HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-08-02 PacketIMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF CITY OF UKIAH
BALLOT MEASURE , MAKING CITY CLERK
POSITION APPOINTIVE RATHER THAN ELECTIVE
Ballot Measure asks whether the city clerk position should
be appointed by the City Council rather than elected at a general
municipal election.
By statute the effice of city clerk is elected by the veters
at a general municipal election. The office ef city clerk can
become appointive, if a majority of the veters voting at a general
or special election approve a city council sponsored ballot measure
to make the office appointive.
If the proposition is approved by the voters, the effice of is
thereafter appointed by the City Council and vacancies are filled
by the City Council. No term of office is specified and the city
clerk serves at the pleasure of the City Council. The City Council
may by ordinance delegate to the city manager the authority to
appeint the city clerk. Currently, no ordinance of the City ef
Ukiah delegates this authority to the city manager. If the ballot
measure passes, the power to appoint the city clerk arises upon the
expiration of the current city clerk's term of effice.
The elected city clerk must be a resident and elector of the
City. An appointed city clerk or city treasurer need not reside in
the City.
CITY ATTORNEY'S
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE
APPOINTED MAYOR
Currently, the City Council of the City of Ukiah is composed of four elected city council members
and the separately elected mayor. Measure __ would eliminate the position of the separately elected
mayor. Under Measure __ the City Council would be composed of five elected city council
members, and the five member City Council would be required to choose one of its members as
mayor, and one of its members as mayor pro tempore (or vice mayor) on the first Tuesday after the
general municipal election each year.
In Ukiah, at the general election held in __, 198_, the electors voted to make the
position of mayor a separately elected position with a two year term of office. Prior to that time the
city council each year appointed one of its members to serve in the position of mayor and one of its
members to serve in the position of vice mayor.
The mayor's duties and the qualifications for office are the same whether the mayor is
separately elected or chosen by the city council from among its members. In both cases, the mayor
must be a resident and elector of the city at the time of his or her election or appointment.
Regardless of whether the mayor is elected or appointed, the vice mayor is selected by the city
council from among its members on the first Tuesday after the general municipal election each year.
The city council could have voted to pay its elected mayor a salary in addition to the salary
he or she receives as a councilperson. The city council has not done that. Consequently, passage of
Measure __ would not affect the compensation of the mayor.
If Measure __ passes, it would affect the selection of the mayor upon the expiration date of
the incumbent mayor's term of office. Since the election for the office of mayor is on the November
2000 ballot, the mayor would be appointed by the City Council, starting in November 2002.
CITY ATTORNY'S
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE__
MAKING TERM OF ELECTED MAYOR FOUR YEARS
Currently, the elected mayor in the City of Ukiah serves a two year term of office. The
elected City Council members serve a four year term of office. Measure __ would increase the term
for the elected mayor from the current two years to four years..
Measure on the ballot would eliminate the separate election ofthe mayor. If Measure __
passes by a majority vote, the elected position of mayor would be eliminated and this Measure __
would not take effect.
If Measure does not pass by a majority vote, this Measure __ would increase the term of
mayor to four years for the mayor elected in the general municipal election conducted in November
2002. The mayor elected in the upcoming November 2000 election would serve a two year term.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Charley Stump, Planning Director
August 2, 2000
Proposed Homeless Facility Ordinance and Use/Development Guidelines
Resolution
Staff and the City Attorney had a discussion of the proposed homeless facility Ordinance and
associated Resolution subsequent to the preparation of the staff report. It was agreed that minor
language modifications were necessary from both a practical and legal perspective.
Accordingly, staff has modified the proposed Ordinance and Resolution with strike-out (deleted
language) and underline (added language) for the Council's consideration. The only non-editorial
changes are removing the listing of zoning districts where homeless facilities can be proposed and
approved from the Resolution to the Ordinance, and eliminating the actual footage distance from
the residential areas, schools and parks.
Zoning Districts
The listing of Zoning Districts where homeless facilities can be permitted legally belongs in the
Ordinance rather than the Resolution.
Separation Distances
Listing specific distances in feet that must be maintained between homeless facilities and residential
areas, parks, and schools, is arbitrary and potentially exclusionary. Replacing the footage distance
with the statement that a homeless facility must be located a sufficient distance from these areas
to avoid adverse impacts provides flexibility, as well as a clear statement of intent.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Approve the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; 3) Introduce the Ordinance revising the Ukiah Municipal Code; and 4) Adopt the
Resolution establishing Use and Development Guidelines for Homeless Facilities.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
AMENDING ARTICLE 15.5 (HOMELESS FACILITIES), CHAPTER 2 (ZONING)
OF DIVISION 9 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
Pursuant to Section 9265 of the Ukiah Municipal Code, Division 9, Chapter 2
(Zoning) is amended by revising Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) as indicated on Exhibit
"A" attached to this Ordinance.
SECTION TWO
The amendments to Article 15.5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code include
establishing a Use Permit process to review and approve homeless shelters of all types
in most locations throughout the City. They also reference a set of "Homeless Shelter
Use and Development Guidelines" that would be adopted in Resolution form by the City Council.
The Guidelines include a Purpose and Intent Statement; Permit and Planning Requirements; and
Operational requirements. The purpose of having these Guidelines in Resolution form rather than
within the body of the Municipal Code, is because they can be more easily modified in the future
as a result of operational experiences and changing needs.
SECTION THREE
This amendment to Article 15.5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code is
necessary to ensure that the City has up-to-date regulations for homeless facilities, and
to provide broader Iocational opportunities, flexible standards, and a public hearing and
decision making process.
SECTION FOUR
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general
circulation published in the City of Ukiah.
SECTION FIVE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption.
Introduced by title only on
, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Passed and adopted on
, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jim Mastin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
CHAPTER 2
ZONING
ARTICLE 15.5 HOMELESS SHELTERS
SECTION'
§9171'
§9172'
Use Permit Required
Approval Guidelines Established by Council Resolution
§9171'
Use Permit Required
Ao
All homeless ~ facilities in the City of Ukiah require Planning Commission
review and approval of a Use Permit, consistent with §9262 of the Zoning Code.
Bo
Actions by the Planning Commission relative to a homeless ~ facility Use
Permit may be appealed to the City Council ~"',.., .." ~""',,, ,.~, ......,.,..,~""""~"",, consistent with
§9262.D.4. of the Zoning Code.
C,
Homeless facilities may be proposed and approved in the following zoning districts:
CN (Nei.qhborhood Commercial); C-1 (General Commercial); C-2 (Heavy Commercial /
Li.qht Industrial); PF (Public Facilities); R-1 (Sin.qle Family Residential) R-2 (Medium Density
Residential) and R-3 (High Density Residential).
§9172:
Use Permit Approval Guidelines
A.
The City Council shall adopt and mc!r, tclr, may, from time to time, amend Use and
Development Guidelines for homeless ~ facilities.
B,
Such Guidelines shall be ""'""" '~'-¢'"'-'~ ' pt b_~
,~ ..... ',n an ado ed r,,.,,,,,,,;,
Resolution, ~hich shall be made available to any applicant seeking to construct or
install a homeless ~ facility in the City.
C,
Such Guidelines shall be utilized by applicants to design and organize any
proposed homeless ~ facility in the City.
Do
Such Guidelines shall be utilized by the Planning Commission, or City Council in its
decision to approve, deny, or modify a homeless shelte~ facility Use Permit.
E,
Conditions of Approval established by the Planning Commission, or City Council in
its review and approval of any homeless shette~ facility shall be based on the
adopted homeless shelte~ facility guidelines.
Fo
An approved homeless ~ facility Use Permit may be revoked if the shelter is
not being conducted in compliance with the Conditions of Approval, or in violation of
any other ordinance pertaining to its operation. Revocation proceedings shall be
conducted in ~ m~,-,,-,cr cc,-,clctcnt accordance with §9262.H. of the Zoning Code.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
ESTABLISHING HOMELESS SHELTER
USE AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR SITING,
DESIGNING AND USING HOMELESS FACILITIES
WHEREAS, in 1988, the City of Ukiah adopted Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of
Chapter 2, Division 9 of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, since 1988, the siting, design, and operational needs for homeless
shelter facilities has changed, which has rendered the existing 1988 regulations out-dated
and inflexible; and
WHEREAS, on July 12, 2000, the City Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider revisions to Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of Chapter 2, Division 9
of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, after the conduct of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend City Council adoption of the Ordinance revising the Municipal
Code, and approval of a Resolution establishing Homeless Shelter Use and Development
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, On August 2, 2000, the City Council, after the conduct of a public
hearing, approved a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, and adopted an
Ordinance revising Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of Chapter 2, Division 9 of the Ukiah
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the newly adopted Ordinance calls for the adoption of a Resolution
establishing Homeless Shelter Use and Development Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Homeless Shelter Use and
Development Guidelines, included as Exhibit "A" herein; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah
hereby approves the Homeless Shelter Use and Development Guidelines to be used to
guide the use, siting, and design of homeless shelter facilities in the City of Ukiah.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on , by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Jim Mastin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
HOMELESS SHELTER FACILITY
USE AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
I. Purpose and Intent
In recognition of the growing numbers of homeless persons in the Ukiah area, these guidelines
are intended to provide thc cr, t!t!cmcr, t fr=ms'.'.'crk a guide by which a temporary or long-term
homeless shelter mieuht could be established within the City of Ukiah. They are also intended to
ensure that the public's health, safety, and welfare are maintained. The term "homeless shelter'
means the same as "homeless facility."
I1. Permit and Planning Requirements
Use Permit: All homeless shelters require Planning Commission approval of a Use Permit,
consistent with the provisions contained in Ukiah Municipal Code §9262. Use Permit
applications are on file in the office of the Planning Department. Conditions of approval shall be
imposed by the Planning Commission sc thct thc sp!r!t cr, d !r, tcr, t, !f ncr bttsr cf th~ fcmgoing
"G'.'!dc!!,-,c=" crc cctlcf!cd in accordance with Article 15.5, Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal
Code. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council.
Shelter Management Plan: Shelter providers shall establish a Shelter Management Plan in
conjunction with the required Use Permit. Shelter Management Plans shall address issues such
as transportation needs, client supervision, food service (if any or if allowed), client services,
interior and exterior building improvements for client and neighborhood welfare, pets, and any
other component which might bear on ensuring that the shelter is operated in a safe, efficient,
and sanitary manner. The Shelter Management Plan shall also include measures to be
implemented that will ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.
III. Operational =nd Cc.-.tcv_t,_'=l Standards:
A. Minimum Distance to Nearest Residential Development:
................... ~ ....... ~ upsn Homeless facilities shall be located a su~cient distance from
residential developments so that the~ will not create adversely impacts. Factors such as
topography1 landscapinR, structures, and other natural or man-made features shall help to
determine whether or not a proposed facility could have an adverse impact on residential areas.
B. Minimum Distance to Nearest School or Public Park: cnn ~....,/r~;o, ....... ~... ,~
*~ ~;.,,, ~ ..... ;~,;-- ~--, ...... ~,; .... u~ Homeless facilities shall be located a sufficient
~l I~ IHVlII~ Il Vlll V~IV~II 1~ VVl IVVlV VI ~H~IIV
distance from s~hools and parks so that the~ will not ~reate adversely impa~ts. Faotors such ~s
topoqraphy, landscaping, structures, and other natural or man-made features shall help to
determine whether or not a proposed facility could have an adverse impact on schools and
parks. School and public park hours of use shall also be considered when determining the
appropriate distance from schools and parks.
C. Hours of Operation: Temporary homeless shelters typically are restricted to the hours of
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., during winter months (November to March). Hours can vary depending
on the severity and/or duration of the winter, or any other unforeseen factor (e.g., natural
disaster, etc.) which, individually or collectively, warrant different hours of operation. Permanent
homeless shelters are allowed to have expanded hours of operation, depending upon the extent
of in-residence services provided.
D. Shelter Separation from Other Shelters:
Shelter Size (Number of Beds) Min. Separation from Other Shelters
25 or less 0.25 miles
26 - 75
0.50 miles
76 - 100 1.00 miles
101 - 125 1.50 miles
126 or more 2.00 miles
E. Location: Shelters should be located within a reasonable distance or travel time from
services and facilities used by the homeless (e.g., food service, bus stops, government offices,
etc.). They should be in areas that are safe and have Iow crime rates. Shelters should be
located so as to minimize travel routes through residential neighborhoods to get to transit
facilities or other services needed by the homeless. Finally, they should be located so their
operations do not conflict with nearby businesses.
F. Shelter Site and Facility Size/Capacity: The size of the shelter site should be
commensurate with the size of the proposed shelter structure and the activities attendant to its
operation. To insure that the shelter operation is fully contained on site, the building should be
of sufficient dimension and capacity to house the proposed number of residents and provide
space for a variety of support activities, as well as other activities and facilities essential for its
operation. This would include, but not be limited to, adequate shower/bath facilities, toilets, off-
street parking, staff facilities, food preparation facilities, counseling center, health screening
facilities, day care center, and the like.
G. Enclosed and Screened Facilities: Shelter activities should be enclosed within buildings,
except for outdoor waiting areas and play areas for shelters which accommodate families with
children. Outdoor areas associated with the shelter should be enclosed and appropriately
screened to ensure privacy and to provide comfortable waiting areas.
H. Lighting: Adequate on- and off-site lighting should be provided.
I. Access: Adequate pedestrian access should be provided between a homeless shelter and
transit facilities and other services needed by the homeless.
NO'V, THEREFORE, I, Jim ALTstin, Afayor of the City of U~'iah, om behalf of m? fellow
City Councihuembers Philh'p Ashiku, Phil Baldwin, I~?thy Libby, and Roy Smi~ do hereby
designate August ~ 2000 as
HA BITA T FOR HU~IWIT~ DA YIN UKIA H
and conlnlend Habitat for Humanity for its dedication to housing andhard ~vorA' on behalf of our
con~munity and encourage the entire community to share in the dedication festivities of ~e nvo
' th~, Mayor.
WHEREAS, Itabitat for Humanity Inland Alendocino County (Habitat) was chaptered in
1996 as an a/f/haw with the international nonprofit organization whose guiding principle is the
creation o£Iow and moderate income housing throughout the world,, and
WHEREAS, Habitat is a voIunteer group utih'zing the generosity o£ businesses,
governments~ and individuaIs to compIete its goals; and
V~IEREAS, Habitat is compIeting its first homes in UA-iah at the corner of Leslie and Peach
Streets with ~e ~vo families scheduled to begin their new home o~m:ership life in August; and
WIIEI?EAS, in addition co ~e tremendous volunteer labor effort, funJraising endeavors by
Iocal ch urches, material donations by numerous IocaI businesses, and hours of indiWduag sacrifice
by community n~embers, the Ukiab RedeveIopmentAgencygran tedS60, 000 to~tard ~is project for
property purchase and in£rastructure in~provements, and
WtIEREAS, Mr. 3IiIh;?rd FuIIer, founder and president of Habitat for Humanity
h:ternationa[, wilIjoin the IocaI volunteers on August 9 to dedicate the nearly compIeted houses.
., .
.
·
MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, July 5, 2000
The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on July 5, 2000, the notice for which had
been legally noticed and posted, at 6:30 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300
Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilrnembers
were present: Smith, Libby, Baldwin (6:32 p.m.), Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. Staff present:
Police Administrative Sergeant Dewey, Finance Director Elton, Assistant City Manager Fierro,
City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport, Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor,
Building Inspector Tuliback, Police Chief Williams, and City Clerk Ulvila.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
City Manager Horsley led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PRESENTATION
3a. Phil Dow, Executive Director of Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG)
presented a synopsis relevant to the administrative portions of the existing organization. He
stated that MCOG is an organization comprised of the Board of Directors, Policy Advisory
Committee (PAC), Executive Committee, Transit Productivity Committee (TPC), Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC), Social Services Transportation ,Advisory Committee (SSTAC),
and the Citizens Advisory Committee. He noted MCOG's general responsibilities include the
administration of the Transportation Development Act. The enactment of this bill provides for
the development of regional transportation planning agencies in California, which is funded
from one-quarter cent of the sales tax generated from Mendocino County and is subsequently
returned through the State Controller's office to MCOG for program implementation. Each
one of the cities within the County has the option to compete for transportation funding which
can include safety programs. This year's proposed work program is estimated to be
approximately $400,000. He briefly elaborated on administrative and subcommittee
responsibilities.
He explained funding resources available to the City, per the Transportation Development
Act, of which $1,951,000 is available for transit funding. He advised that $80,000 per year
has been allocated from the Regional Planning Assistance (RPA), while funding from other
sources vary. Funding from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) was
discussed, and he noted that MCOG is expected to receive approximately $5.2 million in the
year 2000 and $18 million in the year 2002 from STIP funding. He is recommending all funds
be spent on County and City of Ukiah roads such as the Willits bypass, Hopland bypass, and
the North Hopland expressway. He is recommending the remainder of the funds be allocated
to the cities. He further discussed the Transportation Planning Work Program, Transportation
Enhancement Activities (TEA) and Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) in which
MCOG administers the funds.
Upon questioning by Mayor Mastin concerning the $400,000 Railroad Study, Mr. Dow
explained that it is a long-range study for the railroad. He discussed NCRA's Five-Year
Business Plan and that it is important to look at alternatives and the viability of the railroad
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 1 of 9
as well as its economic impact upon cities near it. He briefly discussed the environmental
process with regard to the VVillits bypass and noted that construction is expected to begin in
the year 2004.
Council thanked Mr. Dow for his report.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE
4b. Albert Fierro, Assistant City Manaqer
City Manager Horsley introduced Albert Fierro as the City's new Assistant City Manager and
discussed his background working as Vice-President of the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) were he managed a Regional Government Mutual Insurance Pool
providing services to 31 cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Albert and his wife are moving
to Ukiah and he started his new position today.
Assistant City Manager Fierro stated he is looking forward to a long professional
relationship with the Council and the Ukiah community.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Sa. Amended Minutes of Reqular Meetinq of June 7, 2000
City Manager Horsley reported the Amended Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 7, 2000
are presented to Council since there had been previous discussion by Council concerning
procedures for amending the minutes, and to ensure that the revisions met with Council's
approval. Council accepted the minutes.
6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
Mayor Mastin read the appeal process.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
MIS AshikulSmith approving items a through c of the Consent Calendar as follows:
a.
bo
c.
Authorized Execution of Amendment No. 4 to the Service Agreement for Juvenile
Work Program at Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site;
Awarded Bid to Rinehart Oil, Inc. for Supply of Petroleum Products for City
Facilities in the Amount of $36,059.45;
Received Report to Council Regarding Acquisition of Services and Parts to
Relocate Two Spacesaver Filing Systems from System Concepts, Inc. in the
Amount of $7,320.75.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin,
Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No one came forward to address Council.
NEW BUSINESS
9a. Adoption of Resolution Makinq Appointments to Planninq Commission~
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 2 of 9
Investment Oversiqht Committee, and Parks, Recreation, and Golf
Commission
City Clerk Ulvila advised that effective June 30, 2000, there were vacancies on the Planning
Commission (1), Investment Oversight Committee (1), and the Parks, Recreation, and Golf
Commission (2). A notice was posted and sent to the media regarding the vacancies. The
applications received as of the June 23, 2000 deadline are included in the Council packet.
She noted the nomination process of Council concerning the vacancies.
MIS Baldwin/Smith nominating Joe Chiles to the Planning Commission, carried by the
following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor
Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
MIS Baldwin/Smith nominating Judith Waterman (Women's Golf Club representative) to the
Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES:
Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT:
None. ABSTAIN: None.
MIS Libby/Smith nominating Faye Hefte (Golf-Public Member) to the Parks, Recreation, and
Golf Commission, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby,
Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
MIS Mayor Mastin/Ashiku nominating Monte Hill to the Investment Oversight Committee,
carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku,
and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
MIS Smith/Ashiku adopting Resolution No. 2001-01 Making Appointments to the Planning
Commission, Investment Oversight Committee, and the Parks, Recreation, and Golf
Commission.
Councilmember Baldwin noted during the Budget Hearings, there was discussion of an
alternative method of appointing Planning Commissioners, and he would like the matter
brought back to Council for discussion.
City Manager Horsley reported at the next Council meeting, there would be discussion
concerning election items for consideration, and staff will also bring that issue before Council
for consideration.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin,
Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
9b. Adoption of Resolution Declarinq 190 Rupe Street a Public Nuisance and City
Council Intent to Commence Abatement Proceedinqs
City Attorney Rapport discussed the procedure the City adopted by way of the City Code,
based on authority in the Government Code, that provides for the procedure for abating
conditions on property in the City that are either a violation of the Uniform Code or constitute
a public nuisance, in that they represent a public health or safety hazard. The procedure,
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 3 of 9
involves adopting a Resolution which declares the City Council's intent to declare a particular
property to be a public nuisance and in violation of various code sections. Once that
Resolution is adopted the process begins and the matter would come before Council, not less
than 30 days from when Council adopts the Resolution, for a more formal hearing. He
continued with details concerning the abatement procedure.
City Manager Horsley reported that Mrs. Golden, the property owner, approached the City
last week and has been speaking with Planning Director Stump concerning the matter. Staff
has advised her that they are willing to work with her, however, they recommend that Council
approve the proposed Resolution to be able to continue with the process.
City Attorney Rapport advised that the City went through a great deal of effort to obtain
voluntary compliance from the property owner before getting to this point, noting that several
notices were sent but no responses were received until recently.
Building Inspector Tuliback explained that the Building Department has made extensive
inspections of the property. On a weekly basis, the structures are continually deteriorating
and remain unsecured. He distributed photographs depicting the current conditions of the
property and structures. He reported that homeless individuals are making a shelter there,
and there are human feces present. Mrs. Golden has signed for certified mailings but has
not responded to staff. He recommended Council proceed with the abatement process. He
discussed the impacts of the property to businesses in the area.
MIS Baldwin/Ashiku adopting Resolution No. 2001-02, Declaring the Property Located at
190 Rupe Street a Public Nuisance and Its Intent to Commence Abatement Proceedings
Pursuant to Ukiah City Code Sections 3300 Et Seq.
Discussion followed concerning the amount of time the process would take. It was reported
by City Attorney Rapport that the City would have to wait 30 days, and under the state
statute after the first notice is given, they have to wait 45 days. Even though under the City
Code staff could bring the matter back to Council in 30 days, they will not bring it back until
the 45 days has run.
City Manager Horsley explained that staff plans to work closely with Mrs. Golden and a
concern has been made that repairs would not be made until early fall, and that there is a
need to have repairs made prior to the onset of winter. Staff hopes the action taken by
Council at this meeting will assist in expediting the level of activity at the property.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin,
^shiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
9c. Award of Bid for Ukiah School Safety Radio Communications Network to
Masterson Communications in the Amount of $30,262.29 and Approve School
Safety Radio Communication Network Project
Police Chief Williams advised that earlier this year, the Police Department applied for a
technology grant and were recently informed that they have authorization to proceed. The
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 4 of 9
purpose of the program is to enhance local law enforcement technology to address problems
relating to crime suppression and prevention. Through the School-Based Partnership Grant,
it was determined that one of the problems affecting the School District and the Ukiah Police
Department was effective first-party communication between responding emergency
personnel and school officials at the scene of an incident. The Ukiah Unified School District
and the Ukiah Police Department propose to take an existing, proven, radio communication
network, and create a complete Ukiah School District- School Safety Communications
network. This communications network will include a dedicated radio frequency, the addition
of base radio stations for the Communication Centers, and the deployment of portable radios
to all schools in the community and responding law enforcement personnel. All responding
Officers will then have the ability to communicate directly with School Officials as they
respond in their patrol cars to an emergency crisis situation and by portable radio while
involved in the incident.
MIS Libby/Smith awarding bid for Ukiah School Safety Radio Communications Network to
Masterson Communications, in the amount of $30,262.29, and approving the Ukiah School
Safety Radio Communications Network Project with the expenditure of grant funds from
account 250.2001, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith,
Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
9d. Discussion and Action Related to Contin.qency Plan for the Taylor Drive
Transfer Station
City Manager Horsley advised that Mendocino County recently approved the final EIR and
Use Permit for the Transfer Station. On March 23, 2000, a Petition for Writ of Mandate on
the Transfer Station was filed with the County of Mendocino naming Solid Wastes Systems,
Inc. (SWS), North Bay Corporation, and the City of Ukiah as Respondents. The current
amended contract for the transfer station calls for it to be built by December 2000. Council
directed staff to investigate possible contingency plans that would allow more flexibility on the
Transfer Station construction date. She reviewed the various contingency options researched
and considered.
Staff worked closely with Mendocino County staff and with the Waste Management section
of the County to discuss various options, including being able to transfer wastes. After each
option was analyzed, the one that appeared to have the best option was to study the
additional capacity of the landfill, if there was any, and what that capacity would equal as far
as additional months to the life of the landfill. Council directed staff to initiate this study,
which they did. EBA Wastechnologies has advised the City, after completing their
calculations and in expectation of the Willits Transfer Station being completed by November
2000, that the Ukiah Landfill can remain open until June 2001.
In speaking with SWS, they have agreed to complete the final design of onsite and offsite
improvements, obtain all grading and State required permits, and begin the preparation of the
Taylor Drive site before the winter season in anticipation of a June 2001 construction
completion date. This is not caused by SWS not being able to fulfill their duties, but was due
to an agreement that was reached between the parties because of extenuating
circumstances. SWS has also stated that, whatever happens with the lawsuit, unless there
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 5 of 9
is a Stop-Stay Order by the court, they will complete the transfer station by the June 2001
deadline. If Council approves the proposed terms, staff will prepare an agreement with SWS
for Council's approval.
Councilmember Baldwin inquired if the current contract is for the completion date of
December 2000. He also inquired why the City's decision to extend the life of the landfill
would change the timeline for construction of the site.
City Manager Horsley explained that the current contract calls for completion in December
2000. The only reason the City looked at the possibility of extending the life of the landfill
was to allow for additional time for construction of the site and for the Closure/Post-Closure
Plan.
Mayor Mastin announced that a fax was received today from Waste Solutions Group for
Council consideration of a proposal concerning this matter.
Jim Salyers, President of SWS felt the timeline for obtaining the building permit could be
moved up two weeks. He discussed the timeline for items during the construction process
and that they would have the grading completed prior to winter.
City Attorney Rapport advised there is adequate protection under the contract due to the
bond requirements, which he explained in detail.
City Manager Horsley read the list of sureties outlined in the contract.
Mayor Mastin inquired as to SWS' contingency plan should the facility not be up and running
by June 4, 2001.
Mr. Salyers stated that if they are not ready by June 4, 2001, they will transport the garbage
out of the County and will make sure the City of Ukiah has an appropriate disposal option for
garbage. He further discussed how they would handle such a situation. He explained that
their Use Permit is in place, they will have their Solid Waste Facilities Permit by August 2000,
and discussed various hauling options.
City Manager Horsley advised that she has been working with Mendocino County staff to
investigate contingency plans including consideration of using the Willits Transfer Station for
a short time.
Councilmember Baldwin inquired about the relationship between SWS and EBA
Wastechnologies. He also inquired if the City contracted with EBA to conduct a study of the
capacity of the landfill.
Mr. Salyers advised that EBA is their contractor/consultant and are designing the Transfer
Station.
City Manager Horsley explained that EBA has written the City's Closure/Post-Closure Plan
DRAFT
July 5, 2O0O
Page 6 of 9
for the landfill, and they are landfill and garbage specialists.
City Attomey Rapport noted that EBA has been doing contract work for the City's landfill for
about 10 years. He respects their professional judgement in preparing a timeline for the
Landfill.
Discussion followed concerning the Study prepared by EBA Wastechnologies and extending
the life of the landfill.
MIS AshikulSmith, approving the extension of the Landfill site closure to June 2001, and
directing staff to prepare an Agreement with Solid Waste Systems, Inc.
Council discussed extending the contract with SWS. The proposal before Council is to
amend the contract to move the beginning date of operation from December 2000, to June
4, 2001.
Motion amended Ashiku/Smith to approve the extension of the Landfill site closure to June
4, 2001, and directing staff to prepare Agreement with Solid Waste Systems, Inc., carried by
the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Libby, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor
Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN' None.
9e. Adoption of Resolution Establishinq the Schedule of Fees and Rates for
Garbaqe and Recycling Collection Service for the 2000-2001 Fiscal Year
Finance Director Elton advised the provisions of the City's Franchise Agreement with Solid
Wastes Systems, Inc. (SWS), for the collection, transportation and disposal of garbage and
the recycling of recyclable materials within the City limits of Ukiah requires that an annual
adjustment be made to the garbage and recycling collection rates. This adjustment is made
by applying a rate factor equal to 75% of the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), for
two consecutive years following the rate adjustment conducted on or about July 1, 1999..
Every third year, the City Council shall conduct a rate hearing to determine what, if any,
adjustment should be made to the garbage collection and recycling rates. He referred to the
schedule of fees and rates for garbage and recycling collection services, as attached to the
proposed Resolution as Exhibit A. He advised that the existing rate for each item was
increased by 3.38%. The proposed rate increase would provide a net increase of 2.8% to
SWS. They will automatically incur an additional franchise and billing and collection fee on
the increased revenue. He further explained how the fee is calculated. The contract states
that the rate will be increase 75% of CPI. It also requires the payment of the franchise and
billing fees to the City and any fees that the City increases will be passed on to the garbage
rate.
Considerable discussion of the rate increase and aspects of the current contract followed.
Staff explained how the percentage of increase is calculated with the CPI.
MIS Ashiku/Baldwin adopting Resolution No. 2001-03, Establishing the Schedule of Fees
and Rates for Garbage and Recycling Collection Services for the 2000/2001 Fiscal Year.
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 7 of 9
Mr. Salyers, President of SWS, responded to an inquiry from Mayor Mastin concerning co-
mingling recycling, by stating that they are investigating it. Currently, at their location in
Santa Rosa, they co-mingle plastic, aluminum, and are looking for a machine that will classify
paper and implement single-stream recycling. For the Ukiah site, he has discussed with the
City Manager the possibility of acquiring an automated collection system that would involve
single-stream recycling. The purchase of this machine may coincide with the opening of the
Transfer Station. They anticipate a reduction in the Tipping Fee because of the opening of
the Transfer Station. It would be an ideal time to implement a new type of collection system
with the single stream recycling, and perhaps not cause an increase to the ratepayers. He
also responded to an inquiry from the Mayor concerning co-mingling of food waste and yard
waste, by stating that he is not familiar with that process. He discussed regulations
concerning food waste recycling.
Discussion of the annual increase as set by the CPI and conducting an audit and review of
the various accounts continued.
Councilmember Libby stated that she is not convinced that the increase is necessary at this
time.
Mayor Mastin explained that the increase is included in the contract.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku,
and Mayor Mastin. NOES: Councilmember Libby. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Smith reported that he acted as emcee at the Concert in the Park on
June 25 and found the concert very enjoyable. He also attended the fireworks display at
the fairgrounds.
Councilmember Libby reported attending a Community Development Block Grant hearing
and found it very informative. They reviewed the allocations and she requested that it be
documented so it would be easy for Council to review the criteria. The Economic
Development Financing Committee met but there is nothing new to report.
Councilmember Baldwin reported he also attended the recent Concert in the Park and
recommended an area be preserved for dancing and that a system be developed so as not
to block the view of the stage from those sitting in the audience.
Councilmember Ashiku had nothing to report.
Mayor Mastin reported this Friday is Fire Marshal Bruce Evans' retirement barbecue at
Todd Grove Park. Although he will be unable to attend, he encouraged others to attend.
13. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR REPORTS
City Manager Horsley reported that a letter and press release has gone out regarding a
meeting at Vinewood Park for the Skateboard Committee. Staff will be meeting with
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 8 of 9
interested parties at the Langely property. Another individual has expressed interest in
purchasing other portions of the property. She advised that Maria Muldaur will be
performing this Sunday at the Concert in the Park and inquired if a Councilmember would
be available to host the performance?
Councilmember Baldwin inquired if the Ken Fowler Auto Center Site Plan will be coming
before Council for review.
City Manager Horsley advised that the Planning Commission has approved the project.
City Clerk Ulvila reported that the City Clerk's office is getting prepared for the November
election. The filing period for Nomination Papers is July 17 through August 11, 2000.
However, should an incumbent not run for re-election, the filing period for that vacancy
would be extended five days, to August 16, 2000.
14. CLOSED SESSION
None.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:26 p.m.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
DRAFT
July 5, 2000
Page 9 of 9
ITEM NO.
DATE: August 2~ 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Award of bid for various pole and pad mount transformers in the amount of $92,213.35 to
various vendors.
A Request for Quotation was written to purchase 12 different size transformers. Requests through the formal
bid process were sent to six suppliers, (power transformers are not available through local vendors). Six bids
were received from five suppliers, and opened by the City Clerk on June 29, 2000, at 2:00 p.m. The bidders
were:
1. G.E. SUPPLY CO.
2. STEPHENS, McCARTHY & ASSOCIATES
3. WESCO
4. WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC (Bidding on both Cooper & Pauweis)
5. WRATHALL & KRUSI
Bids were evaluated on price, delivery time, load losses and availability of circuit protection. The bids are total
cost, including tax and shipping. Based on staff's evaluation the lowest compliant bidder for each unit is as
summarized in the attached table. The transformers will be placed in warehouse stock and will be charged out
on a project by project basis. Adequate funds for this purchase are budgeted in Account No.
800.3646.690.000.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Award bids totaling $92,213.35 as follows: Five - 5 KVA, five - 10 KVA,
ten - 15 KVA, five - 37.5 KVA, ten - 50 KVA, and five - 75 KVA pole mount transformers, one - 25 KVA,
one - 37.5 KVA, two - 50 KVA and three - 300 KVA 480Y/120 pad mount transformers to Western States
Electric for $59,259.72. Three - 150 KVA and three - 300 KVA 208Y/120 pad mount transformers to Wesco
for $32,953.63.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
Reject all bids and provide direction to staff.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor
Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: Bid Tabulation
Approved: ~
Cand~ce Horsley, City Ma~lager
H Ul
0 o 0
Z Z Z
o
o
o
o
o
o
04
o
J~
0
0 0
Z Z
o
o
·
-H
0 0
0
~J
O
0
o o
0
O
4J
0
o o
Z Z
o o~ ~
o
00 ~D 02 [~
o o
~ u
0 0
0 0
Z 2:
Z
0
0
o
0 o
u u
0 0
o 0 0
Z Z Z
o 0
u O
0 0
0 0
Z Z
o
0
0 0
-,-I -,-{ H
0 o
-,-I
o o o~
o
o
0 0 o
o o o
0 0 0 0
Z Z Z
o
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o
i Z m 0 D ~
~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0
ITEM NO. 6b
DATE: AUGUST 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
REJECTION OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM MENDOCINO
COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT AND JANIS VANOVEN, AND
REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE
MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND
The claim from the Mendocino County Probation Department was received by the City
of Ukiah on June 30, 2000 and alleges damages related to Iow voltage on June 28, 2000 at
280 East Standley Street.
The claim from Janis F. Vanoven was received by the City of Ukiah on July 6, 2000 and
alleges damages related to a power outage on June 28, 2000 at 548 Ford Street, #22.
Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the claims as stated
and refer them to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claims for Damages received from Mendocino County
Probation Department And Janis Vanoven, and Refer Them to the
Joint Powers Authority, REMIF.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
Yes
Claimants
Michael F. Harris, Risk ManagedBudget Officer
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Claim of Mendocino County Probation Department, pages 1-4.
2. Claim of Janis F. Vanoven, pages 5-6.
APPROVE ~~1,~~,~._
Can~ace Horsley,-Ci~
mfh:asrcc00
0802CLAIM
Manager
NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST
THE CiTY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA
This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of '
State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: CITY OF UKIAH Attn: City Clerk
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482 .;
IJUN 0 2000
3
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
CLAIMANT'S NAME: Mendocino County Probation Department
)fthe
.
3~
.
.
.
CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS:
· 280 East Standley Street
Number/Street and/or Post Office Box
Ukiah CA 95482
City State Zip Code
( ). (707). 463-4272
Home Phone Number Work Phone Number
PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT (if different from above):
Heidi Dunham~ Business Services Manager
'Name
280 East Standley Street
Number/Street and/orPostOfficeBox
Ukiah CA
(707) 463-4272
Telephone
95482
City State Zip Code
DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: June 28 ~ 2000
PLACE OFACCIDENTOROCCURRENCE: 280 East Standley Street, Ukiah, CA 95482
,
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach additional page(si, if more
space is needed):
Electricity Problem took out two (2) IBM Computer Terminals
See Attached Event Detail
NAME(S), if known, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) ALLEGEDLY CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS:
N/A
.
WFrNESS(ES), if known (optional):
Name
a. Probation Department Staff
b.
Address
280 East Stand]ey Street Uk~ah
T~ephone
(707~ 463-4271
DOCTOR(S)IHOSPITAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREA TED:
Name Address
a.N/A
Telephone
10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS so far
as it may be known at the time of presentation of the claim:
Final Fvonr ~ ,dect~-~]__,e.d .,gn .a-C_-_t.a~'hment took out ~-~o (7) TRM
valued at $750.00 each
11.
STATE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED if it totals less than'"ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of
presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage or loss, insofar
as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the
amount claimed (for computation use #12 below). However, if the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim
would be a limited civil case (CCP § 85).,
Amount Claimed $ 1, ~00. O0
or Applicable Jurisdiction
12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS:
Damages incurred to date:
- Expenses for medical/hospital care:
Loss of earnings:
Special damages for.
Loss of two (2) IBM Computer
Terminals @ $750.00 each
General damages:
b. Estimated prospective damages as far as known:
Future expenses for medical and hospital care:
Future loss of earnings:
Other prospective special damages:
Prospective general damages:
$ 1,500.00
$1,~00.00
This claim must be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A c/aim relating to a cause of
act/on for death or for in]ury to the person otto personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than
six (6) calendar months or 182 days after the accrual of the cause of act.ion, whichever is longer. C/aims relating
to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1)~ar afteAaccrual of the cause of action.
Dated: June 30, 2000 Mendocino County Probati~k ,N_~JYJ~ !,9 . .
S/GNA T, URE OF CLAIMANT(S)
Received in the Office of the City Clerk this ~(~
day of.
NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only. Any other type of form may be used if desired, as long as it
satisfies the requirements of the Government Code. The use of this form is not intended in any way to adv/se you of
your legal rights or to interpret any law. ff you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law,
you should seek legal counsel of your choice at your own expense.
Rev. 5~18.~J9
Attachment to Notice of Claim Against The City of Ukiah, California
Filed By: Mendocino County Probation Department, June 30, 2000
Events leading to the loss of Two (2) IBM Computer Terminals:
Monday, June 19, 2000: When employees arrived at work, it was discovered that the
electricity had gone out over night. All computers were down and the back-up/power
units were beeping. Probation staff contacted our County Information Services to get
systems back up and running. Paul Holden, Computer Operations Manager for the
County, contacted Tammy at the City of Ukiah and found out that some brown-out
conditions were occurring in the downtown area. The problem disappeared by 9:30 A.M.
Tammy later told Paul that the City was looking to replace a transformer which supplied
power to the Standley Street Probation Office to remedy the situation.
Tuesday, June 20, 2000:
Approx. 10:00 A.M. Tammy from the City of Ukiah called Heidi Dunham at Probation to
advise there was electrical work being done in our area and advised us to "save" our
documents on our computers because there was a chance we could lose power. Tammy
stated the work should only take "a few minutes" and she would call us when they were
done. Heidi advised we would shut computer systems down until 11:00 A.M.
Approx. 11:00 A.M. A City of Ukiah Worker came to our building to advise they were
having difficulties and would have to shut our power off during the noon hour. He stated
"We will do our best to keep you up and running until that time". In addition, he advised
that the City would have to replace a transformer and that our power would be off on
Wednesday morning from 7 A.M. to approximately 9 A.M.
At approximately 11:40 A.M., Heidi from Probation advised all staff to shut their systems
down due to power fluctuations. In addition, a memo was issued to all staffthat they were
to shut down thek systems before going home that evening due to the planned power
outage the following morning. The County's Information Services Department was also
contacted regarding the planned outage and made preparations to come to the Probation
Department to prepare for the outage and avoid damage to any county systems.
Approx. 12:00 P.M. Power to the building was shut off. It was offuntil approximately
1:30 P.M. '
Approx. 1:45 P.M. A City of Ukiah Worker came to our building and advised the problem
had been corrected and the City did not need to do the additional work the next morning.
He also stated that we were to notify the City of Ukiah immediately if we noticed any
power fluctuations, no matter how small. Heidi fi'om Probation notified staff and the
County Information Services Department that the power would not be offthe following
morning and to report any power fluctuations.
Approx. 2:30 P.M. A City of Ukiah Worker came to have Heidi at Probation unlock our
Utility Room door so he could take readings. He was here for approximately 30 - 45
minutes. (note...this may have been Wednesday afternoon, the 21a, instead of Tuesday)
Page 1 of 2
Wednesday, June 28, 2000: At approximately 3:45 P.M., all Standley Street Probation
Department computer equipment shut down, the overhead lights went out, the air
conditioning system shut off, the large photocopy machine shut off and other large items
shut off. Smaller equipment remained on, such as radios and the shredder. All desk lamps
dimmed and we lost the use of our main telephone unit. Immediately, staffbegan to shut
offall computer equipment. After approximately 45 minutes, staff.were sent home due to
the brown-out condition. It was noted that several buildings immediately surrounding the
Probation Department did have full power.
Thursday, June 29, 2000: When staff arrived at work, they began to turn on equipment.
Some computers were not working. Staff.contacted the County's Information Services
Department, who immediately sent two staff over to assess the problem. They were able
to reset our. systems, however, they also_ discovered that two IBM Computer Terminals
were no longer functioning due to the power outage problem.
Heidi from Probation called the City of Ukiah, feeling this was a situation related to the
problems encountered the previous week. She was informed that the situation was a
"brown-out".
Attachment to Notice of Claim Against City of Ukiah
Filed By: Mendocino County Probation Department
Page 2 of 2
NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST
THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA
JUL 0 6 ZOO0
This claim must be presented, as prescribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title l, of the.
State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO:
CITY OF UKIAH
Attn: City Clerk
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482
.
o
CLAIMANT'S NAM.EL.-.
CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS:
Home Phone NUmber
k
JUL - 6 20OO
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
'1),? ,.,~ _~ !.., .</~
'-"¢~ ._..2 9-
State
;~ip Code
'-/6~'- ¢~ 3 .'3
Work Phone Number
3. PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT (if different from above):
Name
Number/Street and/or Post Office Box
( '),
Telephone
.
,
City State
DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE:
PLACE OF ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE:
Zip Code
o
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach additional page(s), if more
space is needed):
.
I~A. ME(S), if. known, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) ALLEGEDLY CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS:
Z'
.
WITNESS(ES), if known (optional):
Name
b.
Address
Telephone
o
DOCTOR(S)/HOSPITAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREATED:
Name Address
a.
Telephone
10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS so far
as it may b,e known.at the time of presentation of the claim: /~),( ~-.~, /3~? ~, ~ L7 ~_~
'STATE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of
presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage or loss, insofar
as i~ may be known'at ~he time of the presentati~on of the c/aim, together with the basis of computation of the
amount c/aimed (for computation use #12 be/ow). However, if the amount c/aimed exceeds ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shaft be inclu, ded in the c/aim. However, it shall indicate whether the c/aim
would be a limited civil case (CCP § 85)."
Amount Claimed
or Applicable Jurisdiction
12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS:
a. Damages incurred to date:
Expenses for medical/hospital care:
Loss of earnings:
Special damages for.
General damages:
b. Estimated prospective damages as far as known:
Future expenses for medical and hospital care: $
Future loss of earnings: $
Other prospective special damages: $
Prospective genera/damages: $
This c/aim must be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A c/aim relating to a cause of
action for death or for injury to the person or to persona/property or growing crops shall be presented not later than
six (6) calendar months or 182 days after the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is longer. Claims relating
to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) year after accrual of the cause of action.
~- siG'~ATUi~EOFCLAiMANT(S)
Received in the Off/ce of the City Clerk this
·
day of
NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only. Any other type of form may be used if desired, as long as it
satisfies the requirements of the Government Code. The use of this form is not intended in any way to advise you of
your legal rights or to interpret any law. ff you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law,
you should seek legal counsel of your choice at your own expense.
Rev. 5/18199 ~ ~ --
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 6c
DATE: August 2, 2000
REPORT
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FROM EBA
WASTECHNOLOGIES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,970
SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the Ukiah City Code, this report is being
submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of services costing
$5,000 or more but less than $10,000. EBA Wastechnologies (EBA) worked with staff to
prepare the Final Closure Plan for the solid waste disposal site. After receipt of comments
on the Final Closure Plan from regulatory agencies, EBA developed a response to comments.
Upon receipt of EBA's response to comments, the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) generated a second comment letter which requires significant additional work
from EBA. Staff then obtained a proposal from EBA to address this second set of comments
from the CIWMB. The proposal in the amount not to exceed $7,970 was accepted and the
purchasing officer issued a purchase order to EBA Wastechnologies for completion of this
additional work. As of the date of this City Council meeting all work identified in EBA's
proposal has been completed.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the acquisition of professional
services from EBA Wastechnologies in an amount not to exceed $7,970.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works
Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Otto Bertolero, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer
1. Fiscal Year 2000 / 2001 budget sheet
APPROVED: !.._~J
ca'~ace Horsley, Cit~Manager
RJS: AGebaProfSvcs4
UJ
ILl
I--
Z
:::)
0
o
o
I.-
Z
LU
C]
Z
ITEM NO. 6d
DATE:AUGUST 8, 2000
--
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT TOWING
OF ABANDONDED VEHICLES
As noted in the adopted budget, the expenses of the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement
program (General Fund Department 2002) were to be absorbed into the Police Department's
budget. All of those expenditures were included in Department 2001 except for the specific
costs of towing the vehicles. These costs are reimbursed by the State of California (revenue
account #100.0800.632.000), but the expense must be budgeted and accounted for as a
separate line item. The $1,500 identified in account 100.2001.250.007 "Towing" is necessary to
meet the costs of towing vehicles involved in normal police activities. $5,000 has been identified
as the estimated towing costs of the abandoned vehicle program. A budget amendment is
necessary to authorize this expenditure.
Staff recommends an amendment to the 2000/0 budget to authorize the expenditure of
abandoned vehicle towing costs.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve amendment to the 2000/01 Budget authorizing the
expenditure of $5,000 for towing of abandoned vehicles in
account 100.2001.250.018
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Determine modifications to budget amendment are necessary, identify changes,
and approve revised amendment.
2. Determine budget amendment is not necessary and take no action.
Citizen Advised'
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with'
Attachments:
N/A
Police Department
Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer
Chris Dewey, Sergeant, Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, and Candace
Horsley, City Manager
1. Budget Worksheet, page 1.
mfh:asrcc00 Candace Horsley, CitI
0802BA
Manager
LLI
w 0
~ooo~
>-
i
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 6e
DATE: August 2, 2000
REPORT
SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $22,475.52 WITH EVERGREEN JOB & SAFETY TRAINING TO PROVIDE JOB
AND SAFETY TRAINING TO THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT
The Electric Department has contracted job and safety training until June
30, 2003 with Evergreen Job & Safety Training, the sole provider of this
service. Five programs per year will be presented at a cost of $7,200.00
for the first year and increased by 4% for each year thereafter. This
would increase the amount to $7,488.00 in the second year and $7,787.52 the
third year for a total amount of $22,475.52. Training has been budgeted in
Account No. 800.3733.250.000 and sufficient funds are available.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the award of a three-
year contract to Evergreen Job & Safety Training for safety training for
the Electric Department in the amount of $22,475.52.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL OPTIONS: N/A
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor
Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: None
Candace Horsley, ~ity Manager
ITEM NO. 8a
DATE: August 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE REVISING UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE
DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 15.5 (HOMELESS FACILITIES); ADOPTION
OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING USE AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR
HOMELESS SHELTERS; AND APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
SUMMARY: Staff has initiated the amendment to the Ukiah Municipal Code to update the
current provisions for homeless facilities. Approval of the proposed new language would establish
a Use Permit process to review and approve homeless shelters of all types in most locations
throughout the City, although they are discouraged in the residential zoning districts. The draft
Ordinance is included as Attachment No. 1.
In addition, the new Code language refers to "Homeless Shelter Use and Development Guidelines"
that would be adopted in Resolution form by the City Council. The Guidelines include a Purpose
and Intent Statement; Permit and Planning Requirements; and Operational requirements. The
purpose of having these Guidelines in Resolution form rather than within the body of the Municipal
Code, is because they can, if necessary, be more readily modified in the future as a result of
operational experiences and changing needs. A draft Resolution containing these Guidelines is
included as Attachment No. 2.
(Continued on page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Approve the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; 3) Introduce the Ordinance revising the Ukiah Municipal Code; and 4) Adopt the
Resolution establishing Use and Development Guidelines for Homeless Facilities.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION:
1. Do not approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, introduce the Ordinance, or
adopt the Resolution, and provide direction to staff.
Citizen Advised: Mendocino County Department of Social Service, The Ford Street Project, and
other interested organizations and individuals
Requested by: Planning Department
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Planning Director
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, and David Rapport, City Attorney
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Draft Ordinance
Draft Resolution
Existing Regulations
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 12, 2000
Planning Commission Minutes, dated July 12, 2000
Correspondence received from Mr. Doug Strong, dated July 5, 2000
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, City M~nager
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project involves a complete revision to the existing Municipal Code
Section addressing homeless facilities. The new Code language requires a Use Permit to
establish a homeless facility, and that any proposal be consistent with a set of Guidelines adopted
by the City Council. The Guidelines accompany the proposed Ordinance revision, and are
proposed for adoption in Resolution form. As indicated earlier, the purpose of establishing the
Guidelines in Resolution form is because they can be more readily modified if necessary, as a
result of operational experiences and changing needs in the future.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The current zoning regulations for homeless facilities were
adopted in 1988. At that time, it was envisioned that a permanent large homeless shelter, or a
number of small shelter facilities would likely be constructed to serve the local homeless population.
The regulations define certain areas for both large and small facilities, and require a "homeless
Facility Permit" issued by the Director of Community Development. The "Homeless Facility Permit"
can only be issued after surrounding property owners are notified and provided an opportunity to
submit written comments. No public hearing is required under the current regulations.
In addition, a number of rigid standards have to be satisfied, in order for the permit to be issued.
These standards include a certain amount of outdoor open space, parking, bathroom facilities,
compliance with building and fire codes, and no drop-in clients.
The proposed regulations provide broader opportunities for siting a homeless facility, as well as
permitting various types of facilities (permanent, temporary, etc.). All proposals would be subject
to the Use Permit process, which involves a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The
standards are flexible, acknowledging the scarcity of existing suitable buildings, the difference in
operational and physical needs of the different types of facilities, and the lack of vacant land in the
City.
COMMUNITY REVIEW: On April 10, 2000, the proposed homeless facilities regulations and
guidelines were distributed to a wide range of interested organizations, groups and individuals for
review and comment. Written comments were received from Mr. Doug Strong (Attachment No.
7).
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: On July 12, 2000, the Planning Commission conducted a
public hearing and discussed the proposed new regulations. A number of individuals addressed
the Commission and commented on both the homeless issues facing the community, as well as
the proposed Ordinance and Resolution. All speakers were supportive of the new regulations, and
urged the Commission to recommend City Council approval.
The Planning Commission accepted staff's recommendations, which included incorporating Mr.
Strong's suggestions into the language of the proposed regulations, and recommending City
Council approval of the new regulations.
CONCLUSIONS: The existing zoning regulations for homeless facilities are generally outdated
and inflexible in terms of siting, designing, and operating shelters. Insurmountable problems were
encountered by homeless shelter providers in the past due to the inflexible and mandatory nature
of the existing regulations. The proposed regulations would provide opportunity for a variety of
types of shelters in a broader area of the City. They also add much needed flexibility in Iocational
and operational requirements.
The Use Permit requirement called for in the new regulations provides a formal public hearing
process, while the existing regulations require an administrative decision-making process. The
Planning Commission Use Permit procedure provides important due process for the general public
and can be used as an educational forum for understanding the complexities of the homeless
situation in our community.
The proposed regulations are easier to understand and use, and would provide the public,
interested organizations, staff, and decision-makers with an important tool for designing, regulating,
and understanding proposals for homeless shelter facilities.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
AMENDING ARTICLE 15.5 (HOMELESS FACILITIES), CHAPTER 2 (ZONING)
OF DIVISION 9 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
Pursuant to Section 9265 of the Ukiah Municipal Code, Division 9, Chapter 2
(Zoning) is amended by revising Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) as indicated on Exhibit
"A" attached to this Ordinance.
SECTION TVVO
The amendments to Article 15.5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code include
establishing a Use Permit process to review and approve homeless shelters of all types
in most locations throughout the City. They also reference a set of "Homeless Shelter
Use and Development Guidelines" that would be adopted in Resolution form by the City Council.
The Guidelines include a Purpose and Intent Statement; Permit and Planning Requirements; and
Operational requirements. The purpose of having these Guidelines in Resolution form rather than
within the body of the Municipal Code, is because they can be more easily modified in the future
as a result of operational experiences and changing needs.
SECTION THREE
This amendment to Article 15.5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code is
necessary to ensure that the City has up-to-date regulations for homeless facilities, and
to provide broader Iocational opportunities, flexible standards, and a public hearing and
decision making process.
SECTION FOUR
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general
circulation published in the City of Ukiah.
SECTION FIVE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption.
Introduced by title only on
, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Passed and adopted on
, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jim Mastin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
EXHIB IT "A"
CHAPTER 2
ZONING
ARTICLE 15.5 HOMELESS SHELTERS
SECTION:
{}9171:
{}9172:
Use Permit Required
Approval Guidelines Established by Council Resolution
[}9171:
Use Permit Required
A.
All homeless shelters in the City of Ukiah require Planning Commission review and
approval of a Use Permit, consistent with {}9262 of the Zoning Code.
Bo
Actions by the Planning Commission relative to a homeless shelter Use Permit may
be appealed to the City Council for a final decision, consistent with §9262.D.4. of
the Zoning Code.
[}9172:
Use Permit Approval Guidelines
A.
The City Council shall adopt and maintain Use and Development Guidelines for
homeless shelters.
B,
Such Guidelines shall be clearly defined in an adopted Council Policy Resolution,
which shall be made available to any applicant seeking to construct or install a
homeless shelter in the City.
C.
Such Guidelines shall be utilized by applicants to design and organize any
proposed homeless shelter in the City.
Do
Such Guidelines shall be utilized by the Planning Commission, or City Council in its
decision to approve, deny, or modify a homeless shelter Use Permit.
E.
Conditions of Approval established by the Planning Commission, or City Council in
its review and approval of any homeless shelter shall be based on the adopted
homeless shelter guidelines.
F.
An approved homeless shelter Use Permit may be revoked if the shelter is not
being conducted in compliance with the Conditions of Approval, or in violation of
any other ordinance pertaining to its operation. Revocation proceedings shall be
conducted in a manner consistent with §9262.H. of the Zoning Code.
/-3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
ESTABLISHING HOMELESS SHELTER
USE AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR SITING,
DESIGNING AND USING HOMELESS FACILITIES
WHEREAS, in 1988, the City of Ukiah adopted Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of
Chapter 2, Division 9 of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, since 1988, the siting, design, and operational needs for homeless
shelter facilities has changed, which has rendered the existing 1988 regulations out-dated
and inflexible; and
WHEREAS, on July 12, 2000, the City Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider revisions to Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of Chapter 2, Division 9
of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, after the conduct of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend City Council adoption of the Ordinance revising the Municipal
Code, and approval of a Resolution establishing Homeless Shelter Use and Development
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, On August 2, 2000, the City Council, after the conduct of a public
hearing, approved a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, and adopted an
Ordinance revising Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities) of Chapter 2, Division 9 of the Ukiah
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the newly adopted Ordinance calls for the adoption of a Resolution
establishing Homeless Shelter Use and Development Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Homeless Shelter Use and
Development Guidelines, included as Exhibit "A" herein; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah
hereby approves the Homeless Shelter Use and Development Guidelines to be used to
guide the use, siting, and design of homeless shelter facilities in the City of Ukiah.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
, by the following roll call vote:
Jim Mastin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
HOMELESS SHELTER FACILITY
USE AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
I. Purpose and Intent
In recognition of the growing numbers of homeless persons in the Ukiah area, these guidelines
are intended to provide the entitlement framework by which a temporary or long-term homeless
shelter might be established within the City of Ukiah. They are also intended to ensure that the
public's health, safety, and welfare are maintained.
I1. Permit and Planning Requirements
Use Permit: All homeless shelters require Planning Commission approval of a Use Permit,
consistent with the provisions contained in Ukiah Municipal Code §9262. Use Permit
applications are on file in the office of the Planning Department. Conditions of approval shall be
imposed by the Planning Commission so that the spirit and intent, if not letter of the foregoing
"Guidelines" are satisfied. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City
Council.
Shelter Management Plan: Shelter provi~lers shall establish a Shelter Management Plan in
conjunction with the required Use Permit. Shelter Management Plans shall address issues such
as transportation needs, client supervision, food service (if any or if allowed), client services,
interior and exterior building improvements for client and neighborhood welfare, pets, and any
other component which might bear on ensuring that the shelter is operated in a safe, efficient,
and sanitary manner. The Shelter Management Plan shall also include measures to be
implemented that will ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.
III. Operational and Contextual Standards:
A. Generally Acceptable Zoning Districts to Operate Shelter: CN (Neighborhood
Commercial); C-1 (General Commercial); C-2 (Heavy Commercial / Light Industrial); and PF
(Public Facilities)
B. Generally Unacceptable Zoning Districts to Operate Shelter: R-1 (Single Family
Residential) R-2 (Medium Density Residential) and R-3 (High Density Residential)
C. Minimum Distance to Nearest Residential Development: 150 feet (Distance can be
less than 150 feet depending upon topography, landscaping, structures, and other factors that
buffer the facility from existing residential areas).
D. Minimum Distance to Nearest School or Public Park: 500 feet (Distance can be less
than 500 feet depending upon topography, landscaping, structures, and other factors that buffer
the facility from existing schools or public parks. School and public park hours of use shall also
be considered when determining the appropriate distance from schools and parks.
E. Hours of Operation: Temporary homeless shelters typically are restricted to the hours of
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., during winter months (November to March). Hours can vary depending
on the severity and/or duration of the winter, or any other unforeseen factor (e.g., natural
disaster, etc.) which, individually or collectively, warrant different hours of operation. Permanent
homeless shelters are allowed to have expanded hours of operation, depending upon the extent
of in-residence services provided.
F. Shelter Separation from Other Shelters:
Shelter Size (Number of Beds) Min. Separation from Other Shelters
25 or less 0.25 miles
26 - 75 0.50 miles
76- 100 1.00 miles
101 - 125 1.50 miles
126 or more 2.00 miles
G. Location: Shelters should be located within a reasonable distance or travel time from
services and facilities used by the homeless (e.g., food service, bus stops, government offices,
etc.). They should be in areas that are safe and Iow crime rates. Shelters should be located so
as to minimize travel routes through residential neighborhoods to get to transit facilities or other
services needed by the homeless. Finally, they should be located so their operations do not
conflict with nearby businesses.
H. Shelter Site and Facility Size/Capacity: The size of the shelter site should be
commensurate with the size of the proposed shelter structure and the activities attendant to its
operation. To insure that the shelter operation is fully contained on site, the building should be
of sufficient dimension and capacity to house the proposed number of residents and provide
space for a variety of support activities, as well as other activities and facilities essential for its
operation. This would include, but not be limited to, adequate shower/bath facilities, toilets, off-
street parking, staff facilities, food preparation facilities, counseling center, health screening
facilities, day care center, and the like.
I. Enclosed and Screened Facilities: Shelter activities should be enclosed within buildings,
except for outdoor waiting areas and play areas for shelters which accommodate families with
children. Outdoor areas associated with the shelter should be enclosed and appropriately
screened to ensure privacy and to provide comfortable waiting areas.
J. Lighting: Adequate on- and off-site lighting should be provided.
K. Access: Adequate pedestrian access should be provided between a homeless shelter and
transit facilities and other services needed by the homeless.
§9171
EXISTING REGULATIONS
§9171
CHAPTER 2
ZONING
ARTICLE 15.5. HOMELESS FACILITIES
SECTION:
§9171'
§9172'
Location of Homeless Facilities
Homeless Facility Permits
§9171' LOCATION OF HOMELESS FACILITIES:
Ae
a.
Ce
Small Homeless Facilities: Subject to first securing a Homeless Facility Permit
as provided in §9172, small homeless facilities may be established in any
district or portion of a district defined in this Chapter, with the following
exceptions:
1. Small homeless facilities may not be established in an R-1 Single-Family
Residential district.
Large Homeless Facilities' Large homeless facilities may be established in any
city zoning district subject to first securing a use permit pursuant to Article 18
(commencing with §9225) of this Chapter. A condition of granting a use permit
shall be that the facility meets the requirements specified for a Homeless
Facility Permit.
Excluded Area: No homeless facilities, whether large or small, may be
established within the area bounded by the following City streets: Mason,
Perkins, Railroad Tracks, Clay, Oak, Henry, State and Norton, Including
properties fronting on said streets. (Ord. 871, §1, adopted 1988)
§9172 §9172
§9172:
HOMELESS FACILITY PERMITS: No more than two (2) small homeless
facilities shall operate at the same time within a homeless facilities zone,
Homeless Facility Permits shall be issued by the Director of Community Development
for each homeless facilities zone pursuant to the following procedures.
A.
Application: Application for a Homeless Facility Permit ("HFP") shall be on a
form provided by the Department of Community Development ("Department")
The application form shall require information on the following items:
1. Physical description or plans for buildings and site.
2. Maximum number of persons to occupy a facility.
3. Outdoor open space for occupants.
4. Hours of operation.
5. Length of stay for occupants.
6. A description of toilet/bath facilities.
7. Description and qualifications of agency operating facility.
8. Evidence that facility complies with applicable building and fire codes.
9. Operational Plan detailing:
- Management system
- Meal program
- Lodging accommodations
- Police assistance plan
- Agency referral system
- Facilities/amenities lists
- Intake and screening process
The application shall contain a certification, signed by the applicant or its
authorized agent, that the applicant will operate the facility strictly in accordance
with the information provided in the application.
S.
Standards: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the following
standards:
9120
§9172
B),~
De
'§9172
1. A minimum of fifty (50) square feet of occupiable outdoor open space shall
be provided, exclusive of parking space and driveways, per occupant.
2. Facilities shall contain a minimum of one bath/shower fixture and one toilet
fixture per six (6) occupants.
3. Facilities shall only accept occupants referred by another agency such as the
Ministerial Association, law enforcement, Social Services, etc. or a source in
accordance with the approved management plan (no occupants allowed on a
drop-in basis)
4. Buildings must meet all building and fire 'code requirements.
5. One on-site parking space per bedroom and one on-site parking space for
each employee per eight (8) hour shift must be provided.
Procedures: Applications shall be received in the Department and approved in
accordance with the following procedures:
1. Within thirty (30) days after receiving the application the Department will
determine whether the application is complete. If the application is not complete,
the Department will notify the applicant of what additional information is
necessary to complete the application.
2. Upon determining that the application is complete, the Department shall give
notice to property owners within three hundred feet (300') of the parcel
boundaries on which the facility is proposed that the application is on file. Said
notices shall also indicate that the application is available for public review, and
that written public comments on the application will be accepted and considered,
if received in the Department within twenty (20) days from the date of the
notice.
3. At the expiration of twenty (20) days from the date of the notice to property
owners, the Director of Community Development shall determine whether any
conditions should be added to the permit based on any public comments timely
submitted and shall issue the permit, if the application demonstrates compliance
with the standards Imposed by this Section and the applicant agrees to any
additional conditions imposed by the Director.
4. The determination of the Director may be appealed pursuant to §1203 of the
Ukiah Municipal Code.
Subsequent Review and Revocation: The permit may be revoked by the
Planning Commission pursuant to §9238, if, at any time, it determines that the
§9172
§9172
D)
Ee
permitted facility does not comply with the application as approved. Any change
to the operational plan shall be submitted in writing to the Department thirty (30)
days prior to the proposed effective date of such change,
Application to Existing Facilities: Homeless facilities operating prior to the
effective date of this Section under existing use permits may continue to operate
upon the expiration of their use permit, provided they submit an application for
an HFP at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the use permit. Upon
issuance of the HFP the use permit shall be considered null and void. Such
facility need not meet the physical/structural requirements of an HFP, if currently
legally 'operating and meeting m(-isting applicable codes provided there are no
operational or structural changes to the facility. All other homeless facilities must
obtain an HFP within one year of the effective date of this Section. The 'Ford
Street Guest House' with sixteen (16) clients, is considered a large homeless
facility and shall continue as such. (Ord. 871, §1, adopted 1988)
9122
UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODEAMENDMENT
HomeleSsShelterF.acilities
CITY OF UKIAH
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
DATE:
APPLICANT:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
June 14, 2000
Ukiah Planning Department
Ukiah Municipal Code Amendment - Chapter 2, Article 15.5 (Homeless Shelter Facilities)
Citywide
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The project consists of substantially revising Article 15.5 of Chapter 2 of the Ukiah
Municipal Code (Homeless Shelter Facilities). The new regulations establish a Use Permit process to review and
approve shelters, and they refer to a set of use, placement, and development guidelines to assist applicants and
decision-makers in accomplishing this task.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The City of Ukiah is a densely developed urban environment.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: An Initial Study of potential environmental impacts resulting from the project was
prepared, and a number of potentially significant adverse environmental consequences were identified. These included
impacts to earth and soils from the development of future homeless facilities; an increase in air pollution from the fugitive
dust cause by construction activities; potential impacts to creeks and streams as a result of the potential development
of future homeless facilities; potential noise impacts; and potential light and glare impacts. However, the Ordinance
requires the securing of a discretionary Use Permit, which in turn, requires individual environmental review. These
potential impacts will be evaluated on a case-case basis for compliance with he California Environmental Quality Act.
This document contains possible mitigation measures that could be applied to future projects through the individual
environmental review processes for all future homeless facility proposals.
FINDINGS SUPPORTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project does not have the
potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment.
.
Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in
short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals.
Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in
impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in
environmental impacts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly.
The potentially significant impacts resulting from this project would be mitigated to levels that are not considered
to be significant if the recommended mitigation measures or similarly effective and feasible mitigation measures
are incorporated into the environmental documents of future homeless shelter development proposals.
STATEMENT OF DECLARATION: After appraisal of the possible impacts of this project, the City of Ukiah has
determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant adverse impact on the
environment, and further, that this Negative Declaration constitutes compliance with the requirements for environmental
review and a.nalysis required by theJ~alifomia Environmental Quality Act. This Negative Declaration and associated Initial
Study~ma~.~eviewe~e U_k~h branch of the Mendocino County Library at 105 North Main Street, Ukiah, or at the
Ci/ty~'of U~ia~'~P~~iah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. (707) 463-6200.
/ Ch~rl'es/,~, In, r~?l~g Director
¢/)/ 2
INITIAL STUDY
OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
g
1
Name of Project Proponent: City of Ukiah Planninq Department
Address of Project Proponent: 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482
Name of Project: Ukiah Municipal Code Amendment - Chapter 2, Article 15.5
(Homeless Facilities).
4. Assessor's Parcel Number(s):, N/A
5. Date of Initial Study Preparation: June 14, 2000
6. Name of Lead Agency: City of Ukiah
7. Address and Phone Number of Lead Agency: 300 Seminary Avenue,
Ukiah, CA 95482 / (707) 463-6200
8. Project Description: (See the detailed project description on page 2 of this
Initial Study).
9. Person(s) Responsible for Preparing Initial Study:
~.~~1~~Ump, Int~i~lanning Director
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Ukiah Municipal Code currently contains Article 15.5 entitled, "Homeless Facilities." It was
written and adopted in 1988, and has not been altered or amended since that time. The proposed
code amendment project involves deleting the existing language and replacing it with the following
text:
CHAPTER 2
ZONING
ARTICLE '15.5 HOMELESS SHELTERS
SECTION:
§9171' Use Permit Required
§9172' Approval Guidelines Established by Council Resolution
§9171' Use Permit Required
A.
All homeless shelters in the City of Ukiah require Planning Commission review and approval
of a Use Permit, consistent with §9262 of the Zoning Code.
B.
Actions by the Planning Commission relative to a homeless shelter Use Permit may be
appealed to the City Council for a final decision, consistent with §9262.D.4. of the Zoning
Code.
§9172: Use Permit Approval Guidelines
A.
The City Council shall adopt and maintain use and development guidelines for homeless
shelters.
Bo
Such guidelines shall be cleady defined in an adopted Council Policy Resolution, which shall
be made available to any applicant seeking to construct or install a homeless shelter in the
City.
Co
Such guidelines shall be utilized by applicants to design and organize any proposed
homeless shelter in the City.
Do
Such guidelines shall be utilized by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal,
in its decision to approve, deny, or modify a homeless shelter Use Permit.
E.
F.
Conditions of approval established by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal,
in its review and approval of any homeless shelter shall be based on the adopted homeless
shelter guidelines.
An approved homeless shelter Use Permit may be revoked if the shelter is not being
conducted in compliance with the conditions of approval, or in violation of any other
ordinance pertaining to its operation. Revocation proceedings shall be conducted in a
manner consistent with §9262.H. of the Zoning Code.
HOMELESS SHELTER GUIDELINES
City Council Resolution No.
Adopted on
Purpose and Intent
In recognition of the growing numbers of homeless persons in the Ukiah area, these guidelines are
intended to provide the entitlement framework by which a temporary or permanent homeless
shelter might be established within the City of Ukiah. They are also intended to ensure that the
public's health, safety, and welfare are maintained.
Permit and Planning Requirements
Use Permit: All homeless shelters require Planning Commission approval of a Use Permit,
consistent with the provisions contained in Ukiah Municipal Code §9262. Use Permit applications
are on file in the office of the Planning Department. Conditions of approval shall be imposed by
the Planning Commission such that the spirit and intent, if not letter of the foregoing "Guidelines"
are satisfied. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council.
Shelter Management Plan: Shelter providers shall establish a Shelter Management Plan in
conjunction with the required Use Permit. Shelter Management Plans shall address "good
neighbor" issues, such as transportation needs, client supervision, food service (if any or if
allowed), client services, interior and exterior building improvements for client and neighborhood
welfare, and any other component which might bear on ensuring that the shelter is operated in a
safe, efficient, and sanitary manner.
Generally Acceptable Zoning Districts to Operate Shelter:
CN (Neighborhood Commercial)
C-1 (General Commercial)
C-2 (Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial)
PF (Public Facilities)
Generally Unacceptable Zoning Districts to Operate Shelter:
R-1 (Single Family Residential)
R-2 (Medium Density Residential)
R-3 (High Density Residential)
Minimum Distance to Nearest Residential Development: 150 feet (Distance can vary if buffer
can be provided that would have the same effect as, or be qualitatively better than, the 150 foot
separation.)
Minimum Distance to Nearest School or Public Park: 500 feet (Distance can vary if buffer can
be provided that would have the same effect as, or be qualitatively better than, the 500 foot
separation.)
Hours of Operation: Temporary homeless shelters typically are restricted to the hours of 6:00
p.m. to 8:00 a.m., during cold, winter months (November to March). Hours can vary depending on
the severity and/or duration of the winter, or any other unforeseen factor (e.g., natural disaster,
etc.) which, individually or collectively, warrant different hours of operation. Permanent homeless
shelters typically are allowed to have expanded hours of operation, depending upon the extent of
in-residence services provided, although the types and numbers of permanent residential facilities
(lavatories, shower/bath facilities, cooking and dining facilities, etc.) will correspondingly increase.
Shelter Separation from Other Shelters:
Shelter Size (Number of Beds) Min. Separation from Other Shelters
25 or less 0.25 miles
26 - 75 0.50 miles
76- 100 1.00 miles
101 - 125 1.50 miles
126 or more i 2.00 miles
Locale: Shelters should be located within a reasonable distance or travel time from services and
facilities used by the homeless (e.g., food service, bus stops, government offices, etc.), and they
should be in areas that are generally safe and that can be characterized as having relatively Iow
crime rates. Moreover, shelters should be located so as to minimize the travel routes through
residential neighborhoods that may be necessary to get to transit facilities or to other services
needed by the homeless. However, shelters should not be located so close to businesses that a
conflict can be anticipated between the use of the shelter and the operation of the possibly nearby
business.
Size: The size of the shelter site or building should be commensurate with the size of the proposed
shelter and adequate to support a variety of space needs for the services to be provided to ensure
that the shelter operation will be fully contained on site. This would include, but not necessarily be
limited to, adequate shower/bath facilities, toilets, off-street parking, staff facilities, laundry facilities,
food preparation facilities, human services center, training facilities, day care facilities, and alike.
On-Site Issues: Shelter activities should be enclosed within a building, except for outdoor waiting
areas and possibly play areas for shelters which accommodate families with children. Outdoor
areas associated with the shelter should be enclosed and appropriately screened to ensure privacy
and to provide comfortable waiting areas.
Lighting: Adequate on- and off-site lighting should be provided.
Access: Adequate pedestrian access should be provided between a homeless shelter and transit
facilities and other services needed by the homeless.
CONTEXT OF INITIAL STUDY
As a result of the proposed code amendment language, a property owner or agent would be
required to pursue a Use Permit to open and operate a homeless facility. It is understood and
acknowledged that while such a facility would more than likely be opened within an existing
building, it is possible that it could also result in the construction of a new building. Accordingly,
this Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed code
amendment language, and the possible new construction of a building that would be used as a
homeless facility. Even though future environmental review would be required of any Use Permit
proposal for a homeless facility, mitigation measures are recommended that are intended to guide
the future individual environmental review processes.
DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS
AND
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
EARTH AND SOILS: The Ukiah Valley is part of an active seismic region that contains the
Maacama Fault, which traverses the valley to the east and north of the City. According to
resource materials maintained by the Ukiah Planning Department, the projected maximum
credible earthquake along this fault would be approximately 7.4 magnitude on the Richter
scale.
According to the Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County
Southwestern Part published by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, the urban portions of
the City are underlain by terraces of alluvial plains. Concrete, asphalt, buildings, or other
impervious surfaces typical of a city environment cover the majority of these soils.
Drainage, surface runoff, and available water capacity are all variable.
A. Impacts
Revising the language of the existing Ukiah Municipal Code to better define and permit
homeless facilities, will not in and of itself have a significant adverse impact on soils within
the City. However, when examining the language in terms of what impact a newly
constructed building that would house a homeless facility may have on the soils within the
City limits, it is concluded that theoretically, such a facility could have an unacceptable
impact, depending upon its size, capacity, specific location, and other factors. Accordingly,
the proposed code language requires discretionary review of any proposal for a temporary
homeless facility, which engages CEQA review. In this way, the size, capacity, location and
other factors of a specific proposal can be fully understood and evaluated for potential
adverse impacts to soils and earth.
It is concluded that it while it is impossible to evaluate what impact a proposed homeless
facilities may have on local soils without knowing where they are proposed, and how big
they are, routine mitigation measures can be effective in assudng that potential impacts are
kept at a level that is considered less than significant.
=
B. Miti_clation Measures
.
Future proposed homeless facilities involving site preparation, grading, and actual
construction, shall not permitted without the review and approval of a Grading and
Drainage Plan by the City Engineer. This Plan shall include, but not be limited to,
the following'
ao
c.
the extent of modifications to existing drainage patterns on the site;
the extent of storm drainage improvements and erosion control measures
for building pads, driveways, parking lot areas and other movements of
soils;
other development that the City Engineer determines could adversely affect
existing drainage patterns on the site or abutting properties or cause wind
or water erosion;
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Requiring a grading and drainage plan for projects involving site preparation, grading, and
actual construction ensures that potential impacts are kept to a level that is less than
significant. However, the effectiveness of these mitigation measures must be confirmed by
the additional environmental review required for future individual projects.
AIR QUALITY
A. Settinq- Air Basin Characteristics
The concentration of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the amount of
pollutant released and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The
major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain, and
sunshine. In Ukiah, the combined effects of moderate winds, clear skies, frequent
atmospheric inversions that restrict vertical dilution, and terrain that restricts horizontal
dilution, result in a relatively high potential for air pollution.
The City of Ukiah is situated in the fiat and narrow Ukiah Valley~ The presence of the
mountains on both the west and east sides of the valley create the terrain that tends to
restrict the horizontal east-west movement of pollutants. The dominant wind direction in
the Ukiah Valley is from the northwest to the southeast. Wind speeds in the central portion
of the community are moderate, with wind speeds of 4 mph or less occurring over 60
percent of the time.
VVhile the potential for air pollution is high in the Ukiah Valley, the actual pollutant levels are
relatively Iow due to the lack of upwind sources and the relatively Iow level of development
in the local air basin.
B. Air Quality Standards
The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 established National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for six "criteria pollutants." These include photochemical ozone, carbon
monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and lead. California then
adopted its own Clean Air Act in 1977, creating separate and stricter air quality standards.
Each standard is shown as a duration of time for which a specific contaminant level cannot
exceed. The standards are designed to protect the public from health hazards, visibility
reduction, soiling, nuisance, impacts to agricultural crops, and other forms of air quality
damage.
Table 1: Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant
Ozone
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide
PM-10
Lead
Average Time
1-hour
8-hour
1-hour
Annual
l-hour
Annual
24-hour
l-hour
Annual
24-hour
30-day Avg.
Month Avg.
Federal Standard
0.12 PPM
9.0 PPM
35.0 PPM
0.05 PPM
------
0.03 PPM
0.14 PPM
50 ug/m3
150 ug/m3
--_
1.5 ug/m3
State Standard
0.09 PPM
9.0 PPM
20.0 PPM
0.25 PPM
0.05 PPM
0.5 PPM
30 ug/m3
50 ug/m3
1.5 ug/m3
PPM = Parts per Million
ug/m3 = Micrograms per cubic meter
D. Existing Air Quality in Ukiah
The Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) operates a monitoring
site in Ukiah measuring concentrations of PM-10. Prior to August 1988 the District also
monitored several gaseous pollutants in Ukiah. In August of 1992, the District again
established a multi-pollutant monitoring site in Ukiah for gaseous pollutants, which
measures ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide.
Air quality in Ukiah meets all Federal and State air quality standards with the exception of
the State 24-hour PM-10 standard. This standard was exceeded on 3 days in 1990, 2 days
in 1991, 0 days in 1992, 2 days in 1993, and 1 day in 1994. No exceedances have
10
occurred since 1994. Sources of PM-10 include field-burning, dust from unpaved roads
and grading operations, combustion, and automobiles. 54 of the 58 counties in California
are designated non-attainment for PM-10, which means that most of the California air
basins exceed the permitted 24-hour concentration. The ARB does not require an
Attainment Plan for jurisdictions that violate the PM-10 standard.
Ozone is one of the most serious pollutants affecting the State, and 30 of the 58 counties
are designated non-attainment. While Mendocino County is attainment for ozone, the
Ukiah (East Gobbi Street) sampling station has shown a steady increase in the annual
hours of ozone levels exceeding the 40, 50, and 60 parts per billion thresholds since 1993
(see Table 2). Additionally, the 80 ppb (State standard = 90 ppb) threshold has been
exceeded twice over the past 4 years. However, based upon 1993-1995 data, the ARB has
assigned Ukiah an "Expected Peak Day Concentration" (EPDC) level of 74 ppb, which
means that any values above 70 ppb would be excluded from the designation process as
extreme concentrations (Marcella Nystrom, ARB, personal communication, 4/24/97).
Regardless of the attainment designation and the EPDC status, ozone remains as the
pollutant of primary concern to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District.
The major sources of ozone precursors are combustion sources such as, factories,
automobiles, and evaporation of solvents and fuels.
Other State cdteria pollutants measured in Mendocino County have routinely had maximum
concentrations well below the applicable Federal or State standards. The only other
pollutant of significant concern is Carbon Monoxide (CO). The local threshold for point
source production of CO is 550 pounds per day.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas whose primary source is automobiles.
Concentrations of CO measured in Mendocino County have never exceeded State or
Federal standards, and current maximum concentrations measured in Ukiah are well below
the applicable standards.
Table 2:1994-97 Monthly Ozone Maximums
Number of Hours
1994 1995 1996 1997
Number of
hours exceeding 348 325 390 200
40 PPB
Number of
hours exceeding 121 119 142 60
50
PPB
Number of
hours exceeding 41 34 44 17
60 PPB
11
Number of
hours exceeding 6 7 7 1
70 PPB
Number of
hours exceeding 2 2 0 0
80 PPB
Number of
hours exceeding
90 PPB (State 0 0 0 0
Standard)
NOTE: 1) PPB = Parts Per Billion; 2) State Standard = 90 PPB; 3) Federal Standard = 120 PPB
SOURCE: A Source of Air Quality Conditions Includinq Emissions Inventory, Ozone Formation, PM10
Generation, and Mitigation Measures for Mendocino County, CA; Sonoma Technologies, Inc., 1998.
E. Project Characteristics in Relation to Air Quality
The proposed Zoning Code amendment would potentially permit a homeless facility to be
established in the City with the securing of a Use Permit. This in and of itself would not
cause a degradation of air quality.
However, if such a facility were established under the proposed code amendment
language, it could be open during the entire year, rather than the more common temporary
winter facility. While an occasional client may arrive by car or truck, It is anticipated that
clients would ordinarily arrive and depart by foot or bicycle. Discussions with the
representatives of local organizations dedicated to finding shelter for the homeless (Ford
Street Project) confirm this assumption. Based on past experience with operating homeless
facilities, the Ford Street Project staff have stated that the vast majority of clients walk to
and from these facilities.
F. Criteria for Determining Impacts and their Significance
The following criteria were used to determine whether or not the project would cause
significant adverse air quality impacts:
.
Would the project cause or contribute substantially to existing or projected
air quality violations?
.
Would the project result in exposure of sensitive receptors (i.e. individuals
with raspatory diseases, the young, and the elderly) to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
12
3.
Would the project cause the exceedance of a Federal or State air quality
standard?
G. Short-term Construction Related Air Quality Impacts
Construction activities create a wide range of emissions, ranging from exhaust from heavy
equipment to the air bound organic gases from solvents, insulating materials, caulking
materials, and "wet" pavement. However, while these emissions may contribute to the
accumulation of substances that undergo the photochemical reaction that creates urban
ozone, they are not regarded as significant short-term impacts.
The major short-term construction related air quality impacts would be due to dust
generated by equipment and vehicles. Fugitive dust is emitted both during construction
activity and as a result of wind erosion over exposed earth surfaces. Construction dust
impacts are extremely variable, being dependent upon wind speed, soil type, soil moisture,
the type of construction activity and acreage affected by the construction activity. The
highest potential for construction dust impacts would occur during the late spring and
summer, and early fall months when soils are dry.
In all probability, any future proposal for a homeless facility would involve the reuse of an
existing structure. However, it is potentially possible that a future proposal could involve
site preparation, grading, and actual construction of a new building. It should be noted that
a future project that is permitted by the proposed code amendment language
is still subject to a Use Permit, which will require further CEQA review. For the purposes
of this Initial Study, the following mitigation measures are suggested to offset potentially
adverse impacts related to the production of PM-lO, and should be considered in the
environmental documents for future homeless facility development proposals.
H. Mitiqation Measures
.
Future homeless facility projects involving site preparation, grading, and actual
construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control
dust, particularly during windy days.
.
All inactive soil piles on future homeless facility project sites shall be completely
covered at all times to control fugitive dust.
.
Future temporary homeless facility projects involving site preparation, grading, and
actual construction shall institute a program of cleaning all trucks leaving the
construction site to control the transport of mud and dust onto public streets.
H. Air Quality Impacts Related to Auto Emissions
Based upon the nature of a given proposed project, there could industrial type emissions
or auto related emissions that could degrade the regional air quality. However, it is staff's
conclusion that auto related emissions, such as Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) and Oxides
of Nitrogen (NOX), which are two precursors of ozone, Carbon Monoxide, and, as indicated
above, PM-10, would not result from the potential construction and operation of a homeless
facility, because these facilities typically serve persons without vehicles.
13
m
I. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
Cumulative impacts refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered
together, are considerable. An examination of cumulative impacts to air quality must take
into account the accumulative of past, present, and probable future projects, and their
associated emissions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but
collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.
It is concluded that because the potential construction and operation of a homeless facility
would produce no appreciable emissions or pollutants, there would be no significant
contribution of these substances to the local quality of air.
Je
Mitigation Measures Addressinq Auto Emissions and Cumulative Air Quality
Impacts
No mitigation measures are recommended or required.
K. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
The recommended mitigation measures designed to control fugitive dust will assure that
the production of PM-10 from future development sites is kept at a level that is less than
significant. However, the effectiveness of these mitigation measures must be confirmed
by the additional environmental review required for future projects.
L. Additional Conclusions Regarding Air Quality
Based on staff's research and analysis, it is concluded that the majority of clients using any
future homeless facility would not be arriving or departing from the facility by vehicles.
Moreover, in all likelihood, future homeless facilities would be reusing existing buildings,
and no site preparation, grading or actual construction would occur. However, a number
of mitigation measures are recommended that guide the future environmental review
process for any proposal involving site preparation, grading, and the actual construction of
a new structure.
WATER: Three major creeks flow through the City on their way to the Russian River. The
areas adjacent to the creeks have been identified by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) as being potential subject to flooding events. Additionally, there are
numerous areas within the City that are Iow-lying and subject to short-term flooding during
the winter months.
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that a proposal for a homeless facility within an existing building would
cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff, unless the proposal included major exterior work such as the construction or
renovation of a parking lot. Additionally, it is concluded that a facility within an existing
building would not adversely impact, or be impacted by any streams, creeks, or other
waterways, unless a new parking facility or other significant exterior changes are made to
14
.
a given site. In this case, a grading and drainage plan would be required to ensure that
the work does not impact creeks, streams, or adjoining properties.
Similarly, the construction of a new homeless facility could impact or be impacted by
streams and creeks if the building site were adjacent to one of the creeks flowing through
the City. This scenario could also result in adverse impacts to drainage patterns,
absorption rates, and the rate and amount of surface runoff.
It is impossible to quantify impacts to water resources, or the potential impacts caused by
water resources without knowing the details of a future project or its precise location.
However, pursuant to the proposed revisions to the Ukiah Municipal Code, any proposal
for a homeless facility is subject to discretionary review and the CEQA process. In this
way, any future homeless facility proposal will undergo environmental review to determine,
based on the details of the proposal and its location, whether or not it would have an
adverse impact on water resources.
B. Mitigation Measures
o
Future homeless facility projects involving new construction in areas subject to
flooding according to the Federal Insurance Rate Maps maintained by the Planning
Department shall comply with the Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for
construction within the flood plain.
o
Future homeless facility projects involving the creation of impervious surfaces such
as parking lots and roofs, shall be required to submit grading and drainage plans to
assure that storm water run-off is properly routed and does not adversely impact
creeks, streams, and adjoining properties.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Assuring compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements regarding development
within areas subject to flooding will reduce potential impacts related to flooding to a level
that is less than significant. Similarly, by requiring grading and drainage plans for projects
involving new construction and the creation of impervious surfaces will keep potential
impacts on water resources at a level that is less than significant. However, this must be
confirmed by the additional environmental review required for future projects.
PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE: It is unknown if there are rare and endangered plant or
animal species within the City limits. The majority of plant and animal life within the City is
generally limited to the dparian corridors along the creeks that flow to the Russian River and
the western hillside area. Any disruption to these sensitive natural habitats could result in
adverse impacts to plants and animals, including potential rare and endangered species.
A. Impacts
Similar to the conclusions made regarding potential impacts to water resources, it is
impossible to determine if a future homeless facility project will adversely impact
plant or animal species without knowing the details of the proposal and its precise location.
15
As indicated in Item 3 above, pursuant to the provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code, any
proposal for a homeless facility is subject to discretionary review and the CEQA process.
In this way, any future homeless facility proposal will undergo environmental review to
determine, based on the details of the proposal and its location, whether or not it would
have an adverse impact on plant and animal resources.
B. Mitigation Measure
,
No development of a homeless facility should be allowed to encroach on the
naturally occurring riparian corridor along any creek or stream unless the project
design includes reasonable and feasible mitigation measures.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Assuring the preservation of the City's creek and stream riparian corridors will substantially
reduce potential impacts on plants and animals and their habitats to a level that is less than
significant. However, this must be confirmed by the additional environmental review
required for future projects.
NOISE: Aside from the various single family residential neighborhoods, the City is
generally noisy due to its dense urban environment and the presence of major streets.
The General Plan suggests that homeless facilities should be located in areas near public
services. Much of the area throughout the City near services such as transportation
facilities, medical care, and food and clothing stores, are generally noisy due to their close
proximity to primary streets. However, it should be noted that many commercially zoned
parcels fronting major streets also back-up to residential areas.
A. Impacts
It is possible that a future proposed homeless facility could be impacted by typical urban
noises. It is also possible that a future facility could cause adverse noise impacts to the
owners and/or inhabitants of adjoining parcels. It is impossible to determine the level of
impact without knowing the size and capacity of a future proposed facility, its precise
location, and whether or not it would be situated within an existing or newly proposed
building.
As indicated in the text above, any proposal for a homeless facility is subject to
discretionary review and the CEQA process. In this way, any future homeless facility
proposal will undergo environmental review to determine, based on the details of the
proposal and its location, whether or not it would create or be impacted by significant
amounts of noise.
However, based upon information provided by the Ford Street Project, who are involved in
programs serving the homeless, noise can be a problem with homeless facilities if they are
located adjacent to sensitive noise receptors such as residential land uses. Accordingly,
staff is able to conclude that noise impacts resulting from the operation of homeless
facilities are potentially significant and warrant mitigation.
16
.
.
B. Mitigation Measure
o
The outdoor activities of clients using homeless facilities shall be strictly regulated
and supervised to ensure that noise levels are reduced to a level that is less than
significant.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
Assuring regulated and supervised outdoor activities provides a means to substantially
reduce potential noise impacts from the users of the facility on adjoining properties to a
level that is less than significant. However, this must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
LIGHT AND GLARE: Light and glare impacts usually result from development projects
involving glare producing materials such as large windows and metal roofing, or that use
broad-casting exterior lighting.
A. Impacts
Once again, it is impossible to determine if a future homeless facility would produce an
adverse amount of light and glare without knowing the design details and exact location of
the facility. However, land uses that are open during the evening hours, particularly during
the dark winter months, have exterior lighting systems for general illumination and security.
It is potentially possible that a future homeless facility could install an exterior lighting
system that casts an excessive amount of light onto adjacent properties, which could be
regarded as a significant adverse impact.
As indicated in the text above, any proposal for a homeless facility is subject to
discretionary review and the CEQA process. In this way, any future homeless facility
proposal will undergo environmental review to determine, based on the details of the
proposal and its location, whether or not it would create significant amounts of light and
glare. This Initial Study concludes that mitigation is warranted, and the following mitigation
measure is intended to guide future environmental review.
B. Miff_clarion Measure
.
The exterior lighting for future homeless facilities shall be kept to a minimum, and
shall not illuminate adjoining properties or the night sky.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Assuring limited extedor lighting, and requiring it to only illuminate the project site, provides
a means to substantially reduce potential light and glare impacts of future projects to a level
that is less than significant. However, this must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
LAND USE/GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The Housing Element of the Ukiah General
Plan contains a section devoted to homeless persons. It distinguishes between transitional
and emergency homeless facilities, and suggests that the latter be situated near services.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed updated code language concerning homeless
facilities achieves consistency with the General Plan.
.
The Ukiah Municipal Code allows or permits large and small homeless facilities in various
locations throughout the City. As a result of the proposed code amendment project, a
homeless facility could be permitted in most areas of the City with the securing of a Use
Permit.
The Ukiah Airport Master Plan establishes airport "compatibility zones" throughout the City.
Generally, the closer a given property is to the airport, particularly the runway protection
area and approach/departure zones, the more development restrictions there are to ensure
safety and limit noise impacts.
A. Impacts
No matter the location, any homeless facility has the potential to conflict with neighboring
land uses. This is due to the assemblage of people, potential loitering, potential noise, and
other nuisance level impacts. However, according to the proposed amendment to the
Ukiah Municipal Code, all proposals for homeless facilities will require the secudng of a Use
Permit. Use Permits are not issued unless findings are made that the proposal will not
adversely impact the health, safety, and welfare of the public, and that the project is
consistent with the Ukiah General Plan.
According to the density limitations associated with the various airport "compatibility zones,"
a future homeless facility may be limited in terms of finding a location. For example, the
"A", compatibility zone limits the number of persons to 10 per acre, and the "BI" and "B2"
zones limit the number of persons on a site to 60 per acre. Depending upon the size of the
property, and the proposed capacity of the shelter, this may be a limiting factor in locating
a homeless facility. However, because the Ukiah Airport Master Plan is an adopted policy
document, all future development must conform to its provisions, and therefore no
mitigation measures are necessary.
B. Miti_clation Measure
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
The public process and public hearing before the City Planning Commission for future
homeless facilities ensures that any land use conflict will be kept to a level that is less than
significant. This will be confirmed not only by the review of the Use Permit, but also by the
additional environmental review that is required for future projects.
NATURAL RESOURCES: For the purpose of this Initial Study, potential impacts to natural
resources are evaluated in two ways. First, the project is evaluated to determine if it will
have an impact on any naturally occurring resources present on a given site; and second,
if a future proposal will demand a significant amount of natural resources for construction
and overall development of the project.
18
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that a future homeless facility will result in any significant adverse
impacts to naturally occurring resources in the City, because the City is a densely urban
environment essentially devoid of renewable or non-renewable natural resources
(exception: water resources - see Section 3). Additionally, it is not anticipated that a
proposal for a new homeless facility will demand unusual amounts of natural resources for
construction purposes, because these types of facilities do not typically make such
demands. Typical construction materials are readily available in the immediate Ukiah area.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
Because no mitigation measures are necessary or required, no impacts to natural
resources would result from the project. This conclusion must be confirmed by the
additional environmental review required for future projects.
10.
HUMAN HEALTH, TOXIC MATERIALS, AND OTHER HAZARDS: The proposed new
code language would not, in and of itself, produce toxic or hazardous materials that would
threaten human health. Based on discussions with local organizations that have provided
homeless facilities in the past, it is not anticipated that the future establishment of homeless
facilities pursuant to the proposed code language would involve the use, collection, or
storage of any toxic or hazardous materials.
A. Impacts
Local organizations dedicated to housing the homeless have indicated that homeless
facilities do not involve the use or storage of hazardous substances. Accordingly, it is
concluded that the project would not result in the creation of human health hazards
associated with toxic materials.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Because no impacts from hazardous or toxic materials would result from the project, no
mitigation measures are required. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
11.
POPULATION: The current population for the City of Ukiah is approximately 15,000
persons, with an annual projected growth rate that is less than two percent (2.0%) per year.
19
12.
13.
A. Impacts
The opening of a homeless facility to provide shelter will assist a portion of the local
population that is homeless. A 1994 study entitled, "Study of Homelessness in the Ukiah
Area" found that up to approximately 2000 persons were homeless in the Ukiah area for all
or a portion of 1993. Local organizations addressing this problem have indicated that the
number of persons without shelter has increased substantially since that time (discussion
with Mr. Mark Rohloff of the Ford Street Project).
B. Mitiqation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Because no impacts to the local population would result from the project, no mitigation
measures are required. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional environmental
review required for future projects.
HOUSING: According to the General Plan Housing Element, the number of housing units
in the City of Ukiah has increased approximately 20% over the last 10 years, and at the
present time, there is an approximate even split of renters and owners. The City is in need
of very-low and above moderate income housing to satisfy the demands of the existing and
projected population. Additionally, the Housing Element indicates that the City has a rising
homeless persons population that constitutes a significant local housing issue.
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that the proposed code language project would have an adverse impact
on housing resources, because it would provide a mechanism for the establishment of
homeless facilities. Moreover, if a homeless facility is proposed and approved by the City
through the discretionary permit process, it would fulfill a goal of the General Plan Housing
Element of providing shelter for homeless persons.
B. Mitiqation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
Because no adverse impacts to the local housing stock would result from the project, no
mitigation measures are required. In fact, the proposed project would provide a regulatory
tool for potentially increasing the housing "stock" of the City. This conclusion must be
confirmed by the additional environmental review required for future projects.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION: As the City grows, the need for a more
efficient circulation systems increases. Over the past several years, the City has
experienced significant infill type development, as well as commercial development in the
southwest portion of the community. This type of development has caused the levels of
20
14.
service at key intersections to drop, yet the duration of "heavy" traffic is limited to short peak
times. The City has kept pace with the increase in traffic by upgrading signals and making
improvements to heavily traveled streets.
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that the proposed enabling language and possible subsequent
establishment of homeless facilities would cause traffic impacts, because while an
occasional client may arrive by car or truck, it is anticipated that clients would ordinarily
arrive and depart by foot. Discussions with the organizations that establish homeless
facilities confirm this assumption. Based on last years experience with operating a winter
homeless facility, Mr. Rohloff and Mr. Lovell of the Ford Street Project has stated that the
vast majority of clients walk to and from the facility.
B. Mitiqation Measures
None recommended or required.
C. Impact Si_clnificance After Mitiqation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
PUBLIC SERVICES: Public services are generally available to all parcels within the City
limits. These include police, fire protection, emergency services, schools, parks and
recreation, solid waste, and public transportation.
A. Impacts
Discussions with the City Police and Fire Departments, and local emergency service
providers reveal that the proposed code amendment project, and possible subsequent
homeless shelter facilities will not adversely impact their ability to serve the City.
In terms of schools, parks and recreation, and solid waste service, discussions with
appropriate representatives reveal that the proposed project would not have an adverse
impact on their operations or service capabilities.
B. Miti_~ation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
21
15.
16.
ENERGY: The City General Plan contains an Energy Element with local public policy
focusing on correcting environmental degradation caused by burning fossil fuels and short-
sighted urban planning and design. Burning fossil fuels creates air pollution and increases
atmospheric concentrations of infrared-absorbing gases. These increases have been
associated with global warming. Past urban design features such as expansive shade-less
parking lots also contribute to the production of heat, both at ground level and in the lower
troposphere. To address excessive energy consumption and the resulting environmental
degradation, the General Plan includes policies aimed at reducing the dependence on fossil
fuels by promoting the use of alternative transportation; promoting the use of renewable
energy resources; increasing the efficiency of energy used within structures; and promoting
urban planning and design techniques, such as requiring heavy tree planting in parking lots.
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that the proposed project or subsequent establishment of homeless
shelter facilities would have a significant adverse impact on energy resources, because
these facilities do not typically use substantial amounts of energy.
Construction of a new homeless facility would be required to meet all building code
requirements for energy conservation, as well as the zoning code requirements for tree
planting in parking lots. Accordingly, it is concluded that the potential future construction
of a new building for a homeless facility does not have the potential to use significant
amounts of energy or result in a significant adverse impact on energy resources.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
UTILITIES: Establishment of code language facilitating the development of homeless
shelter facilities, and the potential subsequent development of a facility would require
connections to City utilities.
A. Impacts
Discussions with the City Public Utility Department reveal that if a homeless shelter facility
is proposed within the City, they will have the capability to serve it with water, sewer, and
electrical service. They have indicated further that such a proposal would not in and of
itself, result in a need for new systems or suppliers.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
22
17.
18.
C. Impact Significance After Mitiqation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects
AESTHETICS: While visual quality is subjective in nature, development projects situated
in close proximity to scenic vista areas or scenic highways must be evaluated to determine
if they adversely impact the visual resource.
In addition, the Ukiah General Plan places a strong emphasis on community design and
visual quality, and contains goals and policies intended to ensure that development is
aesthetically pleasing.
A. Impacts
The proposed code language establishing a process for the development of homeless
shelter facilities, and the possible subsequent development of such a facility could cause
adverse aesthetic impacts if it involved the construction of a new building. However, any
proposal is subject to the discretionary Use Permit process, which pursuant to the Ukiah
Municipal Code, requires an examination of the aesthetic quality of projects, and
subsequent CEQA review.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
RECREATION: Recreation is an important component to the City's quality of life. Including
the golf course, the City currently has approximately 10.4 acres of developed parkland per
1000 people, which exceeds the park acreage goals for the City contained in the General
Plan.
A. Impacts
It is not anticipated that the proposed code amendment language and the potential
subsequent establishment of homeless shelter facilities would adversely impact local park
and recreation facilities, because according to City Parks staff, the park facilities are
generally underutilized, and there is an ample amount of parkland to serve the local
population.
B. Mitiqation Measures
None required.
23
19.
20.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: The City General Plan illustrates areas of
identified archaeological sensitivity within the General Plan Planning Area. Most of the
known sites are situated along or in close proximity to creeks and streams, and very few
are located within the City limits.
A. Impacts
The proposed code amendment language will not in and of itself have a significant adverse
impact on historic or cultural resources. However, the language enables a homeless
shelter facility to be established with the securing of a Use Permit, and therefore, the project
indirectly has the potential to impact these resources.
Without an actual detailed proposal, it is impossible to determine if future homeless shelter
facilities would have a significant impact on historic and cultural resources. The final
determination on this matter will be made during the CEQA review of any future project.
However, for the purpose of this Initial Study, it is presumed that any future proposal for
a homeless shelter facility will not have a significant adverse impact on historic and cultural
resources because there are very few areas of archaeological sensitivity within the City
limits, and in all likelihood, such a facility would be located within an existing structure.
Moreover, the requirement for discretionary review and a detailed CEQA compliance
analysis will assure that no significant adverse impacts would result.
B. Mitigation Measures
None required.
C. Impact Significance After Mitigation
There is no potential for significant impact, and therefore no mitigation is required. Potential
impacts remain insignificant. This conclusion must be confirmed by the additional
environmental review required for future projects.
CONCLUSIONS REGARDING POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: After the
conduct of this Initial Study, staff is able to conclude that there are a number of potential
impacts that could result from the proposed Municipal Code amendment project. However,
these same impacts could result under the current Municipal Code regulations for the
development of homeless shelter facilities. The future development of homeless facilities
will require the securing of a Use Permit from the City Planning Commission, which
automatically triggers individual CEQA review. This Initial Study provides possible
mitigation measures that could be used in the future environmental review processes for
the Use Permit proposal seeking approval to develop homeless shelter facilities.
24
21.
22.
MITIGATION MONITORING: AB 3180 requires "all public agencies" to adopt a monitoring
program whenever they adopt an EIR or "mitigated" Negative Declaration.
The City of Ukiah fulfills the requirements of AB 3180 for this project in the following
manner. All imposed mitigation measures are tied to routine field inspections and/or the
development/code permitting process. For example, fulfillment of mitigation measures is
required prior to recordation of a final map, prior to the issuance of grading permits, prior
to the issuance of building permits, or prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy.
In the case of the subject project, an additional stage of the project will be the development
of a precise Development Plan. Additionally, routine grading operation field inspections
by City Engineering staff will ensure compliance with the mitigation measures related to
short-term construction impacts. The Community Services Department, Public Works
Department, and Planning Department will be responsible for the review of grading and
building plans, and will confirm that required mitigation measures are satisfied at the vadous
required stages of the project. In this way, City staff can effectively monitor the
implementation of mitigation measures.
A copy of the draft Mitigation Monitoring checklist is included as an attachment to this Initial
Study.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
Ae
al
Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Short Term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the
environments one which occurs in a relatively, brief, definitive period of time. Long-
term impacts-~_iJl endure well into the future).
C.
Cumulative: Does the project have impacts, which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the
effect on th~of those impacts on the environment is significant).
25
Dm
Substantially Adverse: Does the project have environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
23. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described within the initial study have will be incorporated into the design
of the project or required by the City of Ukiah. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
Stump, Interim Planninq Director
Title
Charles Stump
Print Name
Date
26
RESOURCES USED TO PREPARE THIS INITIAL STUDY
.
.
.
City of Ukiah General Plan, 1995
The Linkaqe Between Land Use, Transportation and Air Quality, State Air Resources Board, 1993.
The Land Use - Air Quality Linkage: How Land Use and Transportation Affect Air Quality, State Air
Resources Board, 1997.
Transportation-Related Land Use Strateqies to Minimize Mobile Source Emissions: An Indirect
.
o
.
.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Source Research Project, State Air Resources Board, 1995.
A Source of Air Quality Conditions Includinq Emissions Inventory, Ozone Formation, PM10
Generation, and Mitiqation Measures for Mendocino County, CA., Sonoma Technologies, Inc.,
November, 1998.
Natural Diversity Data Base, Department of Fish and Game, 1995
Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County, Southwestern Part, California,
U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, January, 1991.
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map, Mendocino County, California - Community Panel Number 060183-
0811 B, June 1, 1983, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
U.S.G.S. Topographical Map, Ukiah Quadrangle, 1958 (photo inspected 1975).
Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan Report, Shutt Moen Associates, July, 1996.
City Air Photographs: 1952, 1968, 1978, 1995.
Study of Homelessness in the Ukiah Area, Kiichli & Associates, August 3, 1994.
Discussions with Mr. Mark Rohloff, Ford Street Project
Discussion with Mr. Richard Lovell, Ford Street Project
Discussions with Ms. Romona Ansolabehere, Mendocino County Department of Social Services
27
UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT
CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 15.5
Homeless Shelter Facilities
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
Mitigation
Measure
1. The City Engineer
shall permit no grading,
excavation, or other
development on the
project site without the
review and approval of a
Grading and Drainage
Plan. This Plan shall
include, but not be
limited to, the following:
a. the extent of
modifications to existing
drainage patterns on the
site;
b. the extent of storm
drainage improvements
and erosion control
measures for building
pads, driveways,
parking lot areas and
other movements of
soils;
c. other development
that the City Engineer
determines could
adversely affect existing
drainage patterns on the
site or abutting
properties or cause wind
or water erosion;
Monitoring
Responsibility
City Department of
Public Works
Monitoring
Schedule and
Timing
Prior to site preparation
and grading activities
Implementation
Verification
Signature and
Date
28
2. Future temporary
homeless facilities
involving site
preparation, grading,
and actual construction
activities shall institute a
practice of routinely
watering exposed soil to
control dust, particularly
during windy days.
3. Future temporary
homeless facility
projects involving site
preparation, grading,
and actual construction
shall institute a program
of washing off trucks
leaving the construction
site to control the
transport of mud and
dust onto public streets.
4. All inactive soil piles
on future homeless
facility project sites shall
be completely covered
at all times to control
fugitive dust.
5. Future temporary
homeless facility
projects involving new
construction in areas
subject to flooding
according to the Federal
Insurance Rate Maps
maintained by the
Planning Department
shall comply with the
Ukiah Municipal Code
requirements for
construction within the
flood plain.
Planning and Public
Works Departments
Planning and Public
Works Departments
Planning and Public
Works Departments
Planning and Public
Works Departments
During routine field
inspections
During routine field
inspections
During routine field
inspections
During routine plans
examination and review
29
6. Future temporary
homeless facility
projects involving the
creation of impervious
surfaces such as
parking lots and roofs.
shall be required to
submit grading drainage
plans to assure that
storm water run-off is
properly routed and
does not adversely
impact creeks, streams,
and adjoining properties.
7. No development of a
temporary homeless
facility shall be allowed
to encroach on the
naturally occurring
riparian corridor along
any creek or stream.
8. The outdoor activities
of clients using
temporary homeless
facilities shall be strictly
regulated and supervise
to ensure that noise
levels are reduced to a
level that is less than
significant.
9. The exterior lighting
for future emergency
homeless facilities shall
be kept to a minimum,
and shall not illuminate
adjoining properties or
the night sky.
Planning and Public
Works Departments
Planning Department
Planning Department
During routine plans
examination and review
Ongoing
Ongoing
30
'10. All proposals for
temporary homeless
facilities shall be subject
to the Use Permit
process, as required by
the Ukiah Municipal
Code.
Planning Department
During routine
examination and review
of submitted plans
31
CITY OF UKIAH
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: July 12, 2000
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City of Ukiah Planning Commission
City of Ukiah Planning Department
Ukiah Municipal Code Amendment (Homeless Facilities)
PROJECT SUMMARY: Staff is initiating an amendment to the Ukiah Municipal Code to update
the current provisions for homeless facilities. Approval of the proposed new language would
establish a Use Permit process to review and approve homeless shelters of all types in most
locations throughout the City, although they are discouraged in the residential zoning districts. The
draft Ordinance is included as Attachment No. 1.
In addition, the new Code language refers to "Homeless Shelter Guidelines" that would be adopted
in Resolution form by the City Council. The Guidelines include a Purpose and Intent Statement;
Permit and Planning Requirements; and Operational requirements. The purpose of having these
Guidelines in Resolution form rather than within the body of the Municipal Code, is because they
can be more easily modified in the future as a result of operational experiences and changing
needs. A draft Resolution containing these Guidelines is included as Attachment No. 2.
This project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners
to visit any property prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council.
PROJECT LOCATION: N/A
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning
Commission 1) recommend City Council ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
2) recommend City Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendments to Chapter 2, Article 15.5
of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and 3) recommend City Council APPROVAL of the Resolution
containing the Homeless Shelter Guidelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: Pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, staff has prepared an Initial Study, and has concluded that as mitigated,
the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. Accordingly, we are
recommending the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: N/A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project involves a complete revision to the existing Municipal Code
Section addressing homeless facilities. The new Code language requires a Use Permit to
establish a homeless facility, and that any proposal be consistent with a set of Guidelines adopted
by the City Council. The Guidelines accompany the proposed Ordinance revision, and are
proposed for adoption in Resolution form. As indicated above, the purpose of establishing the
Guidelines in Resolution form is because they can be more easily modified as a result of
operational experiences and changing needs in the future.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The current zoning regulations for homeless facilities were
adopted in 1988. At that time, it was envisioned that a permanent large homeless shelter, or a
number of small shelter facilities would likely be constructed to serve the local homeless population.
The regulations define certain areas for both large and small facilities, and require a "homeless
Facility Permit" issued by the Director of Community Development. The "Homeless Facility Permit"
can only be issued after surrounding property owners are notified and provided an opportunity to
submit written comments. No public hearing is required under the current regulations.
In addition, a number of rigid standards have to be satisfied in order for the permit to be issued.
These standards include a certain amount of outdoor open space, parking, bathroom facilities,
compliance with building and fire codes, and no drop-in clients.
The proposed regulations provide broader opportunities for siting a homeless facility, as well as
permitting various types of facilities (permanent, temporary, etc.). All proposals would be subject
to the Use Permit process, which involves a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The
standards are flexible, acknowledging the scarcity of existing suitable buildings, the difference in
operational and physical needs of the different types of facilities, and the lack of vacant land in the
City.
COMMUNITY REVIEW: On April 10, 2000, the proposed homeless facilities regulations and
guidelines were distributed to a wide range of interested organizations, groups and individuals for
review and comment. No written comments were received, but a number of reviewing parties
phoned to express full support for the new regulations. All reviewing organizations, groups and
individuals were mailed a notice of the July 12, 2000 Planning Commission public hearing.
CONCLUSIONS: The existing zoning regulations for homeless facilities are generally outdated
and inflexible in terms of siting, designing, and operating shelters. The proposed regulations would
provide opportunity for a variety of types of shelters in a broader area of the City. They also
establish a Use Permit process, and add flexibility in Iocational and operational standards.
The proposed regulations are easier to understand and use, and would provide the public,
interested organizations, staff, and decision-makers with an important tool for designing, regulating,
and reviewing proposals for homeless shelter facilities.
ATTACHMENTS:
.
.
Draft ordinance amending Chapter 2, Article 15.5 (Homeless facilities) of the Ukiah
Municipal Code.
Draft Resolution containing the Homeless Shelter Guidelines.
Existing Code: Chapter 2, Article 15.5 (Homeless Facilities).
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
outer perimeters of the site. He inquired whether there was the possib
may change as the buildings mature wherein more emphasis woul
additional landscaping efforts?
this aspect
be placed on
Mr. Akerstrom replied affirmatively. He indicated landscaping
volunteer effort. However, additional landscaping would be impl~
site perimeters.
is strictly a
on those outer
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:35 p.m.
Planning Commission Discussion:
A brief discussion followed regarding the number of
suitable location. It was noted the southern site is he.
further noted the project is not large enough to triggt
es to be planted and the most
ly dominated by conifers. It was
lot trees.
It was the consensus of the Commission to mI
"Three medium-canopy deciduous trees shall
setback areas to the east and west of the class~
:ondition of Approval No. 11 to read,
~ planted in each of the side yard
om complex."
It was the consensus of the Commission to pprove staff's recommendation regarding
Condition of Approval No. 10.
Commissioner Puser did not favor the ~anufactured building concept.
A brief discussion followed regardin! he premanufactured and/or modular building
concept.
ON A MOTION by Commissioner 'uden, seconded by Commissioner Chiles, it was
carried by an the following roll cai to approve Major Site Development Permit No.
00-24 as submitted by Ukiah E~ r~gelical Free Church, based on Findings Nos. 1-6
and Conditions of Approval .Nos -13, as outlined in the Staff Report and as discussed
and modified above.
AYES: Commis=
NOES: Commissione
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Correll, Pruden, and Chairman Larson
8C.
Ukiah Municipal Code Amendment - Chapter 2, Article 15.5 (Homeless
Facilities) Ordinance amendment initiated by City staff to update the
current provisions for homeless facilities, by establishinq a Use Permit
process to review and approve homeless shelters and to provide flexibility
in Iocational and operational standards. The project also includes a set of
"Homeless Shelter Guidelines" prepared in Resolution form that would be
adopted by the City Council.
Planning Director Stump reported the City has been working with a variety of agencies
in order to revise the City's Homeless Shelter Ordinance. Staff proposes to amend
and/or repeal the existing Ordinance, which is now outdated, in order to provide for a
more flexible and more realistic document for addressing the homeless situation. The
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ].3
July 12, 2000
proposed Ordinance amendment does allow provisions for a public scrutiny process as
well to provide additional homeless opportunities. The revised Ordinance incorporates
Homeless Shelter Guidelines providing sections relative to Purpose and Intent, Permit
and Planning Requirements to include a Use Permit and a Shelter Management Plan,
Operational and Contextual Standards relative to Generally Acceptable and
Unacceptable Districts to Operate a Shelter, Minimum Distance to Nearest Residential
Development, School and Public Park, Hours of Operation, Shelter Separation from
other Shelters, Locale, Size, On-Site Issues, Lighting, and Access. The Shelter
Management Plan must reflect the Shelter Guidelines. The above-referenced Guidelines
would be adopted by Resolution. The purpose for separating the Guidelines from the
Ordinance and/or Municipal Code is to allow for an easier amendment process in the
future.
The Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Article 15.5 (Homeless
Facilities), Chapter 2 (zoning) of Division 9 of the Ukiah Municipal Code and Homeless
Shelter Guidelines are specifically provided for and incorporated herein by reference as
Agenda item 8C. The proposed Ordinance as well as the Resolution would be reviewed
and adopted by City Council on the same evening.
Mr. Stump drew attention to a staff Memorandum, dated July 12, 2000, directed to the
Planning Commission regarding comments submitted by Doug Strong relative to the
Homeless Shelter Ordinance. He welcomed the comments and noted they were
primarily editing comments, which provide additional language clarification and
interpretation. He stated staff agrees with Mr. Strong's comments and recommends
these comments be incorporated into the Homeless Shelter Ordinance and Guidelines
as they advance to City Council for approval.
He noted an Initial Study was required to be prepared on behalf of the Zoning Code
amendments and Legislative Acts. The Study clearly outlines any proposal for a
homeless shelter would require discretionary review therefore, triggering the California
Environment Quality Act (CEQA) process. The purpose of this Initial Study was to
identify possible impacts that might occur from the construction of a new building or the
occupation of an existing building. The Study would also provide guidance to
environmental review of any homeless shelter that is proposed.
It was noted that in some cases the site selection would require CEQA review.
Commissioner Correll inquired whether the proposed Negative Declaration would be
the standard for all future environmental studies?
Mr. Stump replied the proposed Negative Declaration would act as a guide for use if
and when a future proposal comes forward and would be referenced in any CEQA
review.
It was noted a potential applicant must submit a Shelter Management Plan to be
completed with the proposal and would be considered as part of the Use Permit
proceedings. This would enable the Planning Commission to understand how the shelter
would be managed wherein all good neighbor issues would be addressed. It was also
noted that changes could be made to the Plan by the applicant, staff, and/or Planning
Commission until the Use Permit is approved. Common procedure would be for the
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ]4
July 12, 2000
applicant to complete a Use Permit along with a Shelter Management Plan to be
presented before the Planning Commissions as a public hearing.
Commissioner Pruden inquired regarding Chapter 2 of the 1988 Zoning text,
referenced as section 9171, Item C, Excluded Area, and whether this particular section
would be incorporated into the amended Ordinance?
Mr. Stump replied negatively. He stated Chapter 2, Zoning, Article 15.5 Homeless
Shelter, marked as Exhibit "A" is the proposed document replacing the 1988 Zoning text.
The revised text states that no specific area would be excluded as reflected in the former
Zoning document.
Commissioner Puser questioned with regard to on-site issues if outdoor areas
associated with the shelter should be enclosed and appropriately screened and whether
staff could further elaborate on this matter?
Mr. Stump replied the language was meant to be vague and flexible. The intent
referencing outdoor areas is to provide privacy t° both, homeless clients as well as
adjacent neighbors.
Chairman Larson inquired in terms of flexibility, the language contained in the
Operational and Contextual Standards section, "generally acceptable" and "generally
unacceptable Zoning districts," and whether a shelter could conceivable be located in an
R-3 Zoning District?
Mr. Stump replied affirmatively. The aforementioned Guidelines are designed not to
exclude an area in the R-3 Zoning District. An appropriate use would be difficult to
establish in the R-1 Zoning District. The Homeless Shelter Guideline essentially directs
those seeking a shelter location.
Mr. Larson inquired regarding the section relevant to the minimum distance nearest
schools and parks and whether the 500 foot separation would be an arbitrary measure
which may be greater or lesser depending on other mitigating factors?
Mr. Stump replied affirmatively whereas the mitigating factors could be based on
design, location, and/or other physical features.
Mr. Larson inquired if the homeless shelter were to be located on a specific site, would
this preclude the development of public park and/or school facility space within 500 feet
of the shelter?
Mr. Stump replied this question was difficult to answer. Since the homeless shelter
existed first, then the school would have to incorporate some criteria and/or standard in
order to justify it being located near a homeless shelter, which would essentially be the
school's choice.
Mr. Larson further inquired whether the notion of a "school" would also include
vocational training facilities that may be mutually beneficial in relation to a homeless
shelter?
A general discussion followed regarding the above-referenced concern.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ! $
July 12, 2000
It was noted that perhaps the term school and park space should be more appropriately
defined. It was also noted the homelessness concern in relation to school and park
facilities would be further discussed by staff and the community.
Mr. Larson drew attention to the Negative Declaration, page 7, On-Site Issues, and
whether pets should be included in this section?
Mr. Stump replied perhaps this issue could be added to the Homeless Management
Plan, since some of the homeless do own pets.
It was noted the Guidelines should indicate that if pets are to be accommodated, then
the Shelter Management Plan must address the issue of pet management and potential
impacts associated with this factor. It was further noted it would depend upon the type
of facility whether or not pets could be accommodated. There exists the possibility the
pets could be housed off-site.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:16 a.m.
Mark Rohloff, Redwood Valley, commended staff for recognizing the scope of the
homeless shelter problem. He questioned the definition of the term "buffer?"
Mr. Stump replied the term "buffer" was meant to be vague. The Planning Commission
would ultimately decide whether the buffer would be natural or otherwise.
Mr. Roholoff supported the concept wherein the terms "permanent" and "temporary"
homeless shelters were distinguished.
Mr. Stump stated establishing a temporary homeless shelter is crucial and must be
expedited in a timely manner.
It was noted the proposed Guidelines are structured to be flexible in order to
accommodate the immediate need for the establishment of a temporary homeless
shelter. It was further noted the Management Shelter Plan must be reflective of the
community concerns with regard to neighborhoods, schools, parks, and other facilities
which would be ultimately affected. In terms of a temporary shelter, a special Planning
Commission can be scheduled at any time provided the meeting is properly noticed.
Gisella Minahan, Capella, commented on the temporary St. Mary's Homeless Shelter
and noted the hours of operation for temporary facilities are from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
She inquired whether the 500-foot minimum distance requirement could be reduced,
since park and temporary homeless shelter hours of operation do not necessarily
coincide.
Mr. Larson replied the Guideline section relative to the minimum distance to schools
and parks should be clarified relative to hours of operation. He favored staff finding a
way to effectively address what the potential problem and/or impact might be if a park or
school existed in close proximity to a homeless shelter. The 500 feet is considered an
arbitrary area since a particular buffer must determine the appropriate distance. The
Planning Commission would be required to provide an appropriate Finding in order to
determine a buffer's appropriate distance. The Guidelines must provide the appropriate
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ! (~
July 12, 2000
information and/or requirements to address the buffer minimum distance issue
whereupon a Finding can be formulated as to whether the minimum distance for parks
and schools should be less than 500 feet.
Ramona Ansolabehere, 740 N. Pine Street, Ukiah, commended City staff for their
outstanding efforts in formulating the subsequent Homeless Shelter Guidelines and
Ordinance.
Commissioner Chiles inquired regarding the Shelter Management Plan and
accompanying Use Permit and whether the term "client service" is related to job
services? He further inquired whether recognition regarding the reasons for the growing
number of homeless persons could be addressed in the homeless document? Is
affordable housing addressed under the client services section?
Mr. Stump replied the homeless situation is a very complex issue.
It was noted the concept of a permanent homeless shelter does not advocate homeless
longevity, since there are various reasons why people are homeless. People do no
desire to leave a stable home to live in a shelter unless personal circumstances make it
mandatory. A permanent shelter should offer services in order to assist those who are
homeless.
Mr. Stump stated language cannot appropriately be provided for in the Ordinance which
solves the homeless issues even though the documents contend with a combination of
both planning and social components and/or elements.
It was noted the homeless issue is the responsibility of the state, local city and county
governments as well as the community.
Mr. Rohloff reported about 98 percent of last year's temporary winter shelter
participants were from the County area and approximately 92 percent were from Ukiah,
which indicates that people do not want to come from other communities for
congregational sleeping and eating. He stated in the past, homeless people mainly
consisted of drug dependent and/or persons incorporating mental and/or physical
problems, but current homelessness encompass entire families for a variety of other
reasons to include the affordable housing crisis.
Ms. Ansolabehere stated the County Board of Supervisors passed a policy on
Homelessness last July indicating the County desires to develop a working partnership
with the community, cities within the County, and the state in order to address the
increasing homelessness problem. The Homeless Planning Group is an existing
organization dedicated to assisting with the homeless problem in this community. She
stated the working poor and AFDC families are struggling financially. The Ukiah
Community Center accommodated approximately 750 families for services last year who
do not have alternative support systems except possibly government assistance.
It was noted this community does incorporate housing assistance agencies and/or
programs.
Norma Lowe, Ukiah, stated she works professionally with homeless people. She
supports the concept of providing a cohesive continuum of services to become a
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ] '7
July 12, 2000
necessary part of the permanent homeless shelter program. She further stated the
potential opportunity exists by incorporating assistance programs in homeless shelters to
assist the homeless towards improving their quality of life.
Laura Golino De Lavato. Executive Director of the Ukiah Community Center,
Ukiah, commended City staff in formulating the Homeless Shelter Guidelines and
Ordinance, which are meant to be flexible documents to assist in achieving the goal of
adding a temporary and/or a permanent homeless shelter in the community.
Chairman Larson questioned whether the County had plans to formulate and formally
adopt a similar Homeless Shelter Guideline and Ordinance so that the community would
possess a highly compatible and/applicable document.
Ms. Ansolabehere replied, as a County employee, the County would be amenable to
formulating a Homeless Shelter Ordinance. She stated the County Board of Supervisors
would review this proposal.
Mr. Stump reiterated staff suggested that should the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the proposed Ordinance to the City Council, and perhaps as a result, the
City Council could direct staff to advance the document to the County for review.
Ms. Ansolabehere supported this recommendation.
It was noted the community has a negative connotation with regard to the establishment
of a permanent homeless shelter.
Mr. Larson inquired whether the possibility exists relative to changing the term
"permanent" to another term, which does not encompass the same associated negative
connotation?
Ms. Pruden recommended the possibility of qualifying certain technical language
contained in the documents, wherein the Planning Commission is accustomed to using
applicable Use Permit terminology interchangeably. The terms "temporary" and
"permanent" are words used commonly by staff as well as the Planning Commission in
different context with relation to homeless shelters.
Mr. Stump stated the word, "temporary" as defined in this case, represents the period of
time it takes for people attempting to secure a winter shelter need in order to satisfy this
necessity. There is no correlation between the term "Temporary" Use Permit and its
usage with reference to homeless shelters.
Ms. Pruden inquired whether the Use Permit when issued relative to a temporary facility
would refer to "each season?"
Mr. Stump replied this concept is not necessarily true. He noted if such a temporary
facility was secured, it could be a Use Permit for a temporary shelter that may be valid
for an undisclosed period of time. This particular Use Permit may not have to be
reviewed by the Planning Commission, but automatically continues each winter season.
Ms. Pruden recommended defining the term, "temporary" as a seasonal shelter.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ! 8
July 12, 2000
It was noted currently there is no temporary homeless shelter in place, which requires a
new Use Permit each time the shelter location changes.
It was recommended that a temporary Use Permit relative to a homeless shelter be
renewable every five years or on a case-by-case basis.
It was noted the connotation of the term "permanent" with reference to homeless
shelters is one of community semantics wherein the public should be appropriately
educated relative to the complexity of homelessness.
Mr. Stump presented a brief summary relative to the Commission's recommendations to
include reevaluation of the terms, temporary and permanent, addressing the pet issue,
defining the intent of "buffer" in terms of homeless shelter distance requirements,
providing clarity to the school and public park issue with regard to the homeless shelter
hours of operation as well as the implication that shelters and school/parks are
incompatible.
A brief discussion followed regarding Mr. Strong's Ordinance recommendations and
which aspects would be incorporated into the final document to include the "good
neighbor" reference. It was noted an effective Shelter Management Plan shall address
good land use planning issues and the reference to "good neighbor" shall be applied to
the Purpose and Intent section of the Homeless Shelter Guidelines and/or in the context
of the Shelter Management Plan reflective of the client's desires or shelter behaviors.
The Good neighbor concept is also subject to an implied code of conduct to include a
well-defined set of rules. Staff suggested with regard to Mr. Strong's recommendations
to delete the term "good neighbor" and either to add a new sentence relative to this
concept or apply it to an appropriate area of the Guidelines.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 10:26 p.m.
ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was
carried by an all AYE voice vote to recommend approval to the City Council the
mitigated Negative Declaration associated with the Ukiah Municipal Code Amendment
for the Homeless Shelter Facilities, as outlined in the Staff Report, and the numerous
recommendations to staff as discussed above.
ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was
carried by an all AYE voice vote to recommend approval to the City Council the
proposed amendments to Chapter 2, Article 15.5 of the Ukiah Municipal Codes to reflect
the changes as discussed above.
ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was
carried by an all AYE voice vote to recommend approval to the City Council of the
Resolution containing the Homeless Shelter Guideline to include the changes as
discussed above.
9. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS
A.
City Council and Redevelopment agency Actions
Future Planning Commission
Status Report
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Page ! 0
July 12, 2000
/~~,,~~' 7-/
/I
ITEM NO. 9a
DATE: August 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF PERIMETER FENCING FOR THE PROPOSED GOBBI
STREET RIVERSIDE PARK
SUMMARY: During previous discussions regarding the development of Gobbi Street Riverside
Park, the Council has requested that staff present alternative ideas for the perimeter fencing that
would be a component of the "agricultural buffer" called for in the adopted Concept Plan. The
purpose of the fencing is to provide security and minimize conflicts between the adjacent
agricultural operations and the increased public use of the park.
The Council, while acknowledging that the fence must provide security, has expressed concern
that traditional chainlink security fencing may be too institutional in appearance, and detract from
the natural beauty of the park. The direction to staff has been to develop an approach to the
fencing and agricultural buffer that would provide the needed security, be attractive, and
compliment the aesthetics of the site.
Basically, there are three types of fencing which staff believes would be most appropriate for the
park. These include masonry, wood, and heavy gauge chainlink. Photographs of examples of
these types of fencing will be provided at the meeting. The following discussion outlines the
advantages and disadvantages of these alternatives.
Masonry Fence: This type of fence can be constructed to provide excellent security, and can
incorporate special design features. However, it would require structural engineering, and would
be very expensive to construct. Cost estimates for a six-foot tall engineered masonry wall/fence
range from $80.00 to $100.00 per foot, which amounts to approximately $270,000 for the 40-acre
property. This clearly exceeds the budget for this component of the project. Additionally, a
masonry fence could provide an attractive surface for graffiti artists, which has long-term
maintenance implications.
(Continued on page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss the alternative approaches to the fencing and agricultural
buffer, and provide direction to staff.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION:
1. Do not conduct a discussion, and direct staff accordingly.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by: Community Services Department
Prepared by: Larry DeKnoblough, Community Services Director
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, and Charley Stump, Planning Director
Attachments: None
APPROVED:~:~L.~'~
Candace Horsley, City Manager
Wood Fence: A solid wood fence could similarly be constructed to provide adequate security, and
could be designed to be very attractive. Wood fencing has a considerably shorter life span than
other alternatives, and the replacement costs, as well as ongoing maintenance represents a
significant economic constraint. Cost estimates for a six-foot tall wood fence range from $40.00
to $50.00 per foot, which for approximately 3000 feet amounts to $135,000. This cost exceeds
what has been preliminarily budgeted for the fencing, and could, similar to a masonry fence,
jeopardize the other components of the phase one development project.
Chainlink Fence: Metal chainlink fencing by itself is the least aesthetically pleasing of the three
alternatives. However, because of its strength and long-term durability, it offers an aesthetic
enhancement opportunity that the others do not. A variety of flowering native and introduced vines
could be planted to climb up and along the chainlink material to create a "living" green fence.
Species that include thorns, and bee-attracting flowers could provide additional security by
discouraging fence climbers. The cost for installing chainlink fencing ranges from $30,000 to
$50,000, depending upon the height of the fence and the gauge/thickness of the chainlink material.
This would leave enough funding for the other components of the phase one development project
In addition, a wide area along the inside of the fence could be contoured, creating a series of three
to five-foot high earth mounds. The mounds could be planted with native grasses, flowering
shrubs, and native blackberry, as called for in the Concept Plan. Trees would be planted at various
locations to contribute to the screening and softening of the metal fence material.
Finally, chainlink fencing is virtually maintenance free, and does not create a surface for graffiti
application. Staff believes that the fence plantings, landscape contouring, and careful tree and
shrub planting would provide significant relief to the institutional and stark appearance of the metal
chainlink material. Therefore this approach is staff's recommended alternative for the security
fencing component of the phase one development project.
ITEM NO.
DATE:
9b
Auqust 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH TOM CASH, AKA 'TAXI GUY'
On June 7, 2000, the City Council directed the City Manager to bring
back a settlement proposal with Tom Cash in reference to the denial
of his taxi permit renewal.
The City Manager and Finance Director met with Mr. Cash on two
occasions. Mr. Cash provided various financial records related to
his business operation. After review of the financial information
submitted by Mr. Cash, staff recommends a settlement in the amount of
nine thousand six hundred dollars ($9,600.00) out of a total
$15,891.27 still owed by Mr. Cash on his three loans. This sum was
arrived at after comparing the outstanding balances on Mr. Cash's
business loans, the cash balance in his business account, and the
estimated value of his two vehicles. For confidentiality purposes,
the financial records of Mr. Cash are available in the City Manager's
office for Council review if desired.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve settlement with Tom Cash in the amount of $9,600.00
ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
Approve a different settlement amount
Prepared by: Gordon Elton, Finance Director
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: None
Can~ce Horsley, ~ity Manager
GE:TaxiGuy.agn
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 9c
DATE: August 2, 2000
REPORT
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION CONCERNING CITY'S NON-PROFIT COMMUNITY BASED
ORGANIZATION GRANTS PROGRAM AND SELECTION OF SUBCOMMITTEE TO
EVALUATE APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
During Budget deliberations, the City Council determined $30,000 would be set aside to assist
local non-profit agencies with projects and programs they are unable to fund through other
sources. For the first time this year, it was determined that the Program would solicit
applications and provide an opportunity for funding two times during the year. Specific funding
allocations for each cycle have not yet been determined by Council. Staff has prepared a draft
letter to solicit the first round of applications for the Council's review and revision. In addition,
the application form has been modified into a more concise format.
In prior years a subcommittee, consisting of two Councilmembers and City staff, has met to
review the applications received by the deadline. The subcommittee will rate the applications
and make a recommendation to the full Council for its final approval.
After discussion, it is requested that the City Council provide direction to staff regarding the
following:
1. Determine funding amount to be allocated for each funding cycle
2. Determine Application deadlines
3. Reaffirm eligible recipients and projects/programs
4. Determine if revisions are necessary to the Application; adding or deleting questions or
information
5. Select two Councilmembers to sit on the subcommittee to review applications
It is anticipated that the recommendations from the subcommittee would be brought back to
the full City Council in September.
RECOMMENDED ACTION' After discussion, Council determine funding allocations for each
cycle, authorize staff to solicit applications for the City's Non-Profit Community Based
Organization Grants Program, and select subcommittee members to evaluate Applications
received.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. N/A
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Attachments:
N/A
City Council
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Draft letter soliciting applications
2. Application
APPROVED Ca'dace Horsley~'Citt
4:Can:ASRFunding.800
Manager
300 SEMINARY AVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400
· ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274
· FAX # 707/463-6204 · EMAIL: ukiahcty®jps.net ·
August 3, 2000
Name
Agency
Address
Dear ·
The Ukiah City Council is pleased to announce that $30,000 has been appropriated from
the 2000/01 budget for the City's Non-Profit Community Based Organization Grants
Program. We are requesting applications for funding of programs and projects that will
benefit out community, which are not currently funded.
This year, the Council is giving two opportunities for funding, $ in August 2000,
and another $. in January 2001. Applications for the August funding cycle will be
accepted until . An agency will only be eligible to receive funds during one of the
funding cycles. If you are not successful in receiving funds during the first funding cycle,
your original application may be revisited in January if you so desire.
Enclosed for your benefit is an application packet for the first round of funding, which
should be completed and submitted no later than at 5:00 p.m. Since
several groups are expected to apply and limited funds are available, it is suggested that
each funding request be for a portion of the $30,000. A subcommittee comprised of two
Councilmembers, the City Manager, and City staff will be reviewing all applications and will
make a recommendation of funding allocations to the full City Council by September.
If you have any questions regarding the process or application, please do not hesitate to
contact me at 463-6213.
Sincerely,
Candace Horsley
City Manager
CH'ky
4:Can:Lfund.800
'We Are Here To Serve"
CITY OFUKIAH
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING
AUGUST 2000
Application/Organization:
Date:
Address:
Executive Director:
Phone:
Name of Contact Person'
Title of Contact Person:
Phone:
Profit
Non-Profit Date Incorporated
How long has your organization been in existence?
(please attach evidence)
Does your agency have an Americans with Disabilities Act Plan? __ Yes
No
Project Title:
Project Location'
Location(s) of additional facilities operated by your organization:
Description of total agency activities or services provided'
Amount requested' $
Total Project Cost $
-1-
,
Please describe in detail the project or activity you are requesting funding
for.
,
Describe to what extent your project will specifically affect, serve, and
benefit City of Ukiah resident and the specific needs within our city that
your proposed project addresses.
o
Describe how your program will coordinate with other agencies and
organizations in providing similar services to this area to compliment,
rather than to duplicate their efforts. Where in Mendocino County are
similar services provided and by whom?
,
Describe your proposed project budget (specify revenues, by sources, as
well as expenditures, by type).
5. Describe the current sources of your organization's funding.
,
If you have received funding from the City of Ukiah in prior years, please
indicate for what years and for how much.
Thank you for completing this application!
4:Can: FundApp.800
-2-
ITEM NO. lOa
DATE: August 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVE AGREEMENT FOR PLANNING/BUILDING DEPARTMENT PLAN
CHECKING AND SUBSTITUTE BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES WITH
COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING INC.
SUMMARY: In September of 1996, the City entered into a revised agreement with The Philips
Group of Santa Rosa for Building Permit plan checking services. The City has had a long-standing
and successful relationship with The Philips Group, dating back to 1978, when they began assisting
the City with the structural review of Building Permit plans. Recently, The Philips Group has
indicated that they are no longer willing to perform the work called for in the 1996 agreement unless
their compensation is increased approximately 25%. In response, staff has explored alternatives,
and has received a proposal from Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. of Santa Rosa to perform the
same services with a slightly reduced compensation package than articulated in the 1996
agreement. Staff searched, but did not find any Ukiah firms qualified to perform the work called
for in the Agreement, nor could we find any other firms in the region with the required capabilities
or qualifications.
In addition, Coast/and Civil Engineering has indicated that they can provide the City with substitute
building inspection services at a very reasonable cost. This would eliminate the need to fill the
currently vacant part-time substitute building inspector position, which has had high turnover during
the past two years. If the contract with Coast/and Civil Engineering is approved by the Council,
staff will return with a budget amendment to reallocate the funds in the Non-Regular Salary account
into the Contractual Services account.
The City Attorney has reviewed and commented on the Agreement, and all his suggested
modifications have been incorporated into the document.
Staff is recommending that the City enter into a formal agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering,
Inc. to take over the contractual plan checking services, and provide substitute building inspection
services for the Planning/Building Department.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. for
Planning/Building Department Plan Checking and Substitute Building Inspection services.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION:
1. Do not approve the agreement, and provide direction to staff.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by: Planning Department
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Planning Director
Coordinated with' Candace Horsley, City Manager, and David Rapport, City Attorney
Attachments:
1. Agreement for Plan Checking and Substitute Building Inspection Services
APPROVED:
Can~"~-~ Horsley, City ~anager
AGREEMENT FOR PLAN CHECKING
AND SUBSTITUTE BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES
This agreement is made this
("CITY"), and
day of 2000, between the City of Ukiah
("CONSULTANT").
RECITALS
A,
CITY is mandated to review building plans to determine whether they comply with
the City of Ukiah Municipal Code; and
Bo
CITY is mandated to inspect building projects to determine whether the work is
consistent with the approved plans and all applicable codes and laws; and
Co
CITY needs substitute building inspection services from time to time when the City
Building Inspector is absent from the office; and
Do
CONSULTANT represents that he is qualified to provide these services required by
CITY, and
E,
The parties have negotiated upon the terms pursuant to which CONSULTANT will
provide such services and have herein reduced such terms to writing.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and CONSULTANT do hereby agree as follows:
I. Scope of Service:
CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with the following services:
A.
CONSULTANT shall perform the following services as requested from time
to time by CITY'S Chief Building Official or assigned designee:
,
Conduct full service or partial review of plans and documents for
building projects in the City of Ukiah to determine whether such
plans and documents are in substantial compliance with Building
Regulations of the Ukiah City Code and with the California Building
Code. A full service review is defined as a non-structural, structural,
and energy conservation plan check. A structural review is defined
as a structural only plan check. An energy review is defined as an
energy only plan check.
.
When such determination has been made, CONSULTANT shall
notify the originator of the documentation as to any lack of
compliance found.
II.
.
.
CONSULTANT will review re-submission of corrected
documentation and repeat the process, if necessary, until
compliance is obtained.
.
CONSULTANT will then return all plans and documents, corrected
by the originator as necessary, to CITY'S Chief Building Official with
a statement that compliance has been determined.
Bo
CONSULTANT agrees to perform initial plan check within 10 (ten)
working days and subsequent rechecks within 5 (five) working days.
Co
In addition, CONSULTANT shall be responsible and shall be readily
available to CITY'S Chief Building Official for the handling and answering of
any and all questions, inquiries, and correspondence referred to
CONSULTANT by the Chief Building Official regarding services performed
under this agreement.
D.
CONSULTANT shall provide substitute building inspection services to the
CITY if requested. Inspections will be performed to verify compliance with
the CITY'S Building Regulations, in accordance with CITY'S policies and
procedures. CONSULTANT will provide appropriate vehicle for inspector at
no cost to the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall stand ready to begin to perform services required by
this agreement immediately upon execution of this agreement, and shall
perform such services diligently until this agreement is terminated according
to the procedures herein.
Payments:
A. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for plan review services as follows:
B.
Full service review including first re-check: 85% of the City's plan
check fee.
°
Structural only review including first re-check: 50% of the City's plan
check fee.
.
Structural and energy review including first re-check: 60% of the
City's plan check fee.
.
Energy only review including first re-check: 25% of the City's plan
check fee.
5. Other services: On an hourly basis.
The CONSULTANT schedule of hourly rates entitled: "Exhibit A", is
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.
City shall pay CONSULTANT for substitute building Inspection services on
an hourly basis according to the attached Exhibit "A."
III.
C.
Payments prescribed herein shall constitute all compensation to
CONSULTANT for all costs of service, including but not limited to, direct
costs of labor of employees engaged by CONSULTANT, travel expenses,
telephone charges, typing, duplication, computer time, and any and all other
costs, expenses, and charges of CONSULTANT, his agents and
employees.
Ownership of Documents
A. Ownership of Work and Rights:
(1)
Work made for hire. The term "Documents" includes, but is not limited
to, all designs, drawings, specifications, and other technical data
produced by CONSULTANT in performing under this Agreement. Said
Documents constitute a work made for hire, as that term is defined in
Section 101 of Title 17 of the United States Code (the Copyright Act).
(2)
Assignment of Copyrights. If all or part of the Documents is, for any
reason, deemed not to be a work made for hire, CONSULTANT agrees
to execute all documents necessary to transfer to CITY the ownership of
any and all rights, including but not limited to copyrights, that
CONSULTANT may have in the documents.
(3)
Waiver of Moral Rights. To the extent that CONSULTANT has any
moral rights (droit moral) or similar rights in the Documents under the
law of any jurisdiction, CONSULTANT expressly waives those rights.
CONSULTANT waives any right to have the documents attributed to
CONSULTANT or to prevent the Documents from being modified,
edited, transformed, or otherwise adapted as CITY may deem
necessary.
(4)
Ownership of Documents. CITY will own the exclusive rights to and in
the documents, including, but not limited to, all United States and
International copyrights and other intellectual property rights. In the
event that this Agreement is terminated, CITY will own the exclusive
rights including, but not limited to, all United States and International
copyrights and other intellectual property rights, in the portion of the
Documents actually completed.
(5)
CONSULTANT agrees that CITY shall have access at all reasonable
times to inspect and make copies of all notes, designs, drawings,
specifications, and other technical data pertaining to the work.
Upon termination of this agreement for any reason or by either party, and
upon completion of this agreement, all notes, designs, drawings,
specification and other technical data produced under this agreement shall
be transferred to and become property of CITY upon its request without
additional compensation.
IV.
S.
CONSULTANT shall maintain the aforementioned records and any other
records related to the performance of this agreement, and shall allow CITY
access to such records, for a period of three (3) years after termination of
the Agreement.
Conflict of Interest
V.
VI.
CONSULTANT covenants that he presently has no interest and shall not acquire
any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the
performance of his services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the
performance of this Agreement, no persons having any such interest shall be
employed.
Indemnity
CONSULTANT shall assume the defense of, indemnity, and hold harmless CITY,
its officers and employees from all other claims, loss, damages, injuries, and
liabilities (including attorney's fees and all other expenses of defense), arising
directly or indirectly out of its performance under this agreement, including only
liabilities due to or arising from the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of
CITY, its officers and employees.
Liability Insurance
VVithout limiting CONSULTANT'S obligations arising under paragraph 6.2,
CONSULTANT shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and
maintains for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to
persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its
performance under this Agreement.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
,
Insurance Services Office ("ISO") Commercial General Liability
Coverage Form No. CG 00 01 11 85.
.
ISO form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability,
code 1 "any auto" or Code 8,9 if no owned autos and endorsement
CA 0025.
.
Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of
the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance.
.
Professional Liability Insurance covering damages which may result
from errors, omissions or acts of professional negligence by
CONSULTANT.
B. Minimum Limits of Insurance.
Co
D.
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
General Liability: $2,000,000 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, the general aggregate limit shall apply
separately to the Agreemented premises.
.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident
for bodily injury and property damage.
.
Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers'
compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California and Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
.
Professional Liability coverage: $500,000 combined single limit per
occurrence. If the coverage is an aggregate limit, the aggregate limit
must apply separately to the Agreement premises.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by the CITY. At the option of the CITY, either the insurer shall
reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects
the CITY, its officers, 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, its officer, officials, employees and volunteers are
to be covered as insured as respects; liability arising out of
activities performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT,
products and completed operations of the CONULTANT,
premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT,
or automobiles Agreemented, 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, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance
maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or
E.
F.
volunteers shall be excess of the CONSULTANT'S
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies
shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, 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.
.
Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage
The Insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the
CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from CONSULTANT'S possession of the Agreemented
Premises, pursuant to this Agreement.
3. Professional Liability Coverage
If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the
effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend to
and include the date two years following the termination of this
Agreement or CONSULTANT shall purchase an Extended
Reporting Period Endorsement to cover a period two years following
the termination of this Agreement.
4. 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 days
(30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the CITY.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating or no less
than A:VII and who are admitted insurers in the State of California.
Verification of Coverage
CONSULTANT shall furnish the CITY with certificates of insurance and with
original 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.
Where by statute, the CITY'S workers' 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 before CONSULTANT takes possession of the
Agreemented Premises.
VII.
IX.
G. Subcontractors
If CONSULTANT uses subcontractors or sub-consultants, it shall cover
them under its policies or require them to separately comply with the
insurance requirements set forth in the Paragraph 6.1.
Assignment:
CONSULTANT shall not assign any rights or duties under this agreement.
Termination:
A.
This agreement may be terminated by either party by giving thirty (30) days
notice to the other in writing of its intent to terminate the agreement.
B,
Upon such termination, CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY an itemized
statement of services performed to the date of termination in accordance
with Paragraph II of this agreement. Said services may include both
completed work and work in process at the time of termination. CITY shall
pay CONSULTANT for any such work for which compensation has not
previously been made by CITY.
C,
CITY and CONSULTANT may negotiate and agree upon a fair and
equitable method for completing work in progress after termination of the
agreement.
Compliance with Civil Ri,qhts:
A. Equal Employment Opportunity
In connection with the execution of this agreement, CONSULTANT shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of
race, religion, color, sex, or national origin.
B. Nondiscrimination Civil Riqhts Act of 1964
CONSULTANT will comply with all federal regulations relative to
nondiscrimination to federally-assisted programs.
C. Solicitations for Subcontractors includinq Procurement of Materials and
Equipment
In all solicitations, either by competitive bidding or negotiations, made by
CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a subcontract including
procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential
subcontractor, supplier, or lessor shall be notified by CONSULTANT of
CONSULTANT'S obligations under this agreement and the regulations
relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, or
national origin.
X. Notices:
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this agreement, any notice submittal or
communication required or permitted to be served on a party hereto, may be served
by personal delivery to the person or the office of the person identified below.
Service may also be made by mail, by placing the notice, submittal or
communication in an envelope, with the proper first-class postage affixed thereto,
and addressed as indicated below, and depositing said envelope into the United
States mail to:
CITY CONSULTANT
City of Ukiah
Building Division
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA. 95482
Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc.
2292 Northpoint Parkway
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
ATTN: Charles Stump
Planning Director
ATTN: John Wanger
Principal Engineer
XI.
Independent Contractor
It is specifically agreed that in providing the services and in rendering its
performance under this agreement, CONSULTANT is an independent contractor
and is not and shall not be construed to be an officer or employee of the CITY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have accepted, made and executed this
agreement upon the terms, conditions, and provisions above stated, the day and year first
above written.
COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC.
By:
Name:
Title:
John Wanger
Principal Engineer
Address: 2292 Northpoint Parkway
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
APPROVES AS TO FORM:
CITY OF UKIAH
By:
Name:
Title:
Address:
ATTEST:
Candace Horsley
City Manager
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
David Rapport, City Attorney
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Date:
,2000
ITEM NO. ]-°b
DATE' August 2, 2000
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY
REPORT ON THE OPERATION OF THE UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND OVERSIGHT REVIEW OF THE CITY FINANCES
The City has received two Grand Jury Report requests regarding the Police Department
and City Finance/Personnel Departments. Dottie Coplen, Foreman of the Grand Jury,
is asking for our responses to these two reports by August 31,2000, so that it can be
included in the second printing of the Grand Jury Report and Responses. The attached
draft letter of response has been prepared by Police Chief John Williams, Finance
Director Gordon Elton, Personnel Officer Melody Harris, and City Manager Candace
Horsley.
Staff is recommending discussion and direction by the City Council to complete a letter
of response to the Grand Jury, which will then be forwarded under the Mayor's
signature to Judge Labowitz, Presiding Judge.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council authorize Mayor Mastin to execute letter of
response for submittal to the Grand Jury.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Council revise letter of response prior to signature.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
N/A
Dottie Coplen, Foreman of the Grand Jury
Candace Horsley, City Manager
John Willitams, Police Chief
Gordon Elton, Finance Director
Melody Harris, Personnel Officer
Attachments: 1. Grand Jury Reports
2. Dra_ff Letter of Response
APPROVED: L~::~¢ /~
-'
Candace Horsley, City nager
4/Can.^SRGrand.00
CITY OF UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT
The Ukiah Police Department (UPD) is the law enforcement agency serving the city of
Ukiah. The Grand Jury's investigation focused on the UPD training program, medical
marijuana policy, and the impact of the new Chief on UPD operations.
Reason for Investigation
The Grand Jury received a citizen's complaint
Method of Investigation
The Grand Jury interviewed the Chief of Police and four Sergeants, the Director of the
Mendocino County Department of Mental Health (MCMHD) and a representative of
the Ad Hoc Committee of Community Concern (AHCCC). Documents reviewed: the
Peace Officers Standards and Training Manual (POST), information from the MCMHD,
(including mental health and developmental training information), UPD medical marijuana
procedure, domestic violence training material, interoffice memoranda and the Policy and
Procedures Manual. The Grand Jury toured the UPD facilities and the new state of the
art dispatch center.
Operations
Findings
,
The UPD personnel consist of 41 employees. There are 26 sworn staff, 11
civilian staff, two Community Oriented Policing (COPS), one Community
Coordinator and one Major Task Force personnel.
.
In the last two years the UPD received a grant and has invested approximately
$500,000 to install a Windows NT network. This computer supports all divisions of
Public Safety from emergency medical services to fire and police services. This
system includes software for medical, fire and police incident reporting and
computer-aided dispatch software to track and assist in the deployment of
emergency personnel. Peace officers, firefighters and dispatchers now share a
central database of information, which provides for enhancement and better use of
their database.
The UPD also received a grant from the State of Califomia for a computer
controlled 9-1-1 telephone and radio system. This computer is tied directly to the
UPD computer-aided dispatch system and provides immediate information to
dispatchers in emergency situations. Also installed was an emergency medical
dispatching software package, which is now assisting dispatchers to provide
immediate medical information on the phone as personnel respond to the scene.
The UPD has also received a number of federal grants, which have provided the
UPD with computer crime-mapping programs, digital cameras, laptop computers
and information access.
3. The morale seems high in the UPD and the entire staff has great esteem for the
new Chief.
4. The tumover rate remains consistently Iow. The staff shows no indication of
discontent with the management or the manner in which the UPD is functioning.
1999-2000 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report
,
In response to a police shooting in July 1998, a group of concerned citizens
formed the AHCCC to address racial issues and law enforcement. In 1999, the
UPD and AHCCC signed a statement of mutual understanding.
o
The UPD adheres to a 1999 countywide medical marijuana policy issued by the
District Attorneys Office and administered by the Sheriff's Department.
Training
Findings
.
.
Effort is made to ensure that all peace officers comply with the mandatory training
required by POST. This compliance has been certified by POST inspectors.
Currently there is no system for monitoring compliance with minimal POST
standards and additional UPD intemal standards. A new computer program has
been ordered to improve the tracking of the training requirements for the UPD.
Recommendations
o
The Grand Jury urges the UPD to continue to make training one of their top
priorities.
.
The UPD should install the computer program and get the training-monitoring
program up and operational as soon as possible.
Findings
.
Peace officers are trained in domestic violence response, leadership, hostage
negotiations, parolee contact, missing persons, field evidence, firearms instruction,
civil liability, intemal affairs, ethics, accident investigation, supervision, background
investigation, sexual assault investigation, narcotics, canine, pepper spray restraint
devices, crime-scene control and security, high-speed stops and other training as
offered.
10. Although not required by POST, there were four formal training sessions with the
MCMHD in the fall of 1999.
Recommendation
Training from the MCMHD should be established on a regularly scheduled basis.
Finding
11.
Training is sometimes restricted as a result of the budget restraints for
reimbursement of pay as many of the classes require overtime. The UPD ran out
of overtime in February 2000 and has since curtailed the training program. POST is
responsible for setting training standards for the hiring of police officers. POST
requires 24 hours of training per year, which is discretionary with each department.
POST will reimburse local districts for up to 80 hours of training per officer per year,
but does not include reimbursement for overtime.
1999-2000 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report
Recommendation
The Ukiah City Council should establish a separate training budget for the UPD
that includes an adequate provision of necessary overtime.
Response Required
Ukiah City Council
Response Requested
Ukiah Police Department
1999-2000 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report
CITY OF UKIAH
The City of Ukiah (City), incorporated on March 8, 1876, has an elected mayor and four
Council members. The City serves a population of 15,059, covers 4.6 square miles
and has 52 miles of paved streets.
The City provides planning and inspection services; public safety including police and
fire services; street maintenance; public utilities including electric, sewer, sanitation and
waste disposal; recreation including nine public parks, a golf course, three public pools,
and an array of programs. The City also operates the airport, Grace Hudson Museum,
Ukiah Valley Conference Center, and the Redevelopment Agency.
Reason for Review
The Grand Jury conducted an oversight review of the finances of the City. The Grand
Jury last reviewed the City in 1988.
Method of Investigation
The Grand Jury interviewed the Finance Director. Documents researched included the
most recent two city budgets, financial statements, 1998-99 audit, fund summaries and
descriptions, Employees' Manual, investment schedule and job descriptions for
department heads. To facilitate analysis, spreadsheets were generated from financial
data for the years 1995 through 1999. The Grand Jury made an on-site visit to City Hall.
Findings
o
.
The 1998-99 audit of the City's financial statements supports our finding that the
City is apparently financially sound and its fiscal affairs are well managed.
The City's General Fund supports those departments and functions which are
generally not supported by fees for service. Some of the City's departments
provide services which receive income (e.g., sports and recreation). Although
these revenues offset some of the operational costs, they do not entirely support
the departments. Special funds are created for special purposes, government
grants and for services that are supported by fees.
.
The City budget and accounting system, in addition to the General Fund, include
79 separate funds. Although many of these funds are mandated by state and
federal funding sources, many were created by the City for special purposes.
Several of the funds are no longer active.
.
As a result of the proliferation of funds, a complete analysis of the total budget for
most City departments requires assembling the data from several funding
categories. For example there are fifteen separate funds that relate to the sewer
system, sanitation district and the disposal site. A clear financial picture of the Public
Utilities Department is not easily determined. The published City Budget does not
include departmental summaries.
,
Likewise, the overall revenues and expenditures for the City are not presented
except in pie-chart format (pages ES-40 and 41 of the 1999-2000 Budget).
1999-2000 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report 1
,
The City has managed to operate successfully in recent years without the need to
increase its permanent staff; although there has been a marked increase in
temporary, seasonal and part-time employees. The number of permanent staff
has declined from 160 in 1996 to 156 in 2000; during the same time frame the
temporary and part-time staff has risen from 76 to 109. Much of this increase is
accounted for by the expansion of community services offered; especially in the
Day Camp and Sports programs, which are seasonal.
,
.
The City maintains a complete set of job descriptions for all key employees.
Some, however, have not been updated recently (e.g., the job description for the
Director of Community Development was last revised in March 1978).
The City's Employees' Manual is both current and comprehensive. Although the
Manual's Harassment Policy includes sexual orientation, it is absent from the
section on Equal Opportunity.
Recommendations
.
To facilitate understanding by the general public and the City Council, the Finance
Director should prepare an Executive Summary that addresses the overall financial
health of the City. This summary could combine the General Fund with all other
funds. In a similar fashion, each department's budget should include a summation of
all revenue sources and spending categories.
2. All inactive funds should be discontinued.
3. Sexual orientation should be included in the non-discriminatory wording in the Equal
Opportunity section of the Employees' Manual.
4. All job descriptions should be reviewed periodically.
Comment
Although the number of temporary, seasonal and part-time employees (109) seems
unusually high at first glance, all of these positions may well be justified.
Response Required
Ukiah City Council
Response Requested
Ukiah City Manager
1999-2000 Mendocino County Grand Jury Final Report
~VE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400
· ADMIN. 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274
· FAX # 707/463-6204 · EMAIL: ukiahcty@jps.net ·
August 2, 2000
Judge Labowitz, Presiding Judge
County of Mendocino Grand Jury
100 N. State St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Dear Honorable Judge Labowitz:
The City of Ukiah is in receipt of the Grand Jury Report 1999-2000. The following
information is the City's formal response to the findings and recommendations in the Report
relative to the operation of the Ukiah Police Department and City finances.
Ukiah Police Department Operations
Findings
.
The department currently has 26 sworn officers. This includes the Community
Oriented Policing personnel. One (1) officer assigned to the Major Crimes Task
Force. 11 ½ civilian employees, which include public safety dispatchers, front office
staff, vehicle mechanic and parking enforcement officers. Public Safety Dispatchers
and vehicle mechanic are actually shared costs with other City departments.
Total UPD Personnel: 37 ½
2. Concur with findings.
3. Concur with findings.
4. Concur with findings.
5. Concur with findings
6. Concur with findings.
Ukiah Police Department Training
Findings
7. Concur with findings.
'VVe Are Here To Serve"
o
P.O.S.T. regulates and monitors adherence to P.O.S.T. standards with an internal
record keeping system and on -site audit by P.O.S.T. personnel.
Recommendations
o
,
.Concur with recommendation. The department will keep training a top priority for all
department personnel.
The computer program that was purchased to manage our training records has been
received and installed. Three department employees are scheduled to received
training to properly use the program. Training scheduled for July 2000.
Findings
9. Concur with findings.
10. Concur with findings.
Recommendation
Concur. The department will continue to explore training opportunities with MCMHD.
Regular scheduled training should be based on the needs of both departments and in
conjunction with other law enforcement agencies. Additionally, U.P.D. invested in the
training of two officers in mental health issues to enable them to return and provide ongoing
training to U.P.D. employees.
Finding
11. Concur with finding. However, P.O.S.T. does reimburse associated overtime for some
specific training courses.
Recommendation
The Ukiah City Council did increase the overtime budget for fiscal year 2000-2001. This
should help with providing for some additional training.
City Finances
Findings
1. Concur with findings.
2. Concur with findings.
3. Concur with findings.
4. Concur with findings.
o
Overall revenues and expenditures for the city are presented as totals on the "Fund
Summary" schedules as well as in the pie-chart format.
6. Concur with findings.
Recommendations
.
Concur. A new schedule "Summary by Activity or Function" was added to the Fiscal
Year 2000/01 Budget in an effort to provide improved summary level data.
.
Inactive funds have been eliminated from the Budget document, though General
Ledger will continue to show funds for period of time for historical purposes.
Personnel Department Comments
Relative to the items included in the Grand Jury Report that relate to the City's Employees'
Manual and job descriptions, the Personnel Officer responds as follows:
Findings
7. Concur with findings.
8. Concur with findings.
Recommendations
°
The City of Ukiah will add "sexual orientation" to the non-discriminatory elements
currently listed in Section 2.02 Equal Employment Opportunity of its Employee's
Manual. Sexual orientation is currently included in the City's Harassment Policy and
in the Equal Opportunity Employment statement at the bottom of each vacancy
recruitment the City posts.
o
City of Ukiah job descriptions are reviewed periodically in a number of instances,
which include: recruitment to fill a job vacancy; requests for reclassification of a
specific position; when duties of a job change; or when legal changes occur. The
Personnel Department is staffed by one employee, therefore other duties and
responsibilities take priority over the review of job descriptions until one of the above
instances occurs, or as time allows.
Sincerely,
Jim Mastin
Mayor
JM:CH:ky
4:Can:LGrandJ.800