evidence that a viable
market does not exist for the building, taking into account the condition of the building, the
probable cost to put the building into marketable condition, and the uses of the property
allowed under existing or probable future zoning regulations. The City Council shall
consider such evidence offered by the applicant and any other information presented at the
meeting by any interested party or by staff, to determine whether or not a viable market
exists. "Viable market" means that it is reasonably likely that the building could be sold
within a commercially reasonable period of time for more than the seller would be required
to invest in the purchase of the property and preparing the property for sale, or that the
property could produce a reasonable return on the amount of money it would take to
purchase the property and prepare the building for income producing purposes. "Reasonable
return" means the average rate of return on real estate investments in the Ukiah Valley.
3. If the City Council determines that a viable market exists:
a. It shall so notify the Building Official who shall not issue the demolition permit. The
City Council shall determine whether a viable market exists based on substantial
evidence presented at the hearing, or, it may assume that a viable market exists, if the
applicant fails to present substantial evidence that a viable market does not exist;
b. Not more than once within any twelve (12) month period, the applicant may submit a
new application for a demolition permit and the City Council may reconsider whether a
viable market exists:
(1) Upon a showing by the applicant that market conditions have changed; or
(2) Based upon new information that in the exercise of reasonable diligence the
applicant could not have produced at the first hearing.
4. If the City Council determines, based on substantial evidence, that a viable market does
not exist, the issuance of the demolition permit shall be stayed for a period of ninety (90)
days.
a. During that ninety (90) day period, the City shall do the following:
(1) Determine whether other alternatives to demolition exist, which are acceptable to
the applicant, that would preserve the historic, architectural or cultural significance of
the building;
(2) Determine whether funds are available from any private source for the acquisition
and preservation of the building through a negotiated purchase on terms acceptable to
the applicant; or
(3) If sufficient funds are available from any private source and a negotiated purchase
is not possible, determine whether to acquire the building through eminent domain.
b. If within the ninety (90) days, the City does not reach agreement with the applicant or
commence acquisition of the building, the Building Official may issue the permit in
accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code.
c. If within the ninety (90) day period, the City either: 1) reaches agreement with the
applicant or 2) commences acquisition of the building, the Building Official shall not
issue the demolition permit.
d. However, the Building Official shall continue to process the application for a
demolition permit in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, if the City and the
applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or abandons
acquisition of the building.
e. The City Manager or his/her designee shall inform the Building Official whenever the
Ho
City .and the applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or
abandons acquisition of the building.
f. If the Building Official has issued a demolition permit under this subsection and the
permittee applies to extend the permit an additional one hundred eighty (180) days in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect,
the Building Official shall refer the application to the City Manager for an initial
determination as to whether market conditions have changed. The City Manager shall
make the determination within ten (10) days after the application is referred by the
Building Official. If the City Manager determines that market conditions may have
changed and that a viable market may exist for the property, he or she shall schedule the
matter for a hearing before the City Council to be noticed and conducted in accordance
with subsections D and G of this Section. However, at the hearing the City shall have the
burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that market conditions have
changed and a viable market exists. If the City Manager determines that market
conditions have not changed, he or she shall so notify the Building Official and the
applicant. Upon such notification, the Building Official shall further process the
application to extend the term of the demolition permit in accordance with the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code then in effect. If the City Council conducts a
hearing upon referral by the City Manager, the City Clerk shall provide written
notification to the Building Official and the applicant of the City Council decision. If the
City Council decides that a viable market exists, the Building Official shall not issue the
permit, but the provisions of subsection G3b of this Section shall apply. If the City
Council decides that a viable market does not exist, the Building Official immediately
shall proceed to further process the application in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect.
5. "Diligently pursue acquisition" means taking all steps within the time required by law to
acquire the building by eminent domain.
6. References to "applicant" herein shall include the building owner.
The Planning Director shall provide a written notice of the City Council determination to the
applicant. The written notification shall be mailed or hand delivered within five (5) days
from the date of the City Council's decision. The notice shall include the finding(s) and
decision made by the City Council and a copy of this Section.
The applicant for a demolition permit for a building determined to have historic,
architectural or cultural significance shall salvage the building materials for reuse to the
maximum extent feasible, and shall ensure that upon completion of the demolition, the site is
left in a safe, presentable, and clutter free condition.
J. Reconsideration Of Decisions:
1. Grounds For Reconsideration: The City Council may reconsider a decision under this
Section within sixty (60) calendar days from the date the decision was made, if information
that may have materially affected the decision was: a) misrepresented by the applicant, or b)
not disclosed by the applicant, if the applicant knew or should have known that the
information may have affected the City Council decision. "Information" as used herein
means matters of fact or law.
A decision may not be reconsidered, if all three (3) of the following have occurred. The
demolition permit: a) has been issued, b) did not at the time it was issued violate any
provision of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City, or any other City ordinance
or State or Federal law, and c) the permittee has commenced demolition in good faith
reliance on the permit.
2. Procedure On Reconsideration: Reconsideration of a decision under this Section may be
placed on the agenda for a regular City Council meeting by any member of the City Council
who voted in favor of the original decision. Notice of any meeting where reconsideration is
on the agenda shall be provided in accordance with subsection D of this Section. If already
issued, the permit shall be suspended from the date that an eligible City Council member
requests that the matter be placed on the agenda and until the City Council makes a final
decision upon reconsideration. The Building Official shall notify the applicant in writing of
the permit suspension. At the meeting, the City Council shall determine, based on evidence
provided to the City prior to or during the meeting, whether reconsideration is permitted
under subsection J 1 of this Section. Any motion to reconsider the decision shall contain
findings supported by substantial evidence. If upon reconsideration the City Council makes
a different decision, the City Clerk shall provide notice of that decision to the Building
Official and the applicant/permittee within five (5) working days after the decision is made.
If, upon reconsideration, the City Council determines that a building has historic,
architectural, or cultural significance, and the Building Official has issued a demolition
permit based on the previous decision, the Building Official shall revoke the permit. If the
previously issued permit has expired, the Building Official shall deny an application for a
new permit, unless the permit is issued in accordance with subsection G4 of this Section.
(Ord. 838, §1, adopted 1984; Ord. 927, §1, adopted 1992; Ord. 1014, §1, adopted 1998)
DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW
COMMITTEE MEETING
March 13, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT
Diana Steele
Brian Keefer
Carl Tuliback
Judy Pruden, Chairman
Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT
None
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Demolition Review was called to order
by Chairman Pruden at 10:00 a.m. in the Conference Room 1, 300 Seminary
Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 26, 2002
ON A MOTION by Member Steele, seconded by Member Tuliback, it was carried
by an all AYE voice vote of the members present to approve the February 26,
2002 minutes, as submitted.
4. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No one from the audience was present.
5. APPEAL PROCESS
Chairman Pruden dispensed with reading of the appeal process, as no one from
the audience was present. She noted the applicant was not present at the
hearing.
6. DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A,
744 South State Street, (Assessor Parcel Number 003-031-71)
Inglenook Partners
Chairman Pruden provided a brief history of the aforementioned building
originally known as the "Frosty Shoppe" built north of the Rock Shop near the
Gobbi-State Street intersection in 1948. The business was moved to its present
location after the lot was reconfigured when a fire destroyed the original Ukiah
Grange in the 1950s. The building retained its original appearance despite
renovations and equipment update. The building possesses no unique or special
architecture features although some of its materials and/equipment could be
salvaged. The historical interest does not pertain to the building but in its
commercial past.
Demolition Permit Review
March 13, 2002
Page
Ms. Pruden stated one item that should be salvaged as commercial memorabilia
is the ice cream sign thought to be the original "Frosty Shoppe" sign. The owner
may choose to save, sell or donate the sign to The Held-Poage Library.
Member Tuliback made a note to the file that the sign issue would be
appropriately addressed with the contractor/owner.
There was a general discussion relevant to future plans for the site. It was noted
the area would more than likely be utilized for parking accommodations as the
Ukiah Grange building located to the rear of the building has been sold to a
commercial business.
ON A MOTION by Member Tuliback, seconded by Member Keefer, it was carried
by an all AYE voice vote of the members present to recommend the City Council
approve demolition of the building located at 744 South State Street based on
the Finding that there is no significant architectural merit or significant historical
association.
7. NEW BUSINESS
There was no discussion relevant to this agenda item.
8. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 10:21 a.m.
Judy Pruden, Chairman
Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
Demolition Permit Review
March 13, 2002
Page
TO:
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
County Clerk FROM:
County of Mendocino
Courthouse
Ukiah, CA 95482
PROJECT TITLE: Mr. Frostie's Demolition Permit
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The project involves the demolition of a small commercial buildinq over 50
years old with no historical or architectural significance.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: 744 South State Street, Ukiah, CA
PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVING PROJECT: City of Ukiah
NAME OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Iglenook Partnership, Owner
CEQA EXEMPTION STATUS:
'/ Ministerial
'/ Declared Emergency
'/ Categorical Exemption Section 15301, Class 1(I)
'/ Statutory Exemption Section
REASONS WHY PROJECT IS EXEMPT: The structure possess no historical or architectural significance,
and otherwise complies with the CEQA exemption criteria in terms of number and location of demolitions.
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Charley Stump
TELEPHONE: (707} 463-6200
SlGNATURE:
TITLE: Planning Director/Environmental Coordinator
DATE:
ITEM NO:
10b
DATE' April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH A STRUCTURE OVER 50 YEARS OLD
LOCATED AT 109 HIGHLAND AVENUE, UKIAH
SUMMARY: The owner of the property located at 109 Highland Avenue has applied for a Demolition
Permit to demolish a single-family residence on the site. The home was built in 1898, is in disrepair, and
the owner would like to demolish it and sell the property. Interested buyers have indicated that they
would like to construct a new single family residence on the property. The single-family residential
structure is over 50 years old, and therefore, according to the Ukiah Municipal Code (UMC), the City
Council must conduct a public hearing to review and consider the historical and architectural significance
of the structure.
On February 26, 2002, the City Demolition Permit Review Committee considered the application and
Historical Profile prepared by Judy Pruden, and unanimously found that none of the criteria in UMC
Section 3016(E) (attachment 4) applied, and therefore the structure is not historically or architecturally
significant. Accordingly, Staff is recommending approval of the Demolition Permit.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Demolition Permit for the structure located at 109 Highland
Avenue based on the finding the structure does not have historical or architectural significance.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not approve the Demolition Permit, and provide
processing direction to staff as to the structure's future disposition.
Citizen Advised: Noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code
Requested by: Francis Caputo, Property Owner
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Demolition Permit Application
Location Map
Historical Profile (Pruden)
Ukiah Municipal Code Section 3016
Demolition Permit Review Committee Minutes, Dated February 26, 2002
CEQA Exemption
APPROVED:
Candace Hor:s~ey, ~,it~ M~ager
PLOT PLAN
Address: //~
Property Owner:
Assessor's Parcel No: O~/,~2¢P.~ I
Instructions to Applicant
This form need not be used when plot plans drawn to scale of not less than 1"=20' are filed
with permit application (each building site must have a separate plot plan).
Provide the following information in the space below: Location of proposed construction and
existing improvements; setback dimensions, show easements, street frontage and sewer
service elevation. Show location of water, sewer, gas and electrical service lines. Specify
the use of each building and major portion thereof.
INDICATE NOI~TH IN SQUARE
SCALE "=
I/We certi~ that the proposed con.struct_io,~ will cp, nform to the dimensions and uses shown above and that no changes will be made
without first obtaining approval. [~J. (~.~U~.~-, i~ ~ ~ (
Signature of dwner(s) or Authorized Representative
TODD
GROVE
PARK
PROJECT SITE
ITY (
;IVIC
DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION
109 HIGHLAND AVENUE
M.E.M.O.R.A.N'D'U'M
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
February 26, 2002
Charley Stump, Director of Planning
Judy Pruden, Chairman
Demolition Permit Review Committee
109 HIGHLAND AVENUE
The upper western areas between Clay and West Standley Streets were developed as
early as the 1870's. The lots were located on the edge of town and considered rural
properties. The parcels were much larger than the City blocks, and the businesses were
scattered; such as a laundry, broom factory, and a quartz mine.
The first owner was George E. Parker who owned the property for several decades (1890's
to 1920's). Mr. Parker was a prominent rancher but did not reside on the property. The
property appears to have been a rental for one-half of its life. In 1947 Virgil R. Williams, a
"Breeder of Registered Dachshunds" rented the house.
The tax roll indicates the structure was built in 1898. A visual inspection of the house
shows some building elements of this period. However, in 1955 the very small structure
was remodeled by enlarging the house and residing in it. I have been inside the house
many times and there are no decorative interior elements.
This small cottage has no significant architectural merit for the City of Ukiah nor any
significant historical association. The structure does have a salvage value in the 1898 core
area and even potential use as a shed or barn if pulled/moved to a corner of the lot. In
addition the front lot has two redwoods on the City right-of-away, which should be retained.
R:I~PLANNING
MHIGHLAND.109
3016: MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE:
mo
The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to applications for building permits is
modified to require in an application to demolish a building, the date when the building was
first constructed, if known.
Bo
The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to permit issuance, is modified to require
that, as to buildings constructed fifty (50) years or more prior to the date of application, the
Director of Planning or his/her designee shall determine whether:
1. The building is an accessory building such as, but not limited to, a garage, storage shed, or
carport, whether attached or detached to a main building; except that certain accessory
buildings, such as carriage houses, which are presumed to have historic or architectural
significance shall be subject to further review as provided in subsection D of this Section,
unless the building is subject to demolition under subsection B2 of this Section.
2. Immediate demolition of the building is necessary to protect the public health or safety
and the failure to immediately demolish the building would constitute a serious threat to the
public health or safety.
Co
If subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, no further review shall be
required under this Section and the permit shall be issued in accordance with the provisions
of the Uniform Building Code.
D°
If the Planning Director finds that neither of the exceptions in subsection B 1 or B2 of this
Section applies to the building, the demolition permit shall be subject to further review in
accordance with this Section. The Planning Director shall transmit the proposal to the
Demolition Permit Review Committee, or other official reviewing body established by the
City Council, for review, comment, and a recommendation to the City Council. Once the
Demolition Permit Review Committee formulates a recommendation concerning the
disposition of the proposed demolition permit, the Planning Director shall schedule and duly
notice the matter for a public hearing and decision by the City Council. The public noticing
shall indicate the day, time, place, and purpose of the public hearing, and how additional
information about the subject matter can be obtained. The public noticing shall be
accomplished in the following manner:
1. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten (10) days prior to
the hearing.
2. Mailing or delivery at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the owner(s) of the subject
property, or his/her agent, and to the project applicant, if the applicant is not the owner.
Eo
Fo
Go
3. First class mail notice to all owners (as shown on the latest available Mendocino County
Tax Assessor's equalized assessment roll) of property within three hundred feet (300') of the
subject property.
In reviewing proposed demolition permits, and formulating recommendations to the City
Council, the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall consider any information provided
during the meeting, and shall use the following criteria. The structure:
1. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving
example of its kind; or
2. Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political,
aesthetic, or architectural history; or
3. Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, State, or national history.
If the Demolition Permit Review Committee finds that any of the criteria listed in subsection
E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition, it shall recommend denial of
the demolition permit to the City.
1. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to subsection D of this Section
to consider the recommendation of the Demolition Permit Review Committee, and to
determine if any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building
proposed for demolition. If the City Council determines that any one of the criteria apply, it
shall make a corresponding finding to that effect.
2. At the hearing, the applicant shall have the opportunity to present evidence that a viable
market does not exist for the building, taking into account the condition of the building, the
probable cost to put the building into marketable condition, and the uses of the property
allowed under existing or probable future zoning regulations. The City Council shall
consider such evidence offered by the applicant and any other information presented at the
meeting by any interested party or by staff, to determine whether or not a viable market
exists. "Viable market" means that it is reasonably likely that the building could be sold
within a commercially reasonable period of time for more than the seller would be required
to invest in the purchase of the property and preparing the property for sale, or that the
property could produce a reasonable return on the amount of money it would take to
purchase the property and prepare the building for income producing purposes. "Reasonable
return" means the average rate of return on real estate investments in the Ukiah Valley.
3. If the City Council determines that a viable market exists:
a. It shall so notify the Building Official who shall not issue the demolition permit. The
City Council shall determine whether a viable market exists based on substantial
evidence presented at the hearing, or, it may assume that a viable market exists, if the
applicant fails to present substantial evidence that a viable market does not exist;
b. Not more than once within any twelve (12) month period, the applicant may submit a
new application for a demolition permit and the City Council may reconsider whether a
viable market exists:
(1) Upon a showing by the applicant that market conditions have changed; or
(2) Based upon new information that in the exercise of reasonable diligence the
applicant could not have produced at the first hearing.
4. If the City Council determines, based on substantial evidence, that a viable market does
not exist, the issuance of the demolition permit shall be stayed for a period of ninety (90)
days.
a. During that ninety (90) day period, the City shall do the following:
(1) Determine whether other alternatives to demolition exist, which are acceptable to
the applicant, that would preserve the historic, architectural or cultural significance of
the building;
(2) Determine whether funds are available from any private source for the acquisition
and preservation of the building through a negotiated purchase on terms acceptable to
the applicant; or
(3) If sufficient funds are available from any private source and a negotiated purchase
is not possible, determine whether to acquire the building through eminent domain.
b. If within the ninety (90) days, the City does not reach agreement with the applicant or
commence acquisition of the building, the Building Official may issue the permit in
accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code.
c. If within the ninety (90) day period, the City either: 1) reaches agreement with the
applicant or 2) commences acquisition of the building, the Building Official shall not
issue the demolition permit.
d. However, the Building Official shall continue to process the application for a
demolition permit in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, if the City and the
applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or abandons
acquisition of the building.
e. The City Manager or his/her designee shall inform the Building Official whenever the
Ho
City ~and the applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or
abandons acquisition of the building.
f. If the Building Official has issued a demolition permit under this subsection and the
permittee applies to extend the permit an additional one hundred eighty (180) days in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect,
the Building Official shall refer the application to the City Manager for an initial
determination as to whether market conditions have changed. The City Manager shall
make the determination within ten (10) days after the application is referred by the
Building Official. If the City Manager determines that market conditions may have
changed and that a viable market may exist for the property, he or she shall schedule the
matter for a hearing before the City Council to be noticed and conducted in accordance
with subsections D and G of this Section. However, at the hearing the City shall have the
burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that market conditions have
changed and a viable market exists. If the City Manager determines that market
conditions have not changed, he or she shall so notify the Building Official and the
applicant. Upon such notification, the Building Official shall further process the
application to extend the term of the demolition permit in accordance with the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code then in effect. If the City Council conducts a
hearing upon referral by the City Manager, the City Clerk shall provide written
notification to the Building Official and the applicant of the City Council decision. If the
City Council decides that a viable market exists, the Building Official shall not issue the
permit, but the provisions of subsection G3b of this Section shall apply. If the City
Council decides that a viable market does not exist, the Building Official immediately
shall proceed to further process the application in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect.
5. "Diligently pursue acquisition" means taking all steps within the time required by law to
acquire the building by eminent domain.
6. References to "applicant" herein shall include the building owner.
The Planning Director shall provide a written notice of the City Council determination to the
applicant. The written notification shall be mailed or hand delivered within five (5) days
from the date of the City Council's decision. The notice shall include the finding(s) and
decision made by the City Council and a copy of this Section.
The applicant for a demolition permit for a building determined to have historic,
architectural or cultural significance shall salvage the building materials for reuse to the
maximum extent feasible, and shall ensure that upon completion of the demolition, the site is
left in a safe, presentable, and clutter free condition.
J. Reconsideration Of Decisions:
1. Grounds For Reconsideration: The City Council may reconsider a decision under this
Section within sixty (60) calendar days from the date the decision was made, if information
that may have materially affected the decision was: a) misrepresented by the applicant, or b)
not disclosed by the applicant, if the applicant knew or should have known that the
information may have affected the City Council decision. "Information" as used herein
means matters of fact or law.
A decision may not be reconsidered, if all three (3) of the following have occurred. The
demolition permit: a) has been issued, b) did not at the time it was issued violate any
provision of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City, or any other City ordinance
or State or Federal law, and c) the permittee has commenced demolition in good faith
reliance on the permit.
2. Procedure On Reconsideration: Reconsideration of a decision under this Section may be
placed on the agenda for a regular City Council meeting by any member of the City Council
who voted in favor of the original decision. Notice of any meeting where reconsideration is
on the agenda shall be provided in accordance with subsection D of this Section. If already
issued, the permit shall be suspended from the date that an eligible City Council member
requests that the matter be placed on the agenda and until the City Council makes a final
decision upon reconsideration. The Building Official shall notify the applicant in writing of
the permit suspension. At the meeting, the City Council shall determine, based on evidence
provided to the City prior to or during the meeting, whether reconsideration is permitted
under subsection J1 of this Section. Any motion to reconsider the decision shall contain
findings supported by substantial evidence. If upon reconsideration the City Council makes
a different decision, the City Clerk shall provide notice of that decision to the Building
Official and the applicant/permittee within five (5) working days after the decision is made.
If, upon reconsideration, the City Council determines that a building has historic,
architectural, or cultural significance, and the Building Official has issued a demolition
permit based on the previous decision, the Building Official shall revoke the permit. If the
previously issued permit has expired, the Building Official shall deny an application for a
new permit, unless the permit is issued in accordance with subsection G4 of this Section.
(Ord. 838, §1, adopted 1984; Ord. 927, §1, adopted 1992; Ord. 1014, §1, adopted 1998)
DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW
COMMITFEE MEETING
FEBRUARY 26, 2002
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT
Diana Steele
Brian Keefer, for Charley Stump
Carl Tuliback
Judy Pruden, Chairman
MEMBERS ABSENT
None.
OTHERS PRESENT
Guy Mills
Suzanna Mills
STAFF PRESENT
Kathy Kinch, Recording Secretary
The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Demolition Permit Review Committee was called to order by
Chairman Pruden at 10:10 a.m. in Conference Room 1,300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was
taken with the results listed above.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: DECEMBER 4, 2001
ON A MOTION by Member Steele, seconded by Member Tuliback, it was carried by an all A~E voice vote
of the members to approve the minutes of December 4, 2001, as submitted.
APPEAL PROCESS
Chairman Pruden read the appeal process..
,DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A,
109 Highland, (Assessor Parcel Number 001-202-09) Caputo/Mills
Chairman Pruden explained and handed a copy to the applicants of the 1929 Sanborn Insurance Map.
She advised she has been inside the house many times and there appears to be no decorative interior
elements, no significant architectural merit for the City of Ukiah, nor any significant historical association.
The structure does have a salvage value in the 1898 core area. She stated she has no objection to
recommending to the City Council approval of the demolition of the structure. Chairman Pruden noted some
historical facts about the property such as South Wurt was the original name for Highland Avenue; in 1947
the house was rented.to a breeder of registered dachshunds; and in 1955 the house was remodeled and
enlarged.
Chairman Pruden asked'if the Ukiah Fire Department expressed an interest in the building for fire training
purposes.
Mr. Guy Mills, applicant, responded the Academy in Lake County expressed a strong interest in the building
for a training to be held in April. The Ukiah Fire Department has also expressed an interest in the building
for training purposes.
Chairman Pruden stated the structure has potential use as a shed or barn, and asked if the structure will be
relocated and used as such..'
Mr. Mills responded no.
Chairman Pruden stated there are two redwood trees located within the City right-of-way, which should be
retained.
Carl Tuliback, Building Inspector, stated there is a 50-foot right-of-way on Highland Avenue. He noted
during the building permit process, the Engineering Department will determine if the two redwood trees are
located on private property or within the City's right-of-way.
Mr. Mills responded from the center of the street, he measured back 25 feet which ends at the fence line.
The fence line is before the redwood trees. He noted one of the redwood trees is in bad condition, broken
limbs, and another plant going through the center.
Member Tuliback had no comments to the project.
Member Steele had no comments to the project.
Member Keefer had no comments to the project.
ON A MOTION by Chairman Pruden, seconded by Member Keefer, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote
of the members present, that the Demolition Review Committee recommend to the City Council approval of
the demolition of the structure located at 109 Highland Avenue based on the findings there is no significant
architectural merit nor significant historical association.
Chairman Pruden advised the applicants the request has to be noticed 10 days and will be presented to
the City Council on March 20, 2002.
.NEW BUSINESS
None.
ADJOURNMENT'
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman Pruden
Kathy Kinch, Recording Secretary
1:AGENDAS/DEMOLITION A022602
TO:
Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
n,~ County Clerk FROM: City of Ukiah
County of Mendocino 300 Seminary Avenue
Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482
Ukiah, CA 95482
PROJECT TITLE: Mills Demolition Permit
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The project involves the demolition of a single family residence over 50 years
old with no historical or architectural significance.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: 109 Highland Avenue, Ukiah, CA
PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVING PROJECT: City of Ukiah
NAME OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Francis Caputo, Owner
CEQA EXEMPTION STATUS:
'/ Ministerial
'/ Declared Emergency
'/ Categorical Exemption Section 15301, Class 1(I)
'/ Statutory Exemption Section
REASONS WHY PROJECT IS EXEMPT: The structure possess no historical or architectural significance,
and otherwise complies with the CEQA exemption criteria in terms of number and location of demolitions.
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Charley Stump
TELEPHONE: (707) 463-6200
SIGNATURE:
TITLE: Planning Director/Environmental Coordinator
DA TE:
ITEM NO: 10(c)
DATE: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE REZONING PORTIONS OF ASSESSOR PARCEL
NUMBERS 003-472-08, 003-472-13, AND 003-472-14 FROM C-2 (HEAVY
COMMERCIAL) TO C-N (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL)
SUMMARY: Approval of the proposed rezone application would change the zoning for a .45-acre area
of land from C-2 (Heavy Commercial) to C-N (Neighborhood Commercial). The purpose of the Rezoning
is to facilitate an expansion of the existing Mountain View assisted living facility on South Dora Street to
add a small AIzheimer care wing onto the east side of the building.
The applicants and Staff are requesting that this item be continued to the City Council meeting of April
17, 2002 because of scheduling conflicts that were unknown at the time the public notice was published,
mailed, and posted. Because it was noticed as a public hearing, the Council must open the public
hearing and hear from any interested citizens.
Staff recommends that the Council open the public hearing, receive public comment, and continue the
matter open to the April 17, 2002 meeting date. A full Agenda Summary Report will be provided for that
meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing and continue it open to the April 17, 2002 meeting date.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not continue the matter, and provide direction to staff.
Requested by: John Lapp, Architect for Mountain View (First Mark)
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: None
APPROVED:
Cand-"~Ce H(~rsley, City Mai~ger
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. t0d
DATE: April 3, 2002
REPORT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) APPLICATION
FOR UKIAH VALLEY CULTURAL/COMMUNITY CENTER
On March 20, 2002, the City Council conducted a Public Hearing approving the design phase of the
Ukiah Valley Cultural and Community Center Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
application. In addition, the Council adopted resolution 2002-31 authorizing the submittal of the
application to the State. At this time, staff is seeking your authorization to formally mail out the CDBG
application. This second Public Hearing is required under CDBG administrative regulations and
therefore, is basically proforma to underscore the City sought reasonable input from the community on
this expenditure of State funds at first, the design phase, and secondly the application phase.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Open Public Hearing, receive input from the public regarding the
CDBG application, and reiterate authorization to submit the grant
application for the Ukiah Valley Cultural/Community Center.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct staff not to apply for the CDBG funds and rescind
resolution 2002-31 authorizing the application.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
Board of Directors UVCRC
Deborah Mead, Executive Director UVCRC
Albert T. Fierro, Assistant City Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
None
APPROVED:
mfh:ASRCityCouncil02
403Albert
Ca-~dace I-iorsley, Ci~'~Manager
ITEM NO.
MEETING DATE'
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
11a
April 3, 2002
SUBJECT: Consideration of Ballot Measures for November 2002 Election
The City Council discussed possible ballot measures at its March 6, 2002 meeting. At
that time, a presentation was made by a Mendocino Council Of Governments (MCOG)
consultant regarding a voter opinion road survey that was distributed throughout
Mendocino County. Though the survey indicated that citizens of the unincorporated
area and Willits would vote favorably toward an increased sales tax to pay for road
maintenance, the cities of Ukiah and Fort Bragg had a lower margin of probability to
pass such a ballot measure. A MCOG workshop regarding this issue will be held on
Monday April 1, 2002. Each Councilmember received a packet regarding the workshop.
Mayor Ashiku will report on the results of that meeting orally to the Council, since it is
being held after the agenda deadline.
There is a myriad of projects within the city limits that citizens have expressed interest
in seeing accomplished, but the City has no money to complete. With the recent
notification that the State is going to withhold our road maintenance money for up to
three years, there is even less funding available than we would see under normal
budgetary constraints. (Continued on page 2.)
RECOMMENDED ACTION. Discuss possible ballot measures for November election
2002 and provide direction to staff
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizens Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachment:
N/A
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager
N/A
General Municipal Elections Schedule for November 5, 2002
Approved: I~.~---~~%
Candaco Homlog, ~it~Manager
Other projects that the community might find desirous include a right hand turn lane
going west on Perkins Street onto Orchard Street, sidewalk and bike lanes on Talmage
Road, bike lanes throughout the city, increased maintenance and repair of sidewalks,
additional parking facilities in the downtown area, increased recreational activities such
as a skateboard park, maintenance of Riverside Park, and other projects that have been
previously discussed by the Council and staff. Staff is asking for Council's discussion of
these various items in light of the April i MCOG meeting to determine possible
appropriate projects for a sales tax ballot measure. Staff is researching whether we
need to receive legislative action to increase our sales tax limit before taking such a
measure to the voters.
There are several other ballot measures that Council mentioned they wished to discuss
with the Council as a whole to determine which, if any, ballot measures would be
included on the November election by the City Council. Councilmember Baldwin
brought up the topics of the Palace Hotel and Open Space Acquisition as questions to
the voters, whether they would be interested in the funding of this project. Mayor
Ashiku also discussed a possible ballot measure regarding the skateboard park. These
items are brought before Council to allow as much time for discussion as possible
before the August 9 deadline for submission of ballot measures, as indicated on the
attached November election schedule.
4:CAN~ASRBallotMeas.032902.doc
CONSOLIDATED GENERAL LAW CITIES
GENERAL (OR SPECIAL) MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2002
LAWS ~ EFFECT ~ 2002
May 29
July 1
July I - July 15
July 8
July 15 ' August 9
July 19
July 19
July 30
July31
August 9
August 9
August 9
August 14
August 14
August 15
August 22
· September 9 - October 22
September 26
October 7- October 29
October 15
October 21
October 24
October 29
October 30 - November 5
November 4
November 5
November 5 CLOSE OF POLLS
December 10
December 19
Janua~j 31, 2003
Apdl 1, 2003
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO F~LE PETmON~ REGARDING MEASURE
SUGGESTED LAST DAY FOR COUNCIL TO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS
PUBUSH NOTICE OF ELECTION ·
.
LAST DAY TO ADOPT REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDA'I~ STATEMENTS
FLUNG PERIOD EOR. NOMINATION PAPERS AND CANDIDATE'S STATEMENTS
SUGGESTED LAST. DAY TO CNJ. ELECTION FOR BALLOT MEASURES
LAST DAY TO FiLE CAMPNGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENT--MEASURES
PUBUSH NOTICE OF ELECTION - MEASURE, NO CANDIDATES
POST NOTICE OF DEADLINE FOR FLUNG AR(~UMF_NrTS
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO FLE ARGUMENTS
LAST DAYTO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEM~rI'S - SEMI-ANNUAL
LAST DAYTO CALL ELECTION'FOR BALLOT MEASURES
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO FILE REBLrn'AL ARGUMENTS
LAST DAYTO F~LE NOMINATION PAPERS
'LAST DAY TO FILE NOMINATION PAPERs -.EXTENSION
LAST DAYTO WITHDRAW MEASURE(S) FROM BALLOT;
SECRETARY OF STATE TO DETERMINE ORDER OF NAMES ON BALLOT
CANCEL ELECTION -- INSUFFICIENT CANDIDATES
FLUNG PERIOD FOR WRITE-IN CANDIDATE
LAST DAYTO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENT9 . l~r PRE-ELECTION
VOTERS MAY REQUEST ABSENTEE/VOTE BY MAIL BALLOTS
LAST DAY TO MAIL SAMPLE BALLOTS AND POLMNG PLACE NOTICES
LAST DAY TO REGISTER TO VOTE
·
LAST DAYTO F~LE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS - 2'~ PRE-ELECTION
LAST DAY FOR CLERK TO PUBMSH NOTICE OF NOMINEES .
EMERGENCY ABSENT VOTING PERDD
LAST DAY FOR COUNCIL TO ADOPT PROCEDURES TO REsoLVE TIE VOTE
ELECTION DAY
LAST DAY TO RECEIVE ABSENT VOTER BALLOTS
COUNCIL TO DECLARE THE RESULTS
LAEr DAYTO F~LE STATEM~ OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS
LAST DAYTO F~LE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS - SEMI-ANNUAL
LAST DAY TO SUBMIT REPORT ON MEASURES TO SECRETARY OF STATE
(E- 160)
(E- 127)
(E- 127 to113)
(E- 120)
(E- 113 to 88)
(E-109)
(E-109)
(E- 98) '
(E -88)
(E-SS)
·
(E 7..88)
(E-SS)
(E-SS)
(E-82)
(E-75)
(E-S7to 14)
(E -40)
(E-29~ 7)
(E-21)
(E -15)
(E- 12)
(E-6 to E)
(E- 1)
(E)
(E)
(E + 35)
(E + 44)
Visit our website w~'w. ma~n~apm~.com email scott ~martinchapman.com ·
MA,4,,N & CHAi=MA~ CO. * 1951 WmeNl' CIRCLE * ANN.~E]M, CA 92806-6028 * 714/939-9866 * FAX 714/939-9870
~WlI-IIA 1.t~01 1 ~ N~ i CM pf~qkd)
ITEM NO. 1 lb
DATE: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT SKATEBOARDS ON SCHOOL DISTRICT
PROPERTY
At its March 20, 2002 meeting, the City Council considered an Ordinance, by request of the Ukiah
Unified School District, to prohibit skateboards on School District property. The Ordinance was
introduced by title only and its introduction was approved by a 4 to 1 vote of Council. A summary of
the proposed Ordinance was published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on March 25, 2002. The Ordinance
is now being presented to Council for adoption.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion, adopt Ordinance prohibiting skateboards on School District
property.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Direct staff to amend Ordinance and return to Council
for future adoption.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Ukiah City Council
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Ordinance for adoption
APPROVED: t,_~_.~,\~_,
Candace Horsley, City ~lanager
/
ASR: Adopting Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING UKIAH
CITY CODE SECTION 6180 PROHIBITING SKATEBOARDS ON PUBLIC
PROPERTY DESIGNATED BY CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows.
SECTION ONE. FINDINGS.
The City Council of the City of Ukiah finds:
1. The Board of Directors of the Ukiah Unified School District has requested the
City Council to prohibit the use of skateboards on school sites in the city limits of the
City of Ukiah.
2. While Ukiah City Code Section 6180 authorizes the City Council to prohibit
skateboards on portions of public property designated by City Council resolution, in
order to make clear that public property includes the grounds and buildings owned by
Ukiah Unified School District within the City of Ukiah, the City Council hereby amends
Section 6180.
3. Ukiah Unified School District has determined that skateboard use on school
sites disrupts its educational programs and causes undue damage to school district
property.
SECTION TWO. ORDINANCE
Section 6180 of Division 7, Chapter 2, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
6180: PROHIBITION ON USE OF SKATEBOARDS:
No person shall operate, ride, propel or use a device with wheels commonly known and
designated as a "skateboard" or any variation thereof in, on or over any public street,
sidewalk, sidewalk space, park, public pedestrian walkway, publicly owned building,
publicly owned property, publicly owned facility, or publicly owned parking facility,
including such streets, sidewalks, spaces, walkways, buildings, property or facilities
owned by Ukiah Unified School District within the City of Ukiah, when such street,
sidewalk, space, park, walkway, public building or facility is posted with appropriate
signs or markings prohibiting such use. The prohibition and the posting of such signs or
markings shall be first established and approved by resolution of the City Council. The
City Council shall so designate property belonging to Ukiah Unified School District only
upon the written request of its Board of Directors. The District shall post the required
signs.
Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 2
SECTION THREE. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall become effective 30
days after it is adopted.
This Ordinance was introduced by title only at a regular City Council meeting on
March 20, 2002, by the following roll call note.
AYES' Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, and Mayor Ashiku
NOES: Councilmember Baldwin
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
This Ordinance was adopted on April 3, 2002, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
A'I'q"EST:
Phillip Ashiku, Mayor
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 2
ITEM NO:
DATE: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING THE AWARD OF A CONSULTANT
CONTRACT WITH WHITLOCK & WEINBERGER TRANSPORTATION, INC. FOR THE
PREPARATION OF A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE REVISIONS TO THE AIRPORT
INDUSTRIAL PARK INDUSTRIAL / MIXED-USE REGULATIONS IN THE AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $8,000.00.
SUMMARY: On March 20, 2002, the City Council approved a budget amendment to fund the Traffic
Study for the revisions to the Industrial / Mixed-Use regulations in the Airport Industrial Park (ALP)
Planned Development Ordinance. As reported to the Council on March 20th, the cost of the Study is
approximately $8,000, including attendance at public hearings. The purpose of this Agenda item is to
provide a report to the City Council, pursuant to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code,
concerning the execution of a contract of less than $10,000.
The $8,000 contract was awarded to Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc., who authored the
Traffic Studies for the Capital Improvement (traffic impact) Program for the Airport Industrial Park (ALP).
The firm obviously has a strong familiarity with the AlP and the surrounding streets and intersections.
The Traffic Study will evaluate the potential traffic implications resulting from full industrial, commercial,
or professional office development, as well as some possible residential development. The Study will
need to determine the existing levels of traffic, provide projections for traffic generation resulting from the
modifications to the regulations, and determine if the existing traffic related Capital Improvement
Program is adequate to accommodate the traffic that would be generated by development under the new
regulations.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive report concerning the execution of a contract with Whitlock &
Weinberger for the AlP Mixed-use Traffic Study in the amount not to exceed $8,000.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A
Citizen Advised: Airport Industrial Park Property Owners
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 Contract with Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation Inc.
APPROVED:
Ca'ace ~o'rsley, Ci~'y M~ager
CITY OF UKIAH
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES
PREPARATION OF A TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR THE
AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK MIXED-USE REGULATIONS
This agreement shall be considered a contract, and is entered into this__ day of
, 2002, by and between the CITY OF UKIAH, a general law municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation,
Inc. a professional corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT."
PREMISES
The purpose of this agreement is the preparation and completion by CONSULTANT
of a Traffic Study for the Airport Industrial Park Mixed-use Regulation project, more
particularly described in CONSULTANT's bid proposal, dated March 12, 2002, referred to
as Exhibit "A", and attached to this agreement.
CITY may retain independent contractor to perform special services for CITY or any
department thereof.
CONSULTANT is willing and able to perform duties and render services in
preparation and completion of such Traffic Study which is determined by the City Council
to be necessary for the welfare of residents of the CITY.
CITY believes the provision of these services to the residents is in their best
interests, and CONSULTANT agrees to perform such duties and render such services as
outlined below:
AGREEMENT
1.01
CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT shall provide those technical, expert, and professional
services as described in Exhibit "A," which consists of the Bid Proposal from
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc., dated March 12, 2002, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Traffic Study shall also fulfill
the requirements contained in the scope of work contained in the Request for
Proposals (RFP) issued by the City for the project. CONSULTANT shall
provide such services within the time limits described below.
1.02
The absence, omission, or failure to include in this agreement items which
are considered to be a part of normal procedure for a study of this type or
which involve professional judgement, shall not be used as a basis for
submission of inadequate work or incomplete performance.
1.03
CITY relies upon the professional ability and stated experience of
CONSULTANT as a material inducement to entering into this agreement.
CONSULTANT understands the use to which the CITY will put his work
product and hereby warrants that all findings, recommendations, studies, and
reports shall be made and prepared in accordance with generally accepted
professional practices.
1.04
When the agreement calls for the preparation of studies and reports, they
shall be in a form acceptable to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall bear the
expense of all printing and reproduction costs until final reports are accepted
by the CITY, at which time CONSULTANT shall turn over to CITY all
documents.
1.05
The following maximum time limits are prescribed for the delivery of reports
subsequent to contract execution:
Submission of an Draft Traffic Study to CITY for review: Within three
(3) weeks of contract execution.
bi
Submission of Final Traffic Study to CITY for review: Within one (1)
week of receipt of all comments on the Draft Study.
Extensions of any of the above time limits may be made by verbal consent
by the CITY. Time is of the essence and of the utmost importance in the
performance of the agreement.
1.06
CONSULTANT shall deliver two (3) copies of the Draft Traffic Study and ten
(10) copies of the Final Traffic Study. An electronic version of the Final
Traffic Study shall also be submitted to the City.
1.07
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for verbally communicating the findings
of the Traffic Study.
1.08
1.09
2.01
2.02
2.03
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for attendance at a "Kick-off" meeting
with staff. Attendance at one (1) or more public hearings may be necessary
and CONSULTANT shall be compensated their standard rates as described
in the March 27, 2002 bid proposal.
CONSULTANT shall perform any additional services as may be required due
to significant changes in general scope of the project. Such additional
services shall be paid for by supplemental agreement and shall conform to
the rates of payment specified in Article V below.
ARTICLE II
SERVICES OF CITY
CITY shall provide any information as to its requirements for performance of
the agreement not already contained in Exhibit "A."
Upon request, CITY shall provide CONSULTANT any information in its
possession or reasonably available to it that consultant may need to perform
services under this agreement.
CITY will examine the required Study, or other submittals from
CONSULTANT and will render, in writing, decisions or comments pertaining
to their adequacy and acceptability within ten (10) working days of receipt
thereof.
3.01
3.02
3.03
ARTICLE III
TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term of this agreement shall be pursuant to the proposal submitted by
CONSULTANT as contractor's bid response and in accordance with
paragraph 1.05 above.
This agreement may be extended on its same terms and conditions for a
period not to exceed thirty (30) days, upon written agreement between the
Planning Director and CONSULTANT.
The execution of this agreement by the CITY shall constitute the
CONSULTANT'S authority to proceed immediately with the performance of
the work described by Exhibit "A."
All work by CONSULTANT shall be completed pursuant to exhibit "A" and
paragraph 1.05 above. CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for
delays caused by circumstances beyond its control.
3.04
3.05
4.01
4.02
5.01
5.02
CONSULTANT acknowledges that timely performance of services is an
important element of this agreement and will perform services in a timely
manner as provided in paragraph 1.05 above and consistent with sound
professional practices.
If CITY requests significant modifications or changes in the scope of this
project, the time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. The
number of days of said extension shall be the final decision of CITY.
ARTICLE IV
COST OF SERVICES
CONSULTANT has been selected by the CITY to provide services described
in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for
which compensation shall not exceed six thousand six hundred dollars
($6,600.00) on a job completion basis, except for additional compensation at
the CONSULTANTS standard rates as described in the March 27, 2002 bid
proposal for attendance at one (1) or more public hearings.
Cost overruns or failure to perform within the maximum compensation ceiling
established in 4.01 above shall not relieve CONSULTANT of responsibility to
provide those services specified in Exhibit "A."
ARTICLE V
PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for work required for satisfactory completion
of this agreement in amount to be determined in accordance with the method
described in paragraph 5.02 below.
Payment scheduling: Total payment not to exceed $6,600.00, except for
additional compensation at the CONSULTANTS standard rates as described
in the March 27, 2002 bid proposal for attendance at one (1) or more public
hearings.
Fees for professional services as outlined herein shall be paid as follows:
a. $6,600.00 or less upon CITY acceptance of Final Traffic Study.
b.
Additional compensation at the CONSULTANTS standard rates as
described in the March 27, 2002 bid proposal for attendance at one
(1) or more public hearings.
5.03
5.04
5.05
6.01
6.02
7.01
7.02
Payments to CONSULTANT shall be based on an itemized invoice
submitted by CONSULTANT.
Payments will be made by CITY within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice
from CONSULTANT.
If CITY substantially alters the scope of work to include additional analyses,
the total payment and cost of services may be changed by amending the
agreement.
ARTICLE VI
PROJECT INSPECTION AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS
Duly authorized representatives of the CITY shall have right of access to the
CONSULTANT'S files and records relating to the project included in the
agreement and may review the work at appropriate stages during
performance of the work.
CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence
pertaining to costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept
available at the CONSULTANT'S California office during the contract period
and thereafter for three (3) years from the date of final payment.
ARTICLE VII
DISPOSITION OF FINAL REPORTS
All original reports and documents together with such backup data as
required by this agreement shall be and shall remain the sole property of
CITY.
CONSULTANT'S attention is directed to the required notice under
Government Code Section 7550, which states in part that "any documents or
written reports prepared as a requirement of this contract shall contain, in a
separate section preceding the main body of the document, the number
and dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the
preparation of those documents or reports if the total cost for work by non-
employees of the public agency exceeds $5,000.00."
8.01
8.02
8.03
9.01
ARTICLE VIII
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
At any time CITY may suspend indefinitely or abandon the project, or any
part thereof, and may require CONSULTANT to suspend the performance of
the service.
In the event the CITY abandons or suspends the project, CONSULTANT
shall receive compensation for services rendered to date of abandonment
and suspension in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.01, 5.02,
and 5.03 herein.
It is understood and agreed that should CITY determine that any part of the
work involved in the program is to be suspended indefinitely, abandoned, or
canceled, said agreement shall be amended accordingly. Such
abandonment or cancellation of a portion of the program shall in no way void
or invalidate this agreement as it applies to any remaining portion of the
project.
If, in the opinion of the CITY, the CONSULTANT fails to perform or provide
prompt, efficient, and thorough service, or if CONSULTANT fails to complete
the work within the time limits provided, CITY shall have the right to give
notice in writing to CONSULTANT of its intention to terminate this
agreement. The notice shall be delivered to CONSULTANT at least seven
(7) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. Upon such
termination, CITY shall have the right to take CONSULTANT'S studies and
reports insofar as they are complete and acceptable to CITY, and pay
CONSULTANT for his performance rendered, in accordance with Sections
5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein, prior to the delivery of the notice of intent to
terminate, less the amount of damages, general or consequential, which
CITY may sustain as a result of CONSULTANT'S failure to satisfactorily
perform his obligations under this agreement.
ARTICLE IX
RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES
HOLD HARMLESS: The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless
the CITY, its agents, officers, and employees against and from any and all
claims, lawsuits, actions, liability, damages, losses, expenses, and costs
(including but not limited to attorney's fees), brought for, or on account of,
injuries to or death of any person or persons including employees of the
CONSULTANT, or injuries to or destruction of property, arising out of, or
resulting from, the performance of the work described herein, provided that
any such claim, lawsuit, action, liability, damage, loss, expense, or cost is
caused in whole or in part by any negligent or intentional wrongful act or
omission of the CONSULTANT, any subcontractor, anyone directly or
indirectly employed by any of them, or any for whose acts any of them may
be liable. CONSULTANT shall have no duty to indemnify or defend CITY
under this paragraph if the damage or injury is caused by the active and sole
negligence or willfully wrongful act or omission of CITY or its officers or
employees. CITY agrees to timely notify CONSULTANT of any such claim
and to cooperate with CONSULTANT to allow CONSULTANT to defend
such a claim.
10.01
11.01
12.01
13.01
ARTICLE X
INSURANCE
CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall secure and maintain at all times during
the entire period of performance of this agreement, insurance as set forth in
Exhibit "B", attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference.
ARTICLE Xl
GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will comply with all
federal, state and local laws and ordinances as may be applicable to the
performance of work under this agreement.
ARTICLE Xll
ENDORSEMENT OF DOCUMENTS
It is understood and agreed that, the CONSULTANT will endorse studies,
reports, and documents in accordance with applicable portions of the
Business and Professions Code of the State of California.
ARTICLE Xlll
NONDISCRIMINATION
CONSULTANT certifies that it is in compliance with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Requirement of Executive Order 11246, as amended by
Executive Order 11375, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California
Fair Employment Practices Act, and any other Federal or State laws
pertaining to equal employment opportunity and that it will not discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of race,
color, religion, handicap, age sex, national origin, or ancestry, in matters
pertaining to recruitment, hiring, training, upgrading, transfer, compensation,
or termination.
13.02
In the event of the CONSULTANT'S noncompliance with the
nondiscrimination provisions of this agreement, the CITY shall impose such
contact sanctions as it may determine to be appropriate including, but not
limited to:
14.01
15.01
15.02
15.03
al
Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the agreement
until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or
bw
Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Agreement in whole or
in part.
ARTICLE XlV
INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
The CONSULTANT, in accordance with its status as an independent
contractor, covenants and agrees that it will conduct itself consistent with
such status, that it will neither hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer or
employee of the CITY by reason hereof, and that it will not by reason hereof,
make any claim, demand, or application to or for any right or privilege
applicable to an officer or employee of the CITY including, but not limited to,
worker's compensation coverage, unemployment benefits, and retirement
membership or credit.
ARTICLE XV
SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNMENTS
The CITY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its partners, successors,
and executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party to this
agreement, and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and
assigns to such party in respect to all covenants of this agreement.
Except as stated above, neither the CITY nor the CONSULTANT shall
assign, sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written
consent of the other, however, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to
assign the proceeds due under this agreement to any bank or person.
In the case of death of one or more members of the firm of the
CONSULTANT, the surviving member or members, shall complete the
professional services covered by this agreement.
16.01
16.02
17.01
18.01
ARTICLE XVl
EXTENT OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall consist of this agreement, the proposal submitted by
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc., dated March 27, 2002, identified
as Exhibit "A", as attached hereto and incorporated herein, and the
insurance requirements set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
This agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the CITY and
CONSULTANT and any other representations or agreements are
superseded by the terms of this agreement.
ARTICLE XVll
PARAGRAPH HEADINGS
The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference
only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this contract.
ARTICLE XVlll
NOTICE
Whenever a notice to a party is required by this agreement, it shall be
deemed given when deposited with proper address and postage in the U.S.
mail or when personally delivered as follows:
City of Ukiah
Civic Center
300 Seminary Drive
Ukiah, California 95482
ATTN: Charley Stump,
Community Development
Director of Planning and
CONSULTANT/
CONTRACTOR:
Steve Weinberger, Principal
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
509 Seventh Street, Suite 101
Santa Rosa, California 95401
ARTICLE XlX
DUPLICATE ORIGINALS
19.01
This agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing
the original signature of both parties and when so executed and such
duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of
the agreement between the parties.
ARTICLE XX
FORUM SELECTION
20.01
CONSULTANT and CITY stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to
the enforcement or interpretation of the agreement, arising out of
CONSULTANT's performance or relating in any way to the work shall be
brought in Mendocino County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County.
CONSULTANT hereby waives any right it might otherwise have to seek a
change of venue based on its status as an out of county corporation, or on
any other basis.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized
officers to execute this agreement in duplicate the day and year first above written.
CITY OF UKIAH
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Date
CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR
Steve Weinberger, Principal
IRS IDN Number
Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM'
David Rapport, City Attorney
Date
10
EXH I BIT "A"
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
WITH WHITLOCK & WEINBERGER TRANSPORTATION INC
AlP MIXED-USE TRAFFIC STUDY
March 12, 2002
Mr. Charley Stamp
of
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Airport/Redwood Business Park Resonlng Traffic Analysis
Dear Charley;
Ib~fitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (W-Tram) is pleased to submit this proposal to provide waffle
enginee~ services related to proposed zoning change for the Airport Industrial Park. This work would build
upon our previous traffic analysis completed for the area ia 1997 and 1999.
Study Area
1. South Slate Street/Hastings Avenue
2. South State Street/TaJmage Road
3. Airport Park Bonl~~e Road
4. U.S. 101 southbound off-ramp/Talnmge Road
5. U.S. 101 northbound off-ramp/Taimage Road
Scope of Services
1. Steve Weinberger will meet with City Staff to discuss the project and appropriate approach to the
traffic projections.
2. New weekday p.m. peak hour turning movement counts ~ be collected at the five study intersections.
.
The existing traffic cxmditions for the study area will be described based on the site evaluation of
physical conditions and a review of the existing traffic volumes. Presentation of thee conditions will
consist of an intersection Level of Service summary table, figures showing peak hour traffic volumes,
text describing these conditions, any other operafiona~safet3, issues, and appendices with detailed
calculations.
Traffic will be generated and assigned to the net~'o~ for any approved projects which have yet to be
occupied or existing projects which are known to be operating at less than full capacity.
The Base intersection level of service conditions ~411 be completed for the study area including the n~w
Lra~c counts and trips calculated in Task 4.
.
The vehicle trips generated by the rezoned parcels will be estimated based on rates contained in Trip
Generation, 6th Editima by Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997, and any other detailed
information presented on the project. These trips will be assigned to the local network based on the
existing travel patterns and destinations.
.
Base plus Project intersection levels of service and delay impacts will be determined for the study area
intersections. Presentation of these conditions would be similar to that for Existing Conditions as
Page 2
described in Task 3.
Specific traffic control and/or g¢orn~tric improvements which will be necessary to maintain acceptable
tm~c ccoditions in the study area with thc addition of the rezoned projects will be reco~ aad
presemed as thc Mitigated Base Plus Project Conditions.
A draft report which dc,scribes the evaluation and recommended improvem~ will be prepared.
Appropriate figures, tables, and appendices will be included.
10.
Based on comments received by City s~aff, final report will be prepared. Conunents that require
additional analysis which was not included in the original scope of work will be considered b~nd ~h¢
scope of our contract. Up to ten (10) bound copies of tho report will be provided.
Schedule sad Budget
The drat~ traffic study can be submitted for your comments within three to four weeks of receipt of
authorization. Our services will be conducted on an hourly basis at $130 per hour for principaltime, $120 per
hour for senior associate time, $90 per hour for engineer time, $85 for planner time, and $50 per hour for
technician time. Any outside services or expenses will be assessed a 10 percent surcharge. Thc estimat~
rnaxim~ fee is $6,600.
Although not included in the scope or fee, additional meetings or attea~ce at public hearings could be
accommodated at our standaxd rates. This proposal will remain a firm offer for 90 days from the date of this
letter, ffyou wish for us to proceed, please provide us with written authorization, the City's standard contract
agreement or purchase order.
Thank you for giving W-Trans the oppo~ to propose on these services.
Sincerely,
S~eve Wemberger, P.E.
Principal
SJ-W/sjwSJKI0:23.P 1
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims
for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with he
performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees
or subcontractors.
A. MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
.
Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive
General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial
General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile
Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025.
.
Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability insurance, if CONSULTANT has employees who will
directly or indirectly provide service or support CONSULTANT in his provision of
services under the Agreement.
B. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE
CONSULTANT shall maintain limits no less than:
.
General Liability: $1,0000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability
Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general
aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury
and property damage.
.
Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability: Workers' compensation limits as
required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits
of $1,000,000 per accident.
C. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS
D.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of
Ukiah. At the option of the City of Ukiah, either the insured shall reduce or eliminate such
deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City of Ukiah, its officer, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing
payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages
a.
The City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered
as insured's as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of
the CONSULTANT, products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT,
premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles owned,
leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
bo
The CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of
officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by
the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of
the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it.
C.
Any failure to comply with reporting provision so the policies shall not affect
coverage provided to the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers.
d.
The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against
whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the
insurer's liability.
2. Worker Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Ukiah,
its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work
performed by the CONSULTANT for the City of Ukiah.
3. All coverages
Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in
coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Ukiah.
E. ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURERS
Fi
Gl
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.
VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE
CONSULTANT shall furnish the City of Ukiah with certificates of insurance and with original
endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and
endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on
forms provided by the City of Ukiah. Where by statute, the City of Ukiah's Worker's
Compensation related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance
Commissioner are to be substituted. All certificates and endorsements are to be received
and approved by the City of Ukiah before work commences. The City of Ukiah reserves the
right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
SUBCONTRACTS
CONSULTANT shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish
separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for
subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 12 l~
DATE: April 3, 2002
REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH LEONARD CHARLES AND
ASSOCIATES FOR PREPARING A REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSION / ORR
CREEK BRIDGE PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$43,580
SUMMARY: As the Council is aware, in 1999, Leonard Charles and Associates, under
contract with the City, prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Orchard
Avenue Extension / Orr Creek Bridge project. Prior to presenting the Final EIR to the
Council for certification, a number of important City/County related issues required
resolution. It appears that resolution of these is forthcoming, and Staff has been
working on design issues in anticipation of moving forward with the project. Recent
detailed work by the City Public Works Department has revealed the need to change the
original size and design of the bridge, which has, along with a determination that a
number of the assumptions in the environmental document are no longer valid,
necessitated revisions to the EIR before it can be certified. This Agenda item is seeking
Council approval of a sole source contract to Leonard Charles and Associates to revise
the EIR accordingly.
(continued on page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the contract with Leonard Charles and Associates
to revise the original EIR for the Orchard Avenue extension and Orr Creek bridge project
in the amount not to exceed $43,580.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not approve the contract and
provide direction to staff.
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
1.
Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community
Development
Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community
Development
Candace Horsley, City Manager, and David Rapport, City Attorney
Draft Contract with Leonard Charles & Associates including Scope
of Work
n
Candace Horsley, anager
~ 1
Staff believes that a sole source approach for this project is warranted because Leonard
Charles and Associates prepared the original EIR, they are very familiar with the project
and surrounding area, and they have a strong reputation for doing outstanding work.
Accordingly, Staff is able to conclude that sole sourcing this contract to Leonard Charles
and Associates will save the City both money and time.
A draft contract and scope of work is included as Attachment No. 1 for the Council's
review.
SCOPE OF WORK: A number of the sections contained in the EIR need to be revised
to reflect the new bridge design. The primary topical areas requiring revision are Wildlife
and Vegetation, Traffic and Circulation, and Public Services. Other topical areas need
minor revisions and reformatting.
Wildlife and Vegetation: This section will be re-written to assess hydrologic impacts
resulting from the new bridge that includes an in-channel abutment. As described in the
Bid Proposal, this will require the involvement of the State Department of Fish and
Game, as well as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Traffic and Circulation: The traffic counts used in the original EIR are too old to be
meaningful. Additionally, the original EIR had certain assumptions concerning build-out
of the area that are no longer valid. This Section needs to be re-written with new traffic
counts and new assumptions for the potential future development on the area.
COST: Leonard Charles and Associates have indicated that to properly revise the EIR,
it will cost approximately $43,580. Optional tasks such as a second buildout scenario
for the traffic component, an expanded noise component, and attendance at meetings
will add to the overall cost. The base scope cost for the original EIR was $38,220,
which has been paid.
While this cost initially seemed high, closer examination of the bid proposal, as well as
discussions with Mr. Charles revealed that the cost for generating new traffic counts
increased the cost by approximately $7,300, the revised discussion of Public Services
(water) will be complex, and therefore more costly, the cost for word processing and
printing is now higher, and the current scope includes a Mitigation Monitoring program
($1,100), where the original EIR did not include this task.
FUNDING: The revised EIR will be funded with a portion of the money contributed by
Kmart towards design and construction of the bridge.
TIMING: The Bid Proposal indicates that the new EIR could be produced and made
ready for certification in approximately 22 weeks, which fits the new project timeline
produced by the Department of Public Works.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Staff believes that the bid proposal is adequate and
reasonable, and the timing is consistent with the new timeline set for the project.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the contract with Leonard Charles and Associates to
revise the original EIR for the Orchard Avenue extension and Orr Creek bridge project.
CITY OF
UKIAH
AGREEMENT FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSION
AND ORR CREEK BRIDGE PROJECT
This agreement shall be considered a contract, and is entered into this __ day of
__~, 2001 (effective date), by and between the CITY OF UKIAH, a general law municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Leonard Charles and Associates, a professional
corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT."
PREMISES
The purpose of this agreement is the preparation and completion by CONSULTANT of an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Orchard Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge
Project. The scope of work is more particularly described in the Exhibit "A", attached to this
agreement.
CITY may retain independent contractor to perform special services for CITY or any
department thereof.
CONSULTANT is willing and able to perform duties and render services in preparation and
completion of such EIR. This work has been determined by the City Council to be necessary for
the welfare of residents of the CITY.
CITY believes the provision of these services to the residents is in their best interests, and
CONSULTANT agrees to perform such duties and render such services as outlined below:
AGREEMENT
CITY and CONSULTANT agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
1.01
CONSULTANT shall provide those technical, expert, and professional
Environmental Impact Report preparation services as described in Exhibit "A,"
which consists of the scope of work, dated March 13, 2002, which is attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. CONSULTANT shall provide such
services within the time limits described below.
1.02
1.03
1.04
.05
.06
1.07
2.01
2.02
The absence, omission, or failure to include in this agreement items which are
considered to be a part of normal procedure for a study of this type or which involve
professional judgement, shall not be used as a basis for submission of inadequate
work or incomplete performance.
CITY relies upon the professional ability and stated experience of CONSULTANT
as a material inducement to entering into this agreement. CONSULTANT
understands the use to which the CITY will put his work product and hereby
warrants that all information contained in the Western Hills Constraints Analysis and
Buildout Study shall be made and prepared in accordance with generally accepted
professional practices.
CONSULTANT shall bear the expense of all printing and reproduction costs until
the draft and final Reports are accepted by the CITY, at which time CONSULTANT
shall turn over to CITY all documents.
CONSULTANT shall deliver one (3) copy of the Administrative Draft EIR within
sixteen (16) weeks of contract execution. Fifty (50) copies of the Draft EIR shall be
submitted within two (2) weeks of receipt of all comments. Fifty (50) copies of the
Final £1R shall be submitted within four (4) weeks of the receipt of all comments on
the Draft Document. A photo-ready reproducible copy of the Final EIR shall also be
submitted.
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for attendance at a minimum of two (2) public
meetings as determined and required by CITY, at the cost stipulated in Exhibit "A."
CONSULTANT shall perform any additional services as may be required due to
significant changes in general scope of the project. Such additional services shall
be paid for by supplemental agreement and shall conform to the rates of payment
specified in Article V below.
ARTICLE II
SERVICES OF CITY
CITY shall provide any information as to its requirements for performance of the
agreement not already contained in Exhibit "A."
Upon request, CITY shall provide CONSULTANT any information in its possession
or reasonably available to it that consultant may need to perform services under this
agreement.
3.01
3.02
3.03
3.04
3.05
4.01
4.02
ARTICLE III
TERM OF AGREEMENT
The term of this agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall
terminate when the CITY has formally accepted the final version of the Orchard
Avenue Extension and Orr Creek Bridge EIR.
This agreement may be extended on its same terms and conditions upon written
agreement between the Planning Director and CONSULTANT.
The execution of this agreement by the CITY shall constitute the CONSULTANT'S
authority to proceed immediately with the performance of the work described by
Exhibit "A."
All work by CONSULTANT shall be completed pursuant to exhibit "A" and
paragraph 1.05 above in a reasonable timeframe according to the established
deadlines. CONSULTANT shall not be held responsible for delays caused by
circumstances beyond its control.
CONSULTANT acknowledges that timely performance of services is an important
element of this agreement and will perform services in a timely manner as provided
in paragraph 1.05 above and consistent with sound professional practices.
If CITY requests significant modifications or changes in the scope of this project the
time of performance shall be adjusted appropriately. The number of days of said
extension shall be the final decision of CITY.
ARTICLE IV
COST OF SERVICES
CONSULTANT has been selected by the CITY to provide services described in
Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, for which
compensation shall not exceed forty three thousand five hundred and eighty dollars
($43,580) on a time and materials basis. The optional tasks described in Exhibit
"A", and CONSULTANT attendance at meetings may be authorized by the City
Manager at the cost indicated in Exhibit "A."
Cost overruns or failure to perform within the maximum compensation ceiling
established in 4.01 above shall not relieve CONSULTANT of responsibility to
provide those services specified in Exhibit "A", for a total compensation including
reimbursable expenses not to exceed $43,580.00, except for the cost associated
with any optional tasks and CONSULTANT attendance at meetings, as authorized
by the City Manager.
5.01
5.02
5.03
5.04
5.05
6.01
6.02
7.01
7.02
ARTICLE V
PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for work required for satisfactory completion of this
agreement in amount to be determined in accordance with the method described in
paragraph 5.02 below.
Payment scheduling: Total payment not to exceed $43,580.00, except for the cost
associated with any optional tasks and CONSULTANT attendance at meetings, as
authorized by the City Manager. Fees for professional services as outlined herein
shall be paid on a time and materials basis. A detailed explanation of services and
associated fees shall be listed on each invoice submitted by CONSULTANT.
Payments to CONSULTANT shall be based on an itemized invoice submitted by
CONSULTANT not more frequently than monthly.
Payments will be made by CITY within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice from
CONSULTANT.
If CITY substantially alters the scope of work to include additional analyses, the total
payment and cost of services may be changed by amending the agreement.
ARTICLE VI
PROJECT INSPECTION AND ACCOUNTING RECORDS
Duly authorized representatives of the CITY shall have right of access to the
CONSULTANT'S files and records relating to the project included in the agreement
and may review the work at appropriate stages during performance of the work.
CONSULTANT must maintain accounting records and other evidence pertaining to
costs incurred, which records and documents shall be kept available at the
CONSULTANT'S California office during the contract period and thereafter for three
(3) years from the date of final payment.
ARTICLE VII
DISPOSITION OF FINAL REPORTS
All grant documents and associated materials and backup data as required by this
agreement shall be and shall remain the sole property of CITY.
CONSULTANT'S attention is directed to the required notice under Government
Code Section 7550, which states in part that "any documents or written reports
prepared as a requirement of this contract shall contain, in a separate section
preceding the main body of the document, the number and dollar amounts of all
contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of those documents or reports
if the total cost for work by non-employees of the public agency exceeds
$5,000.00."
8.01
8.02
8.03
9.01
ARTICLE VIII
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
At any time CITY may suspend indefinitely or abandon the project, or any part
thereof, and may require CONSULTANT to suspend the performance of the
service.
In the event the CITY abandons or suspends the project, CONSULTANT shall
receive compensation for services rendered to date of abandonment and
suspension in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03
herein.
It is understood and agreed that should CITY determine that any part of the work
involved in the program is to be suspended indefinitely, abandoned, or canceled,
said agreement shall be amended accordingly. Such abandonment or cancellation
of a portion of the program shall in no way void or invalidate this agreement as it
applies to any remaining portion of the project.
If, in the opinion of the CITY, the CONSULTANT fails to perform or provide prompt,
efficient, and thorough service, or if CONSULTANT fails to complete the work within
the time limits provided, CITY shall have the right to give notice in writing to
CONSULTANT of its intention to terminate this agreement. The notice shall be
delivered to CONSULTANT at least seven (7) days prior to the date of termination
specified in the notice. Upon such termination, CITY shall have the right to take
CONSULTANT'S studies and reports insofar as they are complete and acceptable
to CITY, and pay CONSULTANT for his performance rendered, in accordance with
Sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.03 herein, prior to the delivery of the notice of intent to
terminate, less the amount of damages, general or consequential, which CITY may
sustain as a result of CONSULTANT'S failure to satisfactorily perform his
obligations under this agreement.
ARTICLE IX
RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITIES
HOLD HARMLESS: The CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the
CITY, its agents, officers, and employees against and from any and all claims,
lawsuits, actions, liability, damages, losses, expenses, and costs (including but not
limited to attorney's fees), brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any
person or persons including employees of the CONSULTANT, or injuries to or
destruction of property, arising out of, or resulting from, the performance of the work
described herein, provided that any such claim, lawsuit, action, liability, damage,
loss, expense, or cost is caused in whole or in part by any negligent or intentional
wrongful act or omission of the CONSULTANT, any subcontractor, anyone directly
or indirectly employed by any of them, or any for whose acts any of them may be
liable. CONSULTANT shall have no duty to indemnify or defend CITY under this
paragraph if the damage or injury is caused by the active and sole negligence or
10.01
11.01
12.01
12.02
13.01
willfully wrongful act or omission of CITY or its officers or employees. CITY agrees
to timely notify CONSULTANT of any such claim and to cooperate with
CONSULTANT to allow CONSULTANT to defend such a claim.
ARTICLE X
INSURANCE
CONSULTANT, at its expense, shall secure and maintain at all times during the
entire period of performance of this agreement, insurance as set forth in Exhibit "B",
attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference.
ARTICLE Xl
GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
It is understood and agreed that the CONSULTANT will comply with all federal,
state and local laws and ordinances as may be applicable to the performance of
work under this agreement.
ARTICLE Xlll
NONDISCRIMINATION
CONSULTANT certifies that it is in compliance with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Requirement of Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive
Order 11375, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the California Fair Employment
Practices Act, and any other Federal or State laws pertaining to equal employment
opportunity and that it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment on the basis of race, color, religion, handicap, age sex, national origin,
or ancestry, in matters pertaining to recruitment, hiring, training, upgrading, transfer,
compensation, or termination.
In the event of the CONSULTANT'S noncompliance with the nondiscrimination
provisions of this agreement, the CITY shall impose such contact sanctions as it
may determine to be appropriate including, but not limited to:
a.
Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under the agreement until
the CONSULTANT complies, and/or
b. Cancellation, termination, or suspension of the Agreement in whole or in
- part.
ARTICLE XIV
INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
The CONSULTANT, in accordance with its status as an independent contractor,
covenants and agrees that it will conduct itself consistent with such status, that it will
neither hold itself out as nor claim to be an officer or employee of the CITY by
reason hereof, and that it will not by reason hereof, make any claim, demand, or
14.01
14.02
14.03
15.01
15.02
16.01
application to or for any right or privilege applicable to an officer or employee of the
CITY including, but not limited to, worker's compensation coverage, unemployment
benefits, and retirement membership or credit.
ARTICLE XV
SUCCESSOR AND ASSIGNMENTS
The CITY and the CONSULTANT each binds itself, its partners, successors, and
executors, administrators, and assigns to the other party to this agreement, and to
the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and assigns to such party in
respect to all covenants of this agreement.
Except as stated above, neither the CITY nor the CONSULTANT shall assign,
sublet, or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written
consent of the other, however, the CONSULTANT reserves the right to assign the
proceeds due under this agreement to any bank or person.
In the case of death of one or more members of the firm of the CONSULTANT, the
surviving member or members shall complete the professional services covered by
this agreement.
ARTICLE XVl
EXTENT OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall consist of this agreement, the Scope of Work, dated May
2001, identified as Exhibit "A", as attached hereto and incorporated herein, and the
insurance requirements set forth in the attached Exhibit "B."
This agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the CITY and
CONSULTANT and any other representations or agreements are superseded by
the terms of this agreement.
ARTICLE XVll
PARAGRAPH HEADINGS
The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only
and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this contract.
17.01
ARTICLE XVlll
NOTICE
Whenever a notice to a party is required by this agreement, it shall be deemed
given when deposited with proper address and postage in the U.S. mail or when
personally delivered as follows:
CITY:
City of Ukiah
Civic Center
300 Seminary Drive
Ukiah, California 95482
ATTN: Charley Stump, Director
Planning and Community Development
18.01
19.01
CONSULTANT/
CONTRACTOR:
Leonard Charles, Principal
Leonard Charles and Associates
7 Robie Court
San Anselmo, California 94960
ARTICLE XlX
DUPLICATE ORIGINALS
This agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the
original signature of both parties and when so executed and such duplicate original
shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the agreement between
the parties.
ARTICLE XX
FORUM SELECTION
CONSULTANT and CITY stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to the
enforcement or interpretation of the agreement, arising out of CONSULTANT's
performance or relating in any way to the work shall be brought in Mendocino
County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County.
CONSULTANT hereby waives any right it might otherwise have to seek a change of
venue based on its status as an out of county corporation, or on any other basis.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized officers to
execute this agreement in duplicate the day and year first above written.
CITY OF UKIAH
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Date
CONSU LTANTICONTRACTOR
Leonard Charles, Principal
Leonard Charles and Associates
IRS IDN Number Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Rapport, City Attorney
Date
EXHIBIT "A"
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
WITH LEONARD CHARLES & ASSOCIATES
ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSION AND
ORR CREEK BRIDGE PROJECT EIR
March 13, 2002
Charley Stump
Ukiah Planning Dept.
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Dear Charley,
We have reviewed the existing EIR prepared for the Orr Creek Bridge project to determine
what additional work would need to be done to prepare a Revised EIR. The following
describes our proposed scope of work.
I. Assumptions
· The project consists of a new bridge design, but the bridge would be located in the
same location as previously assessed.
· The project does not include improvements to Brush Street.
· The previous assessment of cumulative impacts will be deleted since the auto
dealerships are no longer proposed.
· There are no other formal or proposed development applications for the study area.
As such, the Revised DEIR will assess the site-specific impacts of bridge construction
and extension of Orchard Avenue and potential growth-inducing impacts from future
development in the study area. City staff will provide the final direction for what land
uses will be assumed for the study area.
II. Preparation of a Revised DEIR
All sections of the previous EIR will need to be changed to reflect the new project and
buildout assumptions. In addition, we will make appropriate changes recommended in
comment letters that are part of the original Final EIR. Specifically, the following will be
done:
A. Introduction Section
This section will be re-written to describe the new project, project history, the new
planning context (including area plan), and a new list of cumulative projects.
B. Summary Section
This section will be re-written to incorporate the new impact analyses.
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 1
C. Environmental Impact Analysis Section
1. Geology
This section will be re-done to incorporate new RWQCB requirements for General
Construction Permits
2. Hydrology
This section will be re-done to assess hydrologic impacts from the new bridge design. We
will rely on Rick Kennedy to supply necessary information regarding potential hydrologic
impacts from obstructing flood flows by placing an abutment within the channel. We will
re-write the analyses to eliminate the auto dealerships.
3. Wildlife and Vegetation
This section will be m-done to assess impacts to wildlife and vegetation from constructing a
longer bridge that includes an in-channel abutment. This will require assessment of the
need for Fish and Game permits as well as Army Corps permits. This section will need to
be re-formatted given the change in future land uses proposed for the study area.
4. Traffic and Circulation
Crane Transportation Group has provided the following scope of work:
A starmp meeting will be conducted with City staff to obtain an update on current
circulation system issues, a listing of all planned and funded circulation system
improvements, and a listing of all approved but not built or under construction
developments. A registered traffic engineer will field survey the local area
circulation system on the same trip. Contact will also be made with County
Transportation Department and Caltrans staff.
.
Weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday) PM peak period (4:00-6:00)
counts will be conducted at the following locations.
North State Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps
North State Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps
North State Street/KUKI Lane
North State Street/Empire Drive/Ford Road
North State Street/Low Gap Road/Brush Street
Perkins Street/Orchard Avenue
Perkins Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps
Perkins Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps-Pomeroy Avenue
Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps
Gobbi Street/U.S. Southbound Ramps
Orchard Street/Ford Street
North State Street/Ford Street
Ford Street/Orr Street
Orchard Street/Clam Avenue
A recent count will be obtained from the City for the Gobbi Street/Orchard Avenue
intersection.
Bid Proposal - On' Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 2
,
Existing PM peak hour operating conditions (level of service) will be determined at
all locations listed in Scope Item g2. In addition, peak hour signal warrant criteria
will be evaluated at all unsignalized intersections analyzed.
.
Weekday PM peak hour traffic projections will be developed for one horizon year
(to be selected in consultation with City staff). Either a list of approved and
planned projects will be supplied by City staff to consider in this evaluation or a
traffic growth mt, will be developed to be uniformly applied to all intersections.
Base Case PM peak hour operating conditions will be determined at all locations
listed in Scope Item//2.
.
Weekday PM peak hour traffic projections will be developed for the proposed
Orchard Avenue extension to a connection with (an unimproved) Brash Street.
This extension (only) is the proposed project. Base Case + project operating
conditions will be determined at each location listed in Scope Item//2 due to the
new circulation system connection.
.
The proposed project will result in growth-inducing impacts on the land to the north
of Orr Creek. The added traffic due to this land use development will be a
secondary significant impact due to the project. Impacts will be determined at all
locations listed in Scope Item//2 for one land use alternative with the underlying
assumption that Orchard Avenue extends to Brash Street, but not to Ford Road. In
addition, impacts will be determined at all locations listed in Scope Item g2 for the
same land use alternative, but with the underlying assumption that Orchard Avenue
extends farther north to Ford Road.
Optional Work: This same analysis can be done for a second set of land use
assumptions for the study area.
.
Measures will be developed to mitigate all significant impacts due to the project as
well as to the secondary impacts resulting from the four land use/circulation system
permutations.
.
An Administrative Draft EIR circulation section will be prepared. After review by
City staff, agreed-to changes will be incorporated into a Draft EIR circulation
section.
5. Air Quality
Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. will conduct the same level of air quality analysis that was done
for the original EIR. The price quote describes the cost if the air quality analysis was done
for one set of land use assumptions and traffic analysis. We have provided an optional cost
of two traffic analyses are done thereby requiring a second air quality analysis.
6. Aesthetics
Minor re-formatting of this section will be required.
7. Noise
This section will be re-formatted and re-written given new traffic data and land use
changes. Please note that neither the original nor this new noise assessment contains a
quantitative analysis by a noise engineer. Such an analysis can be provided if desired as an
amendment to this proposal.
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 3
8. Public Services
All pubic service providers will be contacted to update data on existing conditions and to
determine whether previous mitigation measures remain acceptable.
We expect to conduct more detailed assessment of the water situation. This will include
discussions with City staff to determine existing and future water availability and the ability
to serve the area.
9. Land Use
Reassess project consistency with County and City General Plans including the proposed
area plan.
D. Topical Issues Section
Revise the growth-inducing and cumulative impacts sections to address new land used
assumptions as well as new projects that need to be assessed for cumulative impacts. The
project alternatives analysis should not require major re-writing.
III. Preparation of Final EIR and MMP
We will respond to written comments received during the public review period. We will
provide written responses to those comments and prepare a Final EIR. We will also
provide a Mitigation Monitoring Program
The City previously did not conduct a public hearing on the Draft EIR. It is assumed that a
public hearing would also not be held for this Revised DEIR.
IV. Schedule and Products
Assuming authorization to start work by April 1, we will submit the following:
2. Submittal of three (3) copies of Within sixteen (16) weeks of
Administrative Draft EIR contract signature
o
Submittal of fifty (50) copies
of Draft EIR
Within two (2) weeks of receipt of all
comments
.
Submittal of fifty (50) copies
of Final EIR and Mitigation
Monitoring Program
Within four (4) weeks of receipt of all
comments
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 4
V. Price Quote
The following price is for the basic scope of work described above. See the subsequent
Notes to the Price Quote for optional tasks.
Preparation of Draft EIR
Meetings with Staff
Introduction Section
Summary Section
Geology
BH~o&°l°gy
tic Resources
Air Quality
Cultural Resources
Traffic and Circulation
Traffic Counts
Base Analysis with Orchard extended to Brush St. only
Analysis of Orchard extended to Ford Rd.
LCA time for inputting into EIR
Noise
Aesthetics
Public Services
Land Use
Topical Issues
Graphics
Word Processing
Project Administration
Report Writing and Editing
Printing (53)
Direct Expenses
9OO
2OO
6OO
140
28O
55O
2,800
5O
4,500
13,000
3,000
4OO
350
250
1,850
650
9OO
7OO
1,150
1,900
3,100
1,060
25O
Subtotal
Preparation of Final EIR
$38,580
Response to Comments
Printing (50)
Subtotal
Preparation of Mitigation Monitoring Program
Total for Base Scope of Work
3,500
400
3,900
1,100
$43,580
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bddl~YOrchard Avenue Extemion Revised
Page
VI. Notes to Price Quote
.
The scope of work for the base price is described in this proposal. If after
reviewing the responses to the NOP the City wishes additional studies, these can be
arranged.
.
The traffic analysis can be expanded to include analysis of a second set of land use
assumptions for the study area. The cost for this second level of analysis would be
an additional $4,000.
.
If the air quality analysis is done for two land use scenarios and two traffic
analyses, the second air quality analysis would be an additional $1,800.
.
We will be notified if for any reason the City wishes us to stop work. We will be
reimbursed for all work completed at the time of that notification within 30 days of
our billing the City.
.
The Price Quote does not include attendance of Leonard Charles at any public
hearing.. Leonard Charles will attend public hearings at a cost of $900 per hearing.
.
Additional copies of reports will be available at the cost of our printing and the time
required to deliver reports to the printers and the City.
.
We will not be responsible, under the basic Price Quote, for any of the following
tasks:
.
.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
.
10.
11.
12.
13.
color mapping
geologic subsurface explorations or geologic analysis by a professional
geologist, geological engineer, or engineering geologist
field surveys for plants or animals
quantification of habitat values
field sampling for air or water quality
quantitative air quality analysis
noise analysis by an acoustic engineer
provision of engineering design for stormwater or other public service
systems
use of planimetry techniques, photo montage, or artistic renderings in the
visual analysis
archaeological explorations
Level 1 or higher investigations for toxic materials
engineering design of hydraulics or project drainage facilities.
U.S. Army Corps wetland delineations
8. We can prepare the Draft Findings for an additional cost of $2,700.
.
The Final EIR will include written comments, a summary of pertinent oral
comments, and our responses to those comments. The Price Quote does not
include revision of the text of the Draft EIR.
10.
The EIR is intended to be a full disclosure document and is provided solely to assist
in the evaluation of the proposed project. Leonard Charles and Associates shall not
be liable for costs or damages of any client or third parties caused by use of this
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 6
.
document for any other purpose, or for such costs or damages of any client or third
parties caused by delay or termination of any project due to judicial or
administrative action, whether or not such action is based on the form or content of
this report or portion thereof prepared by Leonard Charles and Associates.
The following reimbursement schedule is requested:
At Contract Signature
City staff acceptance of a Draft EIR
City staff acceptance of a Final EIR
30 percent
60 percent
10 percent
Bid Proposal - Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension Revised EIR
Leonard Charles and Associates
Page 7
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims
for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with he
performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees
or subcontractors.
A. MINIMUM SCOPE OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
Insurance Services Office form number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive
General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad
Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial
General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile
Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025.
.
Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employers Liability insurance, if CONSULTANT has employees who will
directly or indirectly provide service or support CONSULTANT in his provision of
services under the Agreement.
B. MINIMUM LIMITS OF INSURANCE
CONSULTANT shall maintain limits no less than:
.
General Liability: $1,0000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability
Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general
aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general
aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury
and property damage.
.
Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability: Workers' compensation limits as
required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits
of $1,000,000 per accident.
C. DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS
D.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of
Ukiah. At the option of the City of Ukiah, either the insured shall reduce or eliminate such
deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City of Ukiah, its officer, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing
payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages
ao
The City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered
as insured's as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of
the CONSULTANT, products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT,
premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT, or automobiles owned,
leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers,
officials, employees or volunteers.
b.
The CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects
the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of
officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by
the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of
the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Any failure to comply with reporting provision so the policies shall not affect
coverage provided to the City of Ukiah, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers.
d°
The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against
whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the
insurer's liability.
2. Worker Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage
The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Ukiah,
its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work
performed by the CONSULTANT for the City of Ukiah.
3. All coverages
Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that
coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in
coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City of Ukiah.
E. ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURERS
Fw
Gu
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.
VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE
CONSULTANT shall furnish the City of Ukiah with certificates of insurance and with original
endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and
endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on
forms provided by the City of Ukiah. Where by statute, the City of Ukiah's Worker's
Compensation related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance
Commissioner are to be substituted. All certificates and endorsements are to be received
and approved by the City of Ukiah before work commences. The City of Ukiah reserves the
right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.
SUBCONTRACTS
CONSULTANT shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish
separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for
subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.
Item No. 12 ¢
Date: April 3, 2002
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485 with the
Western Area Power Administration for the Purchase of Excess Capacity.
REPORT: The City of Ukiah, as a customer of the Western Area Power Administration,
paid a share of a needed up-grade to the generator windings at Shasta Dam. In return for
our participation in the up-grade, the City of Ukiah was given the opportunity to share in the
increased capacity produced as a result of the generator up-grade. This Letter Agreement
gives the City of Ukiah the right to purchase one-half of one percent (.5%) of any excess
capacity and associated energy available from Shasta Dam from April 1,2002 until March
31,2003 on a daily basis. The Agreement does not obligate the City of Ukiah to purchase
the excess capacity and associated energy. However, when excess capacity under this
agreement is available, we are able to replace higher cost generating capacity. Excess
capacity and energy under this agreement costs $ 24.63/kwh and our average capacity and
energy costs is $ 60.84/kwh.
The City of Ukiah has participated in this program since 1994 and has utilized the
excess capacity and energy from this program to obtain operational savings. Therefore, staff
recommends that the city participate in the annual program, and request that the Mayor be
granted the authority to execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to Execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-
00485 with the Western Area Power Administration for the Purchase of Excess Capacity.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Authority to Execute the Agreement.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachment: 1) Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
APPROVED: '. ~ o _
Can~-~ce Hdrsley, C~'t~ ~anager
Department of Energy
Western Area Power Administration
Sierra Nevada Customer Service Region
114 Parkshore Drive
Folsom, California 95630-4710
Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
Mr. Darryl L. Barnes
Public Utilities Director
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482-5400
Dear Mr. Barnes:
This Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485 is made between the Sierra Nevada Customer
Service Region of the Western Area Power Administration and the City of Ukiah for the
Sierra Nevada Region to provide Shasta Rewinds and daily excess capacity and
associated energy to Ukiah.
The Sierra Nevada Region and Ukiah agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. This Letter of Agreement shall become effective on April 1,2002, and shall
remain in effect through March 31, 2003, except as otherwise provided in Section 13
herein. All obligations incurred under this Letter of Agreement shall be preserved until
satisfied.
.
Excess capacity and associated energy shall be made available as follows:
2.1
Shasta Rewinds Excess Capacity (SREC):
2.1.1 Ukiah will be allocated its percentage share (0.5%) of SREC as a
result of participating in the Shasta Rewinds project in accordance with
Contract 94-SAO-00047. Allocations will be based on the weekly average
additional capacity available as determined in Contract 94-SAO-00047.
The capacity factor associated with SREC shall not be more than 67
percent or less than 50 percent, unless agreed to by the Parties.
2.1.2 Five days prior to the beginning of each month Western shall
determine whether the energy associated with SREC will be provided on a
purchase or return basis. If Western requires Ukiah to purchase the
energy associated with SREC, it will be at the rates provided in Exhibit D
to this Letter of Agreement. If Western requires that Ukiah return the
energy associated with SREC, Western will notify Ukiah in writing by
either facsimile or electronic mail of the terms and conditions for the
return.
2.1.3 On Thursday of each week, by 3:00 p.m., Western will notify Ukiah
of the amount of SREC and associated energy available for the following
week (Monday through Sunday).
2.2 Daily Excess Capacity (DEC):
2.2.1 Ukiah will be allocated its prorata share of DEC.
2.2.2 Five days prior to the beginning of each month Western shall
determine whether the energy associated with DEC will be provided on a
purchase or return basis. If Western requires Ukiah to purchase the
energy associated with DEC, it will be at the rates provided in Exhibit D to
this Letter of Agreement. If Western requires that Ukiah return the energy
associated with DEC, Western will notify Ukiah in writing by either
facsimile or electronic mail of the terms and conditions for the return.
2.2.3 The Sierra Nevada Region will notify Ukiah of the total amount of
DEC and associated energy available to Ukiah each day during the term of
this Letter of Agreement.
2.2.4 Ukiah will have the right to request all or a portion of the DEC and
associated energy available to Ukiah.
2.2.5 The Sierra Nevada Region's preschedulers will confirm the
requested amount, or a lesser amount, depending on the amounts
requested and the criteria in Section 7.
3. SREC and DEC and associated energy may be curtailed to the extent required
by an outage of one or more Central Valley Project generating units affecting the Sierra
Nevada Region's ability to provide some or all of the SREC and DEC and associated
energy for the duration of the outage, or may be curtailed to the extent required by
increased project use pumping which reduces the amount of SREC and DEC and
associated energy available. SREC and DEC and associated energy may also be
curtailed to the extent required by either a reduction in transmission capability on the
California-Oregon Intertie affecting the Sierra Nevada Region's ability to import power
from the Northwest or a reduction in the transmission capability on the Central Valley
Project transmission system. To the extent that the Sierra Nevada Region must curtail
deliveries hereunder, the Sierra Nevada Region will immediately notify Ukiah and will
reduce Ukiah's schedule at the commencement of the next applicable scheduling hour
that begins at least 30 minutes after the notification. The Sierra Nevada Region will
determine the extent to which it curtails the SREC and DEC and associated energy. If
necessary, curtailments will first apply to DEC, then to SREC.
4. The receipt of SREC and DEC and associated energy shall not reduce Ukiah's
obligations to take its minimum annual energy entitlement and capacity requirements
provided under existing contracts between Western and Ukiah.
5. The authorized representatives for Ukiah and the Sierra Nevada Region for
scheduling and real-time transactions are provided in Exhibit A.
6. Ukiah may request an amount of SREC and DEC and associated energy, in
accordance with Exhibit B, not to exceed the balance of its unmet expected peak load
for the month after adjustment for its current Contract Rate of Delivery. Ukiah's peak
load shall not include wholesale sales for resale. Ukiah shall provide its expected peak
load forecast for a month by the 20th day of the preceding month.
7. SREC and DEC will be scheduled on the day and by the time specified in
Exhibit B. Once scheduled, any changes to scheduled quantities requested by Ukiah
shall be implemented only if agreed to by the Sierra Nevada Region.
8. Ukiah will not schedule amounts of Sierra Nevada Region preference products,
including commercial firm power, SREC and DEC, in excess of its load.
9. SREC and DEC and associated energy will be delivered to the point of delivery
designated in Exhibit C. Transmission service beyond the point of delivery shall be the
responsibility of Ukiah.
10. Subject to Sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.2, if Western sells the SREC and/or DEC to
Ukiah, Ukiah will be billed for SREC and/or DEC based on the scheduled energy. In the
event of a curtailment of either SREC and/or DEC by the Sierra Nevada Region, Ukiah
will be required to pay for only that amount of SREC and/or DEC actually received, The
rate for SREC and DEC provided hereunder is specified in Exhibit D.
11. In order to ensure the Sierra Nevada Region's ability to continue to provide
reliable, firm electric service to all of its preference Customers, Ukiah hereby agrees to
pay all or a portion of its bill under this Letter of Agreement, as described herein, directly
to the Sierra Nevada Region's power suppliers.
11.1 Ukiah and the Sierra Nevada Region agree that Ukiah assumes no
obligation to the specified power suppliers for 'such payments and that such
payments are made as an administrative and accounting accommodation to the
Sierra Nevada Region. Ukiah and the Sierra Nevada Region further agree that
all obligations for supply of Ukiah's power allocation hereunder remain with the
Sierra Nevada Region.
11.2 The Sierra Nevada Region shall determine the amount of Ukiah's bill
under this Letter of Agreement to be paid to power suppliers. Such amount shall
be deducted from Ukiah's bill under this Letter of Agreement; and in no event
3
12.
shall Ukiah be obligated to pay an amount in excess of its bill under this Letter of
Agreement, based on scheduled or actual use quantities.
11.3 Any failure to pay a power supplier in the time period specified on Ukiah's
bill shall constitute nonpayment of a portion of Ukiah's bill and shall be subject to
the General Power Contract Provisions attached hereto for nonpayment of bills in
full when due.
11.4 Agreement by Ukiah to pay a portion of the Sierra Nevada Region's power
purchase contract obligations shall not be contingent upon Congress making
appropriations for expenditures by the Western Area Power Administration for
such power purchase contract.
Billing and payments for the power provided hereunder shall be as follows:
12.1 Billing and payment for power provided pursuant to this Letter of
Agreement shall be in accordance with the Billing and Payment provisions of the
General Power Contract Provisions attached hereto. Bills shall be sent to Ukiah
at the following address:
City of Ukiah
Public Utilities
Attn: Accounts Payable
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482-5400
12.2 In accordance with Section 11 above, the Sierra Nevada Region shall
notify Ukiah of the power suppliers, amount to be paid to each power supplier,
and all other necessary information, by specifying that information on Ukiah's bill.
12.3 Ukiah shall pay to the designated power suppliers the amounts due within
the time period specified for payment on its bill.
12.4 Payments shall be made to the power suppliers by an electronic transfer
of funds or check, at the option of Ukiah, unless otherwise agreed between the
Sierra Nevada Region and Ukiah. Documentation of payments sent to
designated power suppliers shall be sent to the Sierra Nevada Region as soon
as practicable.
12.5 Payments due to Western may be wired for electronic transfer deposit to
Western's sub-account (American Bank Association No. 021030004, Subtype
10) of the Treasury Department's account with the Federal Reserve Bank in New
York City, (BNF = AC-89001602), account number information to be included
with the bill. Payments may also be sent in check form to the following address:
Department of Energy
Western Area Power Administration
File No. 51587
Post Office Box 60000
San Francisco, CA 94160-1580
12.6 If agreed to by Ukiah and the Sierra Nevada Region, the Sierra Nevada
Region may credit monthly amounts due Ukiah for power sold to the Sierra
Nevada Region, under various contracts the Sierra Nevada Region may have for
purchasing power from. Ukiah, against the amounts due to the Sierra Nevada
Region under this Letter of Agreement. In the event the amount due by Ukiah to
the Sierra Nevada Region is less than the amount owed by the Sierra Nevada
Region to Ukiah, then the Sierra Nevada Region shall pay the difference to
Ukiah. In the event the amount due by the Sierra Nevada Region to Ukiah under
those purchase power contracts is less than the amount owed by Ukiah to the
Sierra Nevada Region under this Letter of Agreement, then Ukiah shall pay the
difference to the Sierra Nevada Region.
13. In the event that Contract 14-06-200-2948A is terminated, this Letter of
Agreement shall terminate concurrently; Provided, That all outstanding energy return
and payment obligations incurred prior to termination of this Letter of Agreement shall
be preserved until satisfied.
14. The authorized representatives; posting, response, and confirmation time
schedule; point of delivery; and the rate for SREC and DEC with associated energy are
set forth in Exhibits A, B, C, and D, respectively. Exhibits A, B, C and D are attached
hereto, and each shall be in force and effect in accordance with its terms until
superseded by a subsequent exhibit or termination of this Letter of Agreement.
15. The General Power Contract Provisions dated July 10, 1998, attached hereto,
are hereby made a part of this Letter of Agreement the same as if they had been
expressly set forth herein; Provided, That Articles 20 through 30 shall not apply.
If you are in agreement with the terms and conditions written above, please indicate
your approval by signing and dating both originals of this Letter of Agreement and return
one original to Gloria Davis (N6205) at this office. If you have any questions, please
contact Jeanne Haas at'(916) 353-4438, or Hiroshi Kashiwagi at (916) 353-4477.
SIGN
InD~ H~'~R E
Attesti ""
....I-I~..a.r~'H i rahara
· '. ". '.'. .Pb~.~.r'.M.~rketi n g Manager
;i'-""~11'~'k"~ KIA H
By:
Title:
Address:
Date:
By:
Title:
City of Ukiah
Exhibit A to
Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
EXHIBIT A
(Authorized Representatives)
1. This Exhibit A is made to be effective under and as a part of Letter of Agreement
02-SNR-00485 and shall remain in effect until superseded by another Exhibit A or upon
termination of this Letter of Agreement.
2. The Sierra Nevada Region's authorized representative for scheduling
transactions shall be its preschedulers, who can be contacted by telephone at (916)
353-4091 or (916) 353-4092, by fax at (916) 353-2210, or by electronic mail at
presched@wapa.gov. For real-time transactions, the Sierra Nevada Region's
dispatchers are the authorized representatives. The dispatchers can be contacted at
(916) 353-2200.
3. The authorized representative for scheduling or real-time transactions for Ukiah
shall be its scheduling agent, the Northern California Power Agency, who can be contacted
by telephone at (916) 781-4281, by fax at (916) 781-4239, or by electronic mail at
kevinm @ ncpa.com.
City of Ukiah
Exhibit B to
Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
EXHIBIT B
(Posting, Response, and Confirmation Time Schedule)
1. This Exhibit B is made to be effective under and as a part of Letter of Agreement
02-SNR-00485 and shall remain in effect until superseded by another Exhibit B or upon
termination of this Letter of Agreement.
2. The following table outlines the normal sequence of events, provided there is no
prescheduling holiday, observed by the Sierra Nevada Region and Ukiah, during a
particular week:
If daily excess capacity is
available on:
SNR posts the amount
available to Ukiah by 11:00
a.m., Ukiah responds by
1:00 p.m., SNR confirms
the amount by 3:00 p.m. on
Ukiah schedules by 9:00
a.m. on the prior:
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
the prior:
Thursday
Thursday
Friday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Wednesday
Friday
Friday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday.
Thursday.
3. The Sierra Nevada Region reserves the right to modify this Exhibit B if it deems it
to be necessary.
City of Ukiah
Exhibit C to
Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
EXHIBIT C
(Point of Delivery)
1. This Exhibit C is made to be effective under and as a part of Letter of Agreement
02-SNR-00485 and shall remain in effect until superseded by another Exhibit (3 or upon
termination of this Letter of Agreement.
2. The Sierra Nevada Region, under terms and conditions stipulated in this Letter of
Agreement, will furnish excess capacity and associated energy to Ukiah at the Tracy
230-kV Substation at a delivery voltage of 230 kV.
3. Delivery of excess capacity and associated energy to the point indicated will be
subject to available transmission capability.
City of Ukiah
Exhibit D to
Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485
EXHIBIT D
(Rate for SREC and DEC with Associated Energy)
1. This Exhibit D is made to be effective under and as a part of Letter of Agreement
02-SNR-00485 and shall remain in effect until superseded by another Exhibit D or upon
termination of this Letter of Agreement.
2,
The rate for SREC and DEC with associated energy shall be comprised of:
2.1 The estimated Pacific Gas & Electric Company's full thermal production
rate (at the time of the excesscapacity sale) used to determine Energy Account
No. 2 transactions, currently 20.16 mills per kWh;
2.2 An administrative adder of 0.5 mill per kWh;
2.3 The Central Valley Project nonfirm transmission rate of 1.0 mill per kWh;
and
2.4 Any additional purchase power or other costs incurred by the Sierra
Nevada Region due to decisions made to the benefit of the excess capacity
program. This is a charge that will be assessed after the fact, once all costs are
determined.
3. The Sierra Nevada Region may change the rate for SREC and DEC with
associated energy upon written notice to Ukiah. This Exhibit D will be modified by the
Sierra Nevada Region to reflect the change in rate.
ITEM NO.
DATE:
d
12
Anril ~ 2~D2
·
_AGI=NDA ~H_MMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SPH
ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE DESIGN SERVICES AND
PREPARE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH'S WATER
TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$ 565,478.
SUMMARY: Proposals to provide engineering design services and prepare construction documents
for the City of Ukiah's water treatment plant (VVTP) improvement project were solicited from 19
engineering firms. This report outlines the results of that solicitation.
The City of Ukiah obtains water supplies from both groundwater sources and the Russian River.
Water from the Russian River is obtained through a Ranney well collector, hydraulically designed to
produce approximately 13 million gallons per day (MGD). There are five groundwater wells, three of
which (wells 2, 3, and 6) according to the California Department of Health Services (DHS) may be
under the influence of the Russian River. If it is determined that the wells are influenced by surface
water, the City will have to abandon the use of these wells. Source water alternatives will be needed
to replace the lost capacity from the wells. DHS has also determined that improvements are needed
in the WTP and additional treated water storage capacity is required.
(Continued on page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a Professional
Consulting Services Agreement with SPH Associates Consulting Engineers for design services and
preparation of construction documents for the City of Ukiah's Water Treatment Plant Improvement
Project.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Determine a different firm is more qualified and
select another consultant to perform the work.
2) Reject all proposals and provide direction to staff.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by: Darryl Barnes, Director of Public Utilities
Prepared by: Ann Burck, Administrative Analyst
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: 1. Memorandum to Darryl Barnes, "Committee Evaluation Results
of WTP Improvement Project Proposals"
APPROVED' ~~~~~
Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager
Page 2
AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH SPH ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE DESIGN SERVICES AND PREPARE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR
THE CITY OF UKIAH'S WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $ 565,478.
Improvements needed to replace the lost capacity from the wells and comply with DHS requirements
will include: 1) expansion of treatment capacity from 6 MGD to 12 MGD, 2) treatment facility building
improvements, 3) improvements to water treatment equipment and control system, 4) additional
standby generator capacity, and 5) additional treated water storage reservoir capacity. The Public
Utilities Department contacted 19 consulting engineering design firms specializing in water treatment
plants to solicit proposals to provide design services and prepare construction documents for the
needed improvements to Ukiah's water treatment plant.
Proposals were received from three consulting engineering firms. Public Utilities assembled a team
including representatives of the Public Works and Public Utilities departments to evaluate the
proposals. The team reviewed and ranked each proposal based on evaluation criteria specified in
the Request for Proposal document. The proposal evaluation team met on March 21, 2001 to
present and discuss the results of their individual evaluations.
The evaluation results for the three proposals along with the team recommendation for award of the
contract were submitted to the Director of Public Utilities on March 27, 2002. SPH Associates
Consulting Engineers received the highest evaluation score. Of the three proposals, its proposal
was the most comprehensive and cost focused. SPH Associates presented a clear understanding of
the WTP performance issues and problems and innovative, cost-effective solutions. Therefore Staff
is recommending that the Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate the final terms and enter
into a contract with SPH Associates Consulting Engineers for the services outlined in the Request for
Proposal Water Treatment Plant Improvement Project. Copies of the recommended proposal from
SPH Associates are available for Council review.
M
mo
Jt l t es
Department of the City of/Jk,ah
To:
From:
CC:
Date:
Re:
Darryl Barnes
Ann Burck
March 27, 2002
Committee Evaluation Results of WTP Improvement Project Proposals
Three consulting engineering firms submitted qualified proposals to provide design
services and preparation of construction documents for the City of Ukiah water treatment
plant improvement project. The proposals were evaluated by a committee according to
criteria specified in the Request for Proposal document mailed to perspective consulting
engineering firms. The members of the WTP proposal evaluation committee met on
March 21,2002 to present and discuss the results of their individual evaluations.
The average of the scores of each committee member's evaluation is given in the
following table:
Point SPH Kennedy/ Black &
Evaluation Factors
Value Assoc. Jenks Veatch
1. Fulfillment of Basic Requirements of RFP 5 3.3 3.3 2.3
2. Project Understanding & Approach 10 9.3 7.3 6.7
3. Past Performance on Similar Projects 25 25.0 20.0 13.3
4. Project Personnel Experience & Workload 20 20.0 18.7 17.3
5. Technical Approach Toward Design 15 12.0 11.0 10.0
Improvements
6. Suitability of Project Schedule 5 4.3 3.7 4.0
7. Project Budget 20 18.7 14.7 13.3
Total 100 92.7 78.7 67.0
Consultant Ranking 1 2 3
Proposal Bid $565,478 $995,700 $1,250,540
SPH Associates Consulting Engineers received the highest evaluation score. Of the
three proposals, their proposal was the most comprehensive and cost focused. SPH
presented a clear understanding of the WTP performance issues and problems and
innovative, cost-effective solutions. The SPH Associates proposal strengths included:
1. Assessment of the factors likely to affect the future performance of the Ranney
Collector along with solutions such as U.S. FilteFs "Actifloc" clarifier unit capability of
filtering higher turbidity source water.
2. Inclusion in the budget for a full-time inspector during plant construction.
3. Grade IV operator to provide start-up training for all WTP operators.
4. Cost saving ideas for additional water storage, stand-by generator capacity, and
having the City buy the Trident filter-clarifier units directly from U.S. Filter.
5. Optional provision for assistance from SPH dudng first year of operation to resolve
any problems.
The evaluation committee recommends that SPH Associates Consulting Engineers be
awarded the contract for design services and preparation of construction documents for
the City of Ukiah Water Treatment Improvement project.
· Page 2