Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1996-11-06 Packet
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH. ~r 16, The City Cour~ ~,,wened ~ · regutar meeting, of whic~ Ihe agenda was legally nolic~l and postecl, et 6:33 p.m. in tt~ Civic C4nter Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ul~ah, C41ifomia. Roll was taken and the folc~ving C~mclk'nembe~ w~re ~: Malm~, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor ,~'~t®r. ABSENT: Co. nc#member Mastin. ~ Present: Public Utilities Director Seines, Community Services Director DeKnobtough, Au4stm~ Cdty IVlnrmger H~ms, City Mnrmger Attorney Rlpport, Pemonr~ Ofltolr Rm~fmim, Deputy Public Wort~ Dimolor Sl~nor, ,Senior Plnnner ·tump, Senior Civil Engineer W~.,Is, taxi C4ty ~ Giuntoli. Mayor Schnelmr no'vised Agencl~ I1em 9n, Acioolicm of Resolution Pmhibitin- ~-~k~e~.~_rd Use at ~ ~ Schools V~fithin the C4tv Limit~, woul~ not be h~rcl, m the City Atlomey aclvisecl that the Uki·h Uniflecl ,~:tmol Distr~ w'~ ··king for ~uthor#y fi'mt w~s ·lmm~ vest·el in it, so the 3. ApDrov'nl of a. 8Decill Meeting. ~er~Im_be_r 1~, 1~19g b. I~.ur.r Ma·tin.. ~er~m~r c. Rm~ui~r Me·tin.. October 2. M/S Watl~nlx~rfl~ to ~oprove the Minutes of the Special Meeting of September 18, 1996, · s submitted; the Minutes of the Regul·r Meeting of September 18, 1996, ·s subrnittecl; ·nci the Minules of the Regular Meeting of October 2, 1996. ·s con'·ct·d: Councilmember M·lone mcomrnencled the following corrosion to the October 2, 1996 Minutes: l:~3e 6, P·reoraDh 7, ·mencl to rencl: "Mr. Malone nolec~ most of the community's concems relate to aesthetics, th·! this use will provide · Iow intensily business ttm! would look just ·s good as inc~ustrial, ·nd thinks the Council should enclome it.' The motion c:m'ried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, ·nd Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Mastin. 4. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Mayor Schneiter explained the appeal process. 5. CONSENT CALENpAR MIS Malone/Wattenburger to approve the Consent Calendar as follows: Received end Filed Report of Disbursements for the Month of September. 1~96; Accepted Resignation of Howard E. Henley from the ,~ Commission and Directed City Clerk to Adveft~ for Vacancy; Approved Job De~ and Salary Range for Wast·water Treatment Plant Mechanic Position; ~ Mayor to Ex~:ule · Sewer ~ ~ belween the City of Uldah encl the Ukiah Valk~y Sanitation ~; Appmv~:l Notice of Com~ for ~ of C, obbi Street 8~orm Drain from Weugh ~ ~ Manager to Execute Agreement with Thomas ~ to Prepare St,te Mandated Cost Reimbumeme~ Claims. The molion carried by the fo~ ~ call vote: AYES: Council~ Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Ma·tin. Reguilr ~. October PM~I AUDIENCE COMM~[NTS ON NON.A~N~ ITE¥$ Angela Hooper, 1285 Yoklyo Court, spoke to her cx)noems regarding the ack of a boys' Otb ltyough 121~ grade biskelbMi progrern, and requested the program be minetited, pledging her help in ~ imp~ement~on. Mayor Sohnelt~r advised Ms. ~ that c'__-o,_,ncil could tlke no action on non-agenda items; however, they oould refer Ihe lubject to ~lff. CI~ Manages' ~ ~ Ms. ~ to rn~e .n apl~nlme~ with her to ~ the oonoems m0an:ling the program. Vlckt Sangiaeomo, $t~0 GuidMIle Road, thanked the Counoil for their previous ~ppofl. She ctstributed a hem~-___,t to I~ Ccxzd moJding gym ~, with a (x)py ofa ietter she hid written 8. UNFINISHED BI,181NE$$ Sa. ACiol~On of Resolution Making CEQA .Findl~ and A_,,~)peJ~ of Ordina .r,~__ Amendinfl the Airport Induetriit Pa~ Planned Devek;J~)fftent Senior Planner ~eump advised that on October 2, 1996, the City Council voted 3 to 2 to introduce an ordinance amending the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Pinned Development. The amendments included changing the Lind U~e Designation for the 16 acres south of Friedman Bros. and east of Airport Park Boulevard to 'lndustfilFAutomo~e Commercial,' and eltlblishing retail commercial IS an allowed use in lhe Professional ofrx:e ~ ~ in the extreme ~st comer of the AlP outside the boundaries of the Redwood Business Perk. On October 8, 1~96, Mr. Gary Akerstrom communicated in written form Ihit he believed there to be In oversight in that action, referring to the topic of 'related automotive oommercial u~es' in that emi ~outh of Fhedmen Bas. While ~ was originally recommending thais types of u~es as 'IIIOM~' UI4S, they do recall that the Council had a lengthy discussion on the matter, I number of motions were made, end the Council voted to prohibit them Is either 'allowed' or 'permitted.' Staff's rlcommendation is to adopt the ordinance as presented. City Attorney Rapport advised that if In ordinance i~ Imended after it his been introduced, the ordinance cannol be adopted It the same meeting It which it is amended. Them must be It least s 5 clay waiting pedod, Ifter which the ordinlnce ely be tck)pted It I regular or adjourned regular meeting, but not It I special meeting of the City Council. Discussion followed relative to previous Council action on the matter. M/S Watterd~~ to add to the ~ Amending lhe Airport Industrial Park Planned Development, "Uses misted to automobile dealerships m~ch Is tire stoas, auto parts stores, car washing facilities, automobile repair I)usine~4, etc.' as Item E.2.3. Discussion followed whether Couftcil~r MalcN~ hlcl a conflict IncI therefore could not vote. It was need thet ~ Malorm hlK:l cilmmined in previous consultltion with City Attorney Rapport and the Flir Political Prlctk::es C~)fwvnislion that no conflict e__'_v~!ed_ under the IpplJclble ame,'zdme~ to lhe PlarvxKl ~ ~ and ~ Mi refemnoe to industrial or industrial park or industrial mlited ules. Regular lINting. Ogtober 1~, Pao. 2 The motion can'ied by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers M~lone, Wltlenburger, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: Councilmember Shoen, mker. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Counciimember Idlstin. ~lrnembor Shoernl~ commented ~ it wis ~ ~ ~ cx)uld be negotiated w~h when land was not zoned for their project, and then pressure put on the Council to change the zoning. M/$ Malone/Wa~rgor to Idopl Resolution No. 97-2e Making Findinge Pumulnt to Public Resources Code $ec:bon 21C~1 and California Envffonmental Quality Act (CEQA') Guidelines · ection 15091 Relying on the Previously Certified ~(Jbsequent Envinmmental Impact Report Prepared for Buiclout oflhe Aklx~ IndustrM ~ (Alp) in Conjunction with Amendments to the AlP Planned Development C)rdklMK~ (1~-38), GllTied by the following roll call vote: AYES: ABSTAIN: None. ABI~ENT: CoMtdlmember Mastin. . ~K)eive Public IN)ut Reoarding C_~am. reunify Dlv~loI)ment .l~__k Grant .A_~-_-4~-~on ~,: [he CaiEm'nia Deoartmel~ qf HOL~_!ng and C~m. munltv I~t~*er_~"~..e.-tt for A F~Le!_~ility ~udv of Ccw~mf~al ~3eve~~ of .~_e-__-e~_~-_,~'. $ Plmel Nos. O0Z-~'~-01 and 002-23~ 44, Ra;;Kmd DeoOt ~ --- Maclelin Noltkamp, Uldah Business Devek)pment Center, advised the public hearing is being held to present lhe finished grant for public input. Currently the status of the grant is that it is completed and ready to submit, but lacks the commitment from the North Coast Railroad Authority (NCR.A) Board, and matching funds from the community. Di.K~ssion followed relative to what action NCRA had taken regarding the grant application. It was noted NCRA had endorsed the concept. II was further noted that City Manager Horsley and Ms. Holtkamp will work together to explore other fur)cling sources since the Railroad is unable to help fund at this time. PUBliC HEARING OPENED: 7:07 p.m. Chuck Williams, 3 Betty Street, spoke in favor of the project and encouraging transportation in Ukiah. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:0~ p.m. Ms. Holtkamp ach~sed the next step in the process is to identify the soumes of matching funds and have the letter of commitment in hand from NCRA. Another public hearing would not be requirecl when the resolution luthodzJng the submission of the application end the match is presented to Council. 7b. .C~~ of Two-Way, I.~.Turn I~ne ~ on ~ ~ ~v-t'.~n Mill !nd 14altinea Deputy Public WMtcs Director Seamer advised the project i~ to construct a two-way left turn lane on Soutt~ State S~ree( tYom Mi $~aet to Haslin~ Avenue, inducle shoe transitions into the two-way left turn Jlnes nof~ of Mill S1reel led south of HlsfJng$ Avenue, led instaJl detector ~s to iltow and Ihe MiminMion of om~lmet I~ woulcl mike II in4xtuib~ f~r the Ix~es to mike their stops. IMndocino Tmnsil Au~ (MTA) expmemed similar mmmms mMive to mn ii:raised mc~ident ?ate aubstantially wamant the cx~~ of th~ p~. and am mque~ng ~imctkm W'om C. oun~l to proceed with ~ deign. Discussion followed relative to the expressed corK:ems of Greyhound end MTA and the future possit:x~ty of bus cut outs. It was noted that a positive aspect of the project would be the potential Regular Meeting. October li, recluclion of the ru'nber of accidents in thai area clue to the elimination of the lift turn stops that tie of the project would mean a loss of parking for the small businesses in the area. Several cdlizefls end ~ owners IPOAe in opposition to the project, citing concerns regarding Of a traffic lane for bcyclists, and Ihe potential for ircreas~ vehi~Aar speed as a result of the elimination of Ihl lift turn stops. It wis noted that planning should GGT, aJr which tikes into CO'tsidlrll~fl a pOSSJI:)M future area pop4,dllJofl ~owth f~::~)r of ~, ~ It~ resultant increase in tmfrc on 8tare Street. It was fur1~r suggested that alternative modes of ttaneponation should be enc=x,mged. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:42 p.m. other design alternatives had been explored to reduce ~ trafrc hazards. Discussion noted that approximately 121 parking spaces along 8tare Stmel wou~ be eliminated, and that current traffic on State Street would not allow for ocdy I two lane highway with I middle turn lane. The capacity of a freeway lane (free-flow conditions) is appmxirnately 1,20C) vehicles per hour. The average clay of trafrc on State Street exceeds 10,000 vehicles a clay. If State Street ware reconflgumcl to have only one through lane in each direction, the capacity, because of the interruptions at the intersections, would be 500 end 700 vehicles per hour, per lane. It was noted there was a need to have a right turn lane at the intersections to maintain capacity at the intersections. Council expressed concerns relative to pedestrian safety, the lack of bicycle lanes, and the loss of on-street parking for the businesses in the area. Discussion noted consensus for staying with the status quo, and not clegradjng the business community because of o~ver irresponsibility. Council acknowteclgecl the denial of the project would cause the loss of the state funds. M/S Watl~nburgerfMalone to not ado~ the concept and ask staff to cease progress on the project to construct a two-way, left-turn lane on South State Street from Mill Street to Hastings Avenue, carried by the following roll calf vote: AYES: Counciimembars Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAJN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Mastin. Recessed: ?:SS p.m. Reconvened: 0:06 p.m. ?c. Aclo~tion of Resolution F~__m.~_bllahino 15 U--r"H ~.~:;~ -A'-----;--.~Vel Of T~¢ I~iv~ion and Calming on Lc-:'-~,~r,e ~,,~,~ City Engineer Kennedy reviewed the staff report and recommendations relative to implementing traff~ dive, ion and calming measures on Lonline Street south of Marlene Street, pursuant to the requirements stipu~ecl in Condition No. 29 of Site Development Permit 90-87 for the Wal-Mart project. The traffic volumes have substantially increased and warrant the implementation of the establishing s 15 MPH speed zone on Lonline Street belween Marline Street and old Telmage Telmage Reed. ~ would Ilcx~v the ablty to make right ancl lift tums from Tiimage Road Councilmember Shoemaker inquirecl why Ihese measures were luperlor to the fixing of Weugh lane bddge al the w.y soulh to Telmage Rood. Coat estimates macle by the previous City Engineer indic, me the City's portion of t~e cost for ~ improvement would be consiclerable. The City does not currently have the funds to participate in the improvement of Waugh Lane. Discussion followed relative to turn arrow signege and use of traffic barriers. Regular ~. October 11,1~ off' of local bu~inesees. Re~clent~ ~ voiced their opinion~ th~ ~~ ~ums ~ ~s ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~to~r, ~ ~ ~ve ~ tot~vel~~~ ~~~,~~~~e~tmlor ~igh~~ ~e~. ~ ~ ~ e~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~n~ ~ ~r ~i~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ Wl~h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~~h PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED:. t:l 1 p.m. Discussion followed ~s the Council ~ttempted to relc~ · consensus. MIS Sheemake~4elone to edel~ Resolution No. 97-30 EstabliaJ~ A 15 Miles Per Hour Speed Zone, camed by the following mil call vote: AYES: CmmcibM~be~ Malone, Wedenburger, · ~)emlker, ami Mayor ~<~'miter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Nc~. ABSENT: Councilmember Mastin. M/S ShoemakeffV~tenl=~- to ba~icade Ma~lene 51rest ~o there is no through mad to Orchard S~reet, with the City Engineer to dllem~i~e ~ ~, ~ by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembe~ Malone, Wattenburger, ~x)emaker, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: CouncilmemberMlstin. ~ Shc~'nskeffW~r to seek infommtion from the C~ Engineer regarding reconnecting Betty Street to old Talmege Road ami abandoning the portion that joins new Telmage Road, camed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor $chneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ,4~ENT: Councilmember Mlstin. M/S ShoemakmYSchnelter to secure an up-to-date c~ estimate for imp~vements on Waugh Lane, camed by an all AYE voice vote. Recessed: 9:21 p.m. Reconvenecl: 9:31 p.m. 7d. Introduction of Ordinance Amending the City Zonina M_-p to P-~zone 101 ~r_'~_ in ~T Dom Street Corridor Neighborhg~d_ Discussion followed regarding the G)flx~ss of introducing the o~linance in consideration of Councilrnember Shoemaker's conflicts relating to the ~s to be mzoned. It was detem~ined that Counciimember Shoemaker should hear the staff mpo~l in total, and mc, use himself dudng the discussion and vote on the conflicted issues. Senior Planner ~ advised that Phase No. 5 of the City-W~le General Plan Rezoning Program involves 101 lots situated in whit is refined to es the Dom ~ ~ aria. The main thrust of this pha~ is to ~ a la,ge number of the pomeds froflti~ Dom b"~'~et, between Hotden ~tmet on the no~th end Beacon lane on the Iouth,fmm "R-3' (Gef~'ll Multiple Residential) to 'C-N" (N~ghtxxf',c-~.___ Commemial). The intent is to ecl~,ew~<~ge and ~ the evolution of this street land uses, and to help ficitlte the ~ of IIxI ~ that am eul of ~)nlext with their s4zyoundings. The l=~nning ~ cx)nside~ the mzofling of 161 pen:sis in this phase of Commla~ermr ~tmernaker recum~ hin~elf from the meeting at 9:39 p.m. Mayor ~chrleltlr advised it was now time to hear public input on those properties proposed to be mzoned from 'R-3' to "C-N." Regular Meeting. October PUBUC NEARING OPENED:. ~:40 p.m. ~ from I~ auclience ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of bulk:lings along the ¢omdor, security of the houses in the ami, llllSC, and the cllgrlclation of the rt~s ~urrouncling the proposed changes with the ~h~flt of mmal$, apartment buildings, or commemml enterprises. Mr. a~ump advised slaff is nee proposing ~ changes to the zoning provisions, just a change in the 23 meeting. PUBLIC I.F. ARING CLOSED: t:46 p.m. Councilman Malone inquirld if Itm "C-N" deNgnation would still allow Iome of the higher density ~mml. Mr. Itump replied the 'C-N' designation would aac~v Ic~ intensity residential and Iow intensity cornrnemial land ms. MIS Wattenburger/Malone to introduce by title only lhe Ordinance Amending the C)frK~l Zoning MaP for the City of Uklah, CA, ~ to those properties mzoned from -R.3- to -C,.N,, camed by an Ill AYE voice vote d the Councilrnl~r~ prlsent. City Clerk Giumoli mad the Ordinance by title only. M/S WatmnburgerfMalone to intnxiuce the Orttirmn~ Amending the Off, al Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah, CA, relative to those prope~s mzoned from "R-3' to 'C-N," camecl by the following mil call vote: AYES: Counciimembers Malone, Wlttenburger, and Mayor ~'¢:hneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmembers Malfin and ,Shoemaker. ff was determined that the on:linarx:e regarding the rezoning of "R-3" to "R-I' would be brought back at a future meeting due to the conflicts of Mayor Schneiter and Councilmember Wattenburger relating to the p4'ot~rties and the absence of Councilmember Ma·tin, thereby creating the lack of a quorum. Mayor Schneiter advised ff was now time to hear public input regarding those properties to be mzonecl from 'R-3' to 'R-2.' PUBLIC HEARJNG OPENED: g:54 p.m. Jack Rising, Redwood Theatem, presented · letter to the Council from the owrmr of the property at 737 South Oak Street that was wrfllen to the Planning Commission, wherein he expressed the desire to retain the present R-3 zoning. Mr. RLsing also ~ooke in favor of retaining the current zoning for his property. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: g:~ p.m. Mayor 8¢hrmiter mad the letter to the c'_-o,__,ncilnmmbem preaent. MIS WattenburgerfM~lone to intnxluca by title only the Orclin~nca Amending the Of Rc~l Zoning Map for the City of Uldah, CA relative to those properties mzorm¢l from 'R-3" to 'R-2', with the axcaption of the lower five pemMs situate~ along the II~tem licM of C)lk ~ ~ Mill and Gobbi Streets which shall remain "R-3'. camed by an all AYE voice va~e. ~ernaker. Mayor Schneiter advised it vms now time to hear public input mgartling the property to be mzoned from "R-l" to 'C,-N.' Councilrnember Shoemaker returned to the meeting at 10:00 p.m. R~ular Meeti~ - O~e~er 1l, 1~ PUBUC HEARING OPENED:. 10:01 p.m. No one came forward. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED:. 10.'02 p.m. ~ WattenburgerfMalone to introduce by title only the Orclir~nce Amending the Off. iai Zoning Map for the CI~ of Uldah, CA, relative to the property to be ~ from 'R-I' to 'C-N', carried by mn ell AYE voica vote of the ~ present. ~ WattenburgerfMalone to introduce the Ordir~nca Am~ the Of~:ial ~ Map for the roll call vote: AYES: ~ Malone, Watter~, Shoemaker, ~ Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: ~Ma~tin. audience present to speak to the 0b. Discussion Regardin. A~ld~_'_.,~nal Tree Planti .~_~ In -~x ~ 'rhG,-;-,a$. Jr. Community Services Director DeKnoblough advised that Nnce the ~mning of the Alex R. Thomas, Jr. Plaza, there has been sub~ntial public comment regarding the need for additional shade tree plantings on the site. In response to this communtt~ ditcu~4ion, the Ukiah Main Street Program has initiated an efforl to obtain donations for additional tree plantings. To date, they have secured donom for at least six laos, 15 gallon to 3~' box in ~ize, for planting this fall. Staff has met with Main Stmat members, as w~ll as with Council~ Shoemaker, to discuss potential tree types and locations. Plantings ara recommended at two trees within each of the three turf areas, excluding the fourth ama in front of the ~tage, Mr. Dennis Denny, Main S~reet Program, stated he had found other individuals willing to donate to this venture, He requested that the Thomas family be asked if the donations would conflict with their desires for the Plaza. Once agreement is reached, he will move forward and secure the donations. Mayor Schnei~ stated he felt that City Manager Homley would be the ideal person to contact Mrs. Thomas to secure her approval of the donations. MIS Shoemaker/Malone to approve the concept and move forward, carried by an all AYE voice vote. The Council expressed their gratitude to Mr. Denny and the Ukiah Main Street Program for their generous efforts, stating the size of the tree donations would give ,omo greatly needed immediate sha~e. Adoption of Rmsolution Af)imlntJna tiM ..".?_in ~ Pmaram ~_-~rd Of I~-,~,r~ Advisory Board to the C~v C0~rmil for Im~ ef the Parking &,-,~ V..~,,"~v~-.,4~ fAB 1693) prepare and prete~ to the Council the required report ~ to disbursemem of futura funds. Regular Meeting. October 1l, ~ ~~~ ~ ~ Rtl ~. 97-31 ~ ~ ~h ~in ~t ~ o~ ~h, c~ ~ ~ ~ M C~H ~: A~: ~ ~, W~e~qer, ~n. lb. AJ)DreVll Of ~ ~~1 ~ far City ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ F~I ~m, Inc. to AY~r~: ~qa~r~:~s MMorm, Wmtton~r, Shoorn~or, mild M~or Schrmter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: C, oulYdrrm~b~ Mastin. k. AoDointmem ~f Union _~enk M' Galtfomie es .a_-'ent te .a_~ es ~_~_',~ted_ ien M C4sh. ~, and ~ Ptaeerty W~ieh __l~y Be ~r~_,~s_..~_ with Union ~k of Califomi- end Authorization for GRy Manager to ~n CRy Mirmger ~y m:lvised · Request for ~1 (RFP) m mJbm~ed fm custodian of the City's ~curtties. The mcom~ i~ ttmt the ~clvi~ory ~ ~ ttm m~todi~n not be one ancl the s~me. The lowest prioe received from the RFP ~ fr~n Union bnk for $2.,500. Discussion followed rel~Jve to minimum end tmn~ction fees, 14~ ,~x~errm~im~ to ~qx)int Union B~nk of C411fomie ns Agent to mci ns C,u~todi~n of C4sh. ,~mcur~s, ~ oltm' property whict~ mm/be deposited with Union ~nk of C41iforr~ nnd luthorize the City M~rmger to ~ign the a.mto~ ~gmement, c~rried by tim followi~ roll c, lll vote: AYES: Councilrnembers M~lone, W~ttenburger, Shoerrmker, lnd Mm/or 8chneiter. NOES: None. A~TAIN: None. A~ENT: Councilmember M~stin. 10. PETITIONS ~D COMMUNICATIONS lOa. LMter IYom Eladia Liine~. Preeeny Owner ae the i)~leee .~H,~,~ ! floor of the newer portion ~ Itm building to non-profit or~~ ~t · r~luced f~e. The City's that blsis. ~rK=e she hid rice/vid strong indiGItJonl from Ihe f~Tner C:31y Idmwger the CouncJI Further ~ folow~ tug.ding wtm tmcl pmviou~ ~ ~ to Ms. Lames regarcl~g ~ uses a(the ~, ~ it .ns nm.d tut IS(X),O00 M R~ ff was the conses'tsus of the Cour~ If, mt bls. Laifles ~ t~ encouraged in her efforts to invest her buicling, and Ihnt ~ese types of businesses were weft accx~pted ~ the community duhng the Umes of their pmviou~ opmltion. I~gubr Ikettq. October li, 11~ 11. ~ COUNCI~~T~ Councilrnember W/fiord)urger reported he hid enjoyed the pumpkin weigh-in for Pump~nfest, th~! I~rts c~tbe edge of the green were removed Mtcl rel)l~oed with turf from Inother Redesign Mil be ct)·sidereal It · liter Irate. C~uncilmember Shoe·raker urged Ihe ~ lc) mid infonTmtWn m~lrcling Proposition 218. 12. ,(~rTY MANAGER/C~PARTMENT .HI=_&~_ REPORT? City Mlrmger Horsley ~'vised the new tllepbeM system would be inslMled this weekend. Tilining will occur for ·11 employees. 13. _.CLOSED SESSION (Nolle} 14. ADJOURNMENT M/S Malone/Watl~burger to edjoum the meeting at 10:55 p.m. to the Regular Adjourned Meeting of October 30, 1996, at 5 p.m., carried by an ·11 AYE voice vote. b: cc~.,c101696.min Merge Giumoli, City C,4erk Regullr Meeting. C)cto~r MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH - October 30, 1 The City Council ~ in n regutar adjourned meeting, of which the agenda was legally noticed and posted, at 5:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were PRESENT: Councilmembers MastJn, Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker and Mayor Schneiter. ABSENT: None. Staff Present: Public Utilities Director Barnes, F'zmnce Director Elton, Assistant City Manager Hams, City Manager Homley, Persor,'~ C)trt~r Revheim, Planning Director Sawyer, Senior Planner Stump, Senior Civil Engineer Woods, end City Clerk Giuntoli. 2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS NON-AGF~N~rp~.. IT~M~ 3. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S Wattenburger/Shoerneker to approve the Consent Calenc~r as follows: a. Received and Filed Report of the Acquisition of Professional Services Related to ConstnJction Administration for the Alternate Leachate Containment Project The motion carded by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ,ia. Ador)tion of Ordinance Amending the City Zoninc~ Map to Rezone 51 North/Central Area Neighborhood Mayor Schneiter and Councilmember Wattenburger recused themselves from the meeting at 5:03 p.m. Senior Planner Stump advised he would, with the concurrence of the Council, dispense with the staff report, and answer questions from Council. M/S Malone/Masfin to adopt Ordinance No. 975 Amending the Official Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah, CA, rezoning 51 lots in the North/~l Area Neighborhood, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, and Shoemlk~. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Wattenburger and Mayor Schneiter. 4b. Adoption of Three Ordinence$__ Amending the City Zoning Map to I _~___~-one 93 Lo~ in th.; Dora SLTeet Corridor I~kldghborhood Mayor Schneiter and Councilmember Wattenburger returned to the meeting at 5:04 p.m. Councilmember Shoemaker recused himself from the meeting at 5:04 p.m. Senior Planner Stump advised he would dispense with the staff reports on all three ordinances unless them were questions fTom Council. i. 83 paroela from "R4 to c~- M/S Malone/Mastin to Adopt Ordinance No. 976 Amending the ~! Zoning Map for the City of Uldah, CA, rezoning 83 pamels fi'om 'R-3 to C-N", carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: ~ Mastin, Malone, Wattenburger, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Shoemeker. M/S Malone/Masttn to Adopt OMinence NO. 977 Amending the Official Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah, CA, rezoning g parcels from "R-3 to R-Z', carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, Wattenburger, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: councilmemberShoemaker. Regular Adjourned Meeting October 30, Page I iii. 1 Parcel from 'R4 to C-N" M/S Malone/Martin to Adopt Ordinance No. 978 Amending the Off~al Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah, CA, rezoning one parcel from 'R-1 to C-N', carded by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmernbers Mastin, Malone, Wittenburger, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilrnember Shoemaker. 4c. Adoption of Ordinance Amending the Airport Ind,_,_.efl, tal Park Planned Councilmember Shoemaker returned to the meeting at 5:07 p.m. Senior Planner Stump advised he would dispense with the staff report for this item. Council informed Councilmember Mastin of their actions It the October 16 meeting regarding amending the proposed ordinance. M/S W~ttanburger/Malone to Adopt Ordinance No. 979 Amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Malone, Wittenburger, ~ Mayor SchnMtm'. NOES: Councitmembers Mastin and Shoemaker. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. NEW BUSINI~SS Discussion Reaarding Procedure for City _r~._rk Appointment, .~mval of ~Job peacription for City Clerk Position, and Author~_--tion of City .¥_-nager to Init~?_ Recruitment Process Personnel Officer Revheim advised that since the deadline of October 22 had passed for '~n'ite-in" candidates to file nomination papers for the elected City Clerk position, staff was requesting the approval of the proposed City Clerk job description and the initiation of the recruitment process and subsequent appointment. The only other option allowed by State law is to hold a special election to fill the vacant position. Discussion followed relative to the recruitment process, wherein it was noted the position would be advertised via press release to local media and agencies, and that applicants ware required to be residents of the City. It was further noted the person selected will become an elected official, and that the selection will be made by the Council. Candidates will be informed of the possibility of late hours of Council meetings and other special duties and responsibilities of the position. City Manager Homley advised that the information regarding City Council meetings and regular office hours will be added to the job description, although the actual designated hours will be negotiated during the selection process. M/S ShoemakerfWatl~nburger to approve the revised City Clerk Job Description, and authorize the City Manager to initiate the recruitment process, carried by an iii AYE voice vote. 5b. Adoption of Resolution Confirming City Manaeer's .~pointment of A_-_-!~-*~_nt City Manac~er aa Parking Citation Administrative .Hea-rine Fv_~_miner Ms. Homley advised the Callfom~ Vehicle Code specifies the requirements for serving as a Hearing Examiner for appeals of parking citations. Though the Finance Director was assigned this task several years ago, the statute Ilipulites that 'The Exm'rmer shall be separate and independent from the citation collection or processing function." It ~ detaflTJined that this function can best be irx~gled in the duties of the Assistant City Manager. The required Parking Hearing Off:er training has ~reedy been taken by one of the City employees, and that inforrnation will be pa~ed along to the new Hearing Examiner. M/S Mas~in/Wattenbur~er to adopt Resolution No. g7-32 Confirming City Manager's Appointment of Assistant C~ Manager as the Perking Citation Administrative Nearing Examiner, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, Wlttenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. At this time, Mayor Schnaiter asked the Councilmembers for any reports they wished to make. Councilmember Mastin had no report. Regular Adjourned Meeting October 30, lf)6 Page2 Councilmember Malone reported he had attended the Northwestern Pacific Railroad meeting, and felt the situation with the North Coast Railroad Authority was beginning to stabilize under the new director, Dan Hauser. Counoilrnember Wattenburger had no report. Councilmember ~'4~eemaker reported he had performed the ~maring in ceremony for the AmedC, oq~ volunt~. Their main emph~__~_~ will be wo~Jng with children, and children's programs. Mayor Schneiter reported the Mayors/Marmgers would meet tomon'ow in Wi#its. ~ Manager I-lemley suggested the d~e of November 15, at 2:30 p.m., for the m~eadng in of the ~Jccessful candidates for City offme by Mamha Young, County Cl~'k-Recorder. ~ also requested the Council look at the financial Reports, which have been customized for the Councir$ clarity and undemtanding, and offer comments and suggestions. ~he further expllinad the code designation '999' on the report was a computer notation that the item should be examined further. It was noted them was a conflict with "Leadership Mendoclno" on Ihe November 15 date. Mayor Schneiter reminded the outgoing Coundlmember~ to c~nplete Fon'n 721, Disclosure of Economic Interest. 6. ADJOURNMENT MIS Wattenbu~gerlMastin to adjourn the meeting at 5:32 p.m., carried by an all AYE vote. cc\cc103096, min Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk Regular Adjourned Meeting October 30, ltg~ Page 3 ITEM NO. 5a DATE: November 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY RE PORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS SETTING THE LIMITATION ON CITY EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1995-96 AND 1996-97. The passage of Proposition 4 in 1979 (Article XIIIB of the California Constitution), requires local governments to prepare a statement of appropriations limitation. Also, each of the governing bodies must pass a resolution setting the appropriations limit for each budget year. Briefly, the City's appropriation growth rate is limited to the change in the County's population and the change in California's per capita personal income. Exhibit A attached to the proposed resolution for fiscal year 1995-96, sets forth the calculations necessary to establish the appropriations limit for the City of Ukiah's 1995-96 fiscal year. Exhibit A attached to the proposed resolution for fiscal year 1996-97, sets forth the calculations necessary to establish the appropriations limit for the City of Ukiah's 1996-97 fiscal year. For these calculations, each revenue source listed in the adopted budget must be allocated as "proceeds from taxes" or "non-proceeds from taxes." Adoption of these resolutions assure the community and the State of California that the appropriations approved do not exceed the City's annual appropriations limit. For fiscal year 1995-96, the calculations show a limit of $16.7 million and appropriations subject to the limit of $4.7 million. For fiscal year 1996-97, the calculations show a limit of $17.6 million and appropriations subject to the limit of $4.3 million. This provides a large margin of safety ($12.0 and $13.3 million, respectively) before compliance with this law would become a problem. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolutions fixing limitations on City expenditures for Fiscal Years 1995-96 and 1996-97. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) . Adopt the resolution setting the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Appropriations limit at $16,680,814. 2). Adopt the resolution setting the Appropriations limit for Fiscal Year 1996-97 at $17,573,297. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Postpone adoption of appropriation limit resolutions. 2. Adopt resolutions with modifications. Prepared by: Gordon Elton, Finance Director Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1) Resolution for FY 95-96 Appropriation limitation. 2) Resolution for FY 96-97 Appropriation limitation. APPROVED: GE:GANNLIMT.AGN Candace Horsley, !City Manager 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 96- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH FIXING LIMITATION ON CITY EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996-97 WHEREAS, the provisions of Proposition 4, (Article XIII B of the California Constitution), the spending initiative, passed by the voters of the State of California, place a limitation on the expenditures of governmental agencies; and WHEREAS, the above referenced legislation requires the City of Ukiah to establish its appropriation limit for the 1996-97 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of the City of Ukiah has computed the limitation of the City of Ukiah for the 1996-97 fiscal year in accordance with the provisions thereof in the amount of $17,573,297; and WHEREAS, the appropriation limitation for the 1996-97 fiscal year was determined by utilizing the change in California per capita income for the 1996-97 fiscal year and the percentage of population change within Mendocino County as estimated by the State of California, Department of Finance estimates as of January 1, 1996. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the budgetary appropriation limitation of the City of Ukiah for fiscal year 1996-97 is hereby fixed at $17,573,297, as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1996, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk 4:Res:Umlt.96 CITY OF UKIAH SCHEDULE TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 4 & 111 APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 EXHIBIT "A" Based on Fiscal Year 1996-97 Budget A) PROCEEDS OF TAXES $4,800,256 B) LESS: EXCLUSIONS $486,070 C) APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO LIMITATION $4,314,186 D) CURRENT YEAR LIMIT $17,573,297 $13,259,111 E) AMOUNT UNDER THE LIMIT (MARGIN OF SAFETY) GANN45.XLS 10/31/96 Page 1 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO GANN LIMIT 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 LIMIT PRIOR YEAR TIMES: % CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA PER CAPITA INCOME (a) (b) OR % GROWTH IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSED VALUATION $14,877,311 5,44O,9O6 $15,687,381 1.0272 1.0071 1.0472 $16,680,814 1.0467 AND TIMES: % POPULATION CHANGE CITY (a) % POULATION CHANGE COUNTY (a) (c) 1.0094 1.0017 1.0005 1.003 1.0104 1.0088 1.0154 1.0065 NEW LIMIT $15,440,906 $15,687,381 $16,680,814 $17,573,297 NOTES: (a) State of California, Department of Finance estimates, May 1996 (b) Factor Chosen for calculation, by default. (c) Factor Chosen for calculation. GANN45.XLS 10/31/96 Page 2 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH PROPOSITION 4 AND 111, APPROPRIATION LIMIT SCHEDULE TO CATEGORIZE BUDGETED REVENUE FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 REVENUE SOURCE TAXES PROPERTY TAXES SALES & USE TAXES PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX BUSINESS LICENSE TAX FRANCHISE TAX FRANCHISE IN-LIEU CITY UTILITIES OTHER TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS BICYCLE LICENSES BUILDING PERMITS ELECTRICAL PERMITS PLUMBING PERMITS MECHANICAL PERMITS MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS FINES & PENALTIES INTERGOVERNMENTAL MOTOR VEHICLE IN LIEU TRAILER COACH FEES OFF HIGHWAY LICENSES TAX RELIEF VICHY SPRINGS FIRE CONTRACT P.O.S..T. REIMBURSEMENTS COUNTY REIMBURSEMENT MISC. PARTICIPATIONS STATE MANDATED COST REIMBURSEMENT USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY INTEREST RENT SUN HOUSE REVENUE CONCESSION INCOME RECREATION PROGRAM INCOME TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FUNDS PROCEEDS OF TAXES $501,905 92,427,000 97,000 9200,000 9155,000 9860,000 9535,000 90 90 97,500 9106,851 NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES 9357,500 9150 954,900 92,800 91,300 93,000 96,600 95,300 94,729 918,000 95,000 90 943,149 910,440 95,100 90 9117,070 985,000 GANN45.XLS 10/31/96 Page 3 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH PROPOSITION 4 AND 111, APPROPRIATION LIMIT SCHEDULE TO CATEGORIZE BUDGETED REVENUE FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 REVENUE SOURCE PROCEEDS OF TAXES NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES SUBD PLANNING FEES SUBDIVISION FEES GENERAL PLAN FEES EMERGENCY RESPONSE REIM POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPT SALE OF MATERIALS WEED ABATEMENT VEHICLE ABATEMENT PLAN CHECK FEES SWIMMING POOL LATE CHARGES/PENALTIES LABOR OVERHEAD REIMBURSEMENT AMBULANCE FEES MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL GENERAL FUND $11,500 $3,050 $0 $17,000 $19,6O0 $7,900 $0 $0 $8,3OO $25,000 $27,600 $0 $0 $414,000 $2,100 $4,800,256 $1,256,088 $6,056,344 ENTERPRISE & OTHER FUNDS $27,718,388 $27,718,388 TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ADD: TRANSFERS INTO GENERAL FUND $4,800,256 $28,974,476 $786,973 $33,774,732 TOTAL PROCEEDS OF TAXES $4,800,256 TOTAL NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES $29,761,449 GANN45.XLS 10/31/96 Page 4 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH SCHEDULE OF EXCLUDED APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 BUDGET QUALIFIED CAPITAL OUTLAYS LEASE/PURCHASE PAYMENTS FIRE TRUCK (lOO.21Ol) CIVIC CENTER (lOO. lOO1,11o1,12o1,191o, 19o5,13o1,1915) LADDER TRUCK (lOO.21Ol) IBM COPIER (lOO.2O01,21Ol) FIRE ENGINE (100.21Ol) STREET EQUIPMENT (lOO.31 lO) PARKS MOWER (10o.6ool) IBM AS 400 HARDWARE (100.1301) IBM AS 400 SOFTWARE (lOO.13Ol) AMOUNT $18,583 $333,226 $13,588 $954 $61,075 $35,548 $8,000 $11,253 $3,843 $486,070 CITY OF UKIAH ALLOCATION OF INTEREST- TO TAX & NON-TAX PROCEEDS FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 BUDGET A) TAX PROCEEDS LESS INTEREST - GENERAL FUND B) LESS; EXCLUDED APPROPRIATIONS C) NET TAX PROCEEDS D) TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES, LESS INTEREST E) NET TAX PROCEEDS, AS PERCENT OF TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE $4,693,4O5 $486,O7O $4,207,335 $5,906,344 71% F) TOTAL INTEREST $1 50,000 G) AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM TAXES AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES H) $106,851 $43,149 GANN45.XLS 10/31/96 Page 5 of 5 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96- 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH FIXING LIMITATION ON CITY EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 WHEREAS, the provisions of Proposition 4, (Article Xlll B of the California Constitution), the spending initiative, passed by the voters of the State of California, place a limitation on the expenditures of governmental agencies; and WHEREAS, the above referenced legislation requires the City of Ukiah to establish its appropriation limit for the 1995-96 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of the City of Ukiah has computed the limitation of the City of Ukiah for the 1995-96 fiscal year in accordance with the provisions thereof in the amount of $16,680,814; and WHEREAS, the appropriation limitation for the 1995-96 fiscal year was determined by utilizing the change in California per capita income for the 1995-96 fiscal year and the percentage of population change within Mendocino County as estimated by the State of California, Department of Finance estimates as of January 1, 1995. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the budgetary appropriation limitation of the City of Ukiah for fiscal year 1995-96 is hereby fixed at $16,680,814, as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1996, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk 4:Res:Umit.95 CITY OF UKIAH SCHEDULE TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 4 & 111 APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 Based on Fiscal Year 1995-96 Budget EXHIBIT "A" A) PROCEEDS OF TAXES B) LESS: EXCLUSIONS C) APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO LIMITATION $4,965,589 $260,254 $4,705,335 D) CURRENT YEAR LIMIT E) AMOUNT UNDER THE LIMIT (MARGIN OF SAFETY) $16,680,814 $11,975,479 GANN45.XLS 10/29/96 Page 1 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH APPROPRIATIONS SUBJECT TO GANN LIMIT 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 LIMIT PRIOR YEAR TIMES: % CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA PER CAPITA INCOME (a) (b) OR % GROWTH IN NON-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSED VALUATION 914,714,170 914,877,311 915,440,906 0.9936 1.0272 1.0071 (not available in this County) 915,687,381 1.0472 AND TIMES: % POPULATION CHANGE CITY (a) % POULATION CHANGE COUNTY (a) (c) 1.0077 1.0094 1.001 7 1.01 76 1.01 04 1.0088 1.0005 1.0154 NEW LIMIT 914,877,311 915,440,906 915,687,381 916,680,814 NOTES: (a) State of California, Department of Finance estimates, May 1995 (b) Factor Chosen for calculation, by default. (c) Factor Chosen for calculation. GANN45.XLS 10/29/96 Page 2 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH PROPOSITION 4 AND 111, APPROPRIATION LIMIT SCHEDULE TO CATEGORIZE BUDGETED REVENUE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 REVENUE SOURCE TAXES PROPERTY TAXES SALES & USE TAXES PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX BUSINESS LICENSE TAX FRANCHISE TAX FRANCHISE IN-LIEU CITY UTILITIES OTHER TAXES LICENSES AND PERMITS BICYCLE LICENSES BUILDING PERMITS ELECTRICAL PERMITS PLUMBING PERMITS MECHANICAL PERMITS MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS FINES & PENALTIES INTERGOVERNMENTAL MOTOR VEHICLE IN LIEU TRAILER COACH FEES OFF HIGHWAY LICENSES TAX RELIEF VICHY SPRINGS FIRE CONTRACT P.O.S..T. REIMBURSEMENTS COUNTY REIMBURSEMENT MISC. PARTICIPATIONS STATE MANDATED COST REIMBURSEMENT USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY INTEREST RENT SUN HOUSE REVENUE CONCESSION INCOME RECREATION PROGRAM INCOME PROCEEDS OF TAXES 9512,000 92,397,539 918,000 9200,000 9161,000 $844,800 $520,000 $3,300 $260 $16,000 9163,691 NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES 9333,000 $130 $20,000 $850 $420 $760 $5,500 $1,450 $4,600 927,000 $55,080 $4,400 $5,000 $36,309 $15,300 $6,500 $8,000 $105,135 GANN45.XLS 10/29/96 Page 3 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH PROPOSITION 4 AND 111, APPROPRIATION LIMIT SCHEDULE TO CATEGORIZE BUDGETED REVENUE FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 REVENUE SOURCE PROCEEDS OF TAXES NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES SUBD PLANNING FEES SUBDIVISION FEES EMERGENCY RESPONSE REIM POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPT VEHICLE ABATEMENT PLAN CHECK FEES SWIMMING POOL MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL GENERAL FUND $4,836,590 $8,000 $1,500 $28,500 $16,800 $6,6O0 $12,000 $17,000 $31,000 84,000 $754,834 $5,591,424 ENTERPRISE & OTHER FUNDS $28,538,052 $28,538,052 TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ADD: TRANSFERS INTO GENERAL FUND $4,836,59O $128,999 $29,292,886 $34,129,476 TOTAL PROCEEDS OF TAXES $4,965,589 TOTAL NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES $29,292,886 GANN45.XLS 10/29/96 Page 4 of 5 CITY OF UKIAH SCHEDULE OF EXCLUDED APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 BUDGET QUALIFIED CAPITAL OUTLAYS LEASE/PURCHASE PAYMENTS FIRE TRUCK (100.21Ol) CIVIC CENTER (100.1oo1,11o1,1201,1910,19o5,13o1,1915) LADDER TRUCK (10o.21Ol) IBM COPIER (lOO.19o5) FIRE ENGINE (lOO.21Ol) STREET EQUIPMENT (lOO.31 lO) PARKS MOWER (lOO.6OOl) IBM AS 400 HARDWARE (lOO.13Ol) IBM AS 400 SOFTWARE (lOO.13Ol) AMOUNT $19,854 $58,872 $27,431 $1 O,50O $61 ,O75 $44,O46 $8,000 $22,476 $8,000 $260,254 CITY OF UKIAH ALLOCATION OF INTEREST- TO TAX & NON-TAX PROCEEDS FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 BUDGET A) TAX PROCEEDS LESS INTEREST- GENERAL FUND B) LESS; EXCLUDED APPROPRIATIONS C) NET TAX PROCEEDS D) TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES, LESS INTEREST E) NET TAX PROCEEDS, AS PERCENT OF TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE $4,672,899 $260,254 $4,412,645 $5,391,424 82% F) TOTAL INTEREST $200,000 G) AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM TAXES AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM NON-PROCEEDS OF TAXES H) $163,691 $36,309 GANN45.XLS 10/29/96 Page 5 of 5 ITEM NO. ~h DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT TO STILES CONSTRUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LEACHATE BOOSTER STATION IMPROVEMENTS AT THE UKIAH LANDFILL, SPECIFICATION NO. 96-17, IN THE AMOUNT OF $136,960 AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS WITHIN THE LANDFILL BUDGET ACCOUNT NO. 660-7301-250 In response to the City's Notice Inviting Bids dated October 2, 1996, the City Clerk received and opened four (4) sealed bid proposals on October 30,1996, for the Construction of Leachate Booster Station Improvements at the Ukiah Landfill. The lowest responsible bidder is Stiles Construction of Windsor, California, with a total bid amount of $136,960. The Engineers cost estimate is $122,000. Bid summary results are provided on the attached Bid Tabulation sheet. The Leachate Booster Station Improvements project is the second phase of the Alternative Leachate Containment System required to be installed at the Landfill by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The System Plan was approved by the City Council on July 17, 1996. Funds for the complete system were budgeted under the Landfill Account No. 660-7301-250- 011, "Reconstruct Leachate Pond", in the amount of $329,000. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Award the contract for the l_eachate Booster Station Improvements at the Ukiah Landfill, Specification No. 96-17 to Stiles Construction in the amount of $136,960.00. . Authorize the transfer of budgeted funds in the amount of $16,235 from budget account No. 660-7301-250-017 to 660-7301-250-011. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Construction of the Alternative Leachate Containment System is required by order of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Budget Transfer Requested: $16,235.00 from N/A 660-7301-250-017 to 660-7301-250-011 Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer,r- 0~ Rick H. Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer~'Yh! ~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Bid Tabulation Sheet 2. Bid Proposal from Stiles Construction 3. Fiscal Year 1996/97 Budget Sheet Candace Horsl'ey, City~lVla~ager R: I'~LANDFILL:Idr ABOOSTER.STA Award of Contract to Stiles Construction for the Construction of Leachate Booster Station Improvements at the Ukiah Landfill, Specification No. 96-17 in the amount of $136,960 and authorize the transfer of funds within the Landfill budget Account No. 660-7301-250 November 6, 1996 Page 2 Phase I of the Project which involved the construction of the leachate force main and gravity line from the leachate ponds to the public sewer in Vichy Springs Road and the construction of the wet well and sedimentation basin was awarded to Ferranti Construction on September 18, 1996, in the amount of $99,807. The work of Phase I is approximately 90 percent complete and three (3) change orders have been issued totaling an estimated cost of $9,800, bringing the total contract amount to $109,607. The work of Change Orders 1 and 3 included work that originally was to be included in Phase II. Phase II of the project is the last phase of the complete system. The work of this phase involves the installation of the at grade leachate storage tanks, pump installation for the wet well, booster pump installation for the storage tank, electrical work, and water level controls. Originally, Phase II work included the earthwork required to construct the tank pad and the reconfiguration and conversation of the existing primary and secondary unlined leachate ponds to an emergency overflow pond. Because of the approaching winter rains and the lateness in the bidding of Phase II work, it was necessary that the grading work be performed with in-house labor and equipment. The grading work was completed the week of September 23, 1996. As stated previously, the Alternative Leachate Containment System was budgeted at $329,000 which included construction, design, geotechnical services, surveying, permitting, construction administration and the extension of power by PG&E. To date the following dollar amounts have been either expended or encumbered: WORK DESCRIPTION CONTRACTOR/VENDOR AMOUNT Project Design Contract Boyle Engineering Corp. $36,000.00 Design Survey and Mapping Rau and Associates 7,200.00 G~technical Services Power Line Extension Kleinfelder, Inc. 6,000.00 PG&E 21,812.71 Extension Rule Liability PG&E (estimated) 1,900.00 Deposit for Preliminary Electric Design PG&E 2,000.00 Reproduction of Phase I Plans Blueprints Plus 280.00 Construction Survey and Compact Testing for Earthwork Rau and Associates Service Pole Installation Wipf Construction 4,000.00 Leachate Piping Improvements Ferranti Construction 99,807.00 Award of Contract to Stiles Construction for the Construction of Leachate Booster Station Improvements at the Ukiah Landfill, Specification No. 96-17 in the amount of $136,960 and authorize the transfer of funds within the Landfill budget Account No. 660-7301-2:50 November 6, 1996 Page 3 WORK DESCRIPTION CONTRACTOR/VENDOR AMOUNT CCO No. 1 - Pipe Line Extensions Ferranti Construction 2,720.00 CCO No. 2 - Check Valves Ferranti Construction 1,350.00 CCO No. 3 - Pipe Line Extension Ferranti Construction 5,730.00 Encroachment Permit County of Mendocino 125.00 Construction Review Services Boyle Engineering Corp Reproduction of Phase II Plans Blueprints Plus 350.00 Amount Encumbered To-Date $203,275.00 Project Budget $329,000.00 Balance Remaining for Phase II Construction $125,725.00 Proposed Award for Phase II $136,900.00 Difference $11,235.00 As indicated above, project costs would exceed the project budget by $11,235.00 with the award of Phase II work. Since this project must go forward, the Director of Public Works requests that the deficit amount of $11,235 plus an additional amount of $5,000 for potential change order work and contact item overruns be taken from project savings in Account No. 660-7301-250-017, the installation of the remaining five (5) gas monitoring wells. Because of a very competitive proposal from Lawrence and Associates, the remaining five (5) gas monitoring wells were installed at a price of $25,764 leaving a positive balance of $54,236 in this budget account. If awarded, compensation for the performance of the work will be based on unit prices bid for contract item quantities actually installed. Bid total are based on unit prices bid for contract items at estimated quantities and, therefore, the actual total paid to the contractor may be lower or higher than the bid total indicated. R:I~LANDFILL:kk ABOOSTER.STA ~ ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 8888 8888~88 8 ~ ~ 8 8 8 8 8 8 ~ 8 8 8888 88888888 8 ~ ~)TT~F~H ~ EAJT * 1 CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PROPOSAL FOR LEACHATE BOOSTER STATION AT THE UKIAH LANDFILL Specification No. 96-17 The undersigned, as bidder, declares that he or she has examined thoroughly all of the contract documents herein contained, that tiffs proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm or corporation and that all laws and ordinances relating to the interest of public officers in this contract have been complied with in every respect. AND he or she proposes and agrees, if this proposal is accepted, I) that he or she will contract with the City of Ukiah, Mendocino County, California, in the form of the copy of the agreement herein contained a) to provide all necessary machinery, tools, apparatus and other means of construction; b) to furnish all materials; to provide all superintendence, overhead expenses and all labor and expenses of whatever nature necessary to complete the job in conformity with the specifications and drawings and other contract provisions herein or reasonably implied hereby or as necessary to complete the work in the manner and within the time named herein and according to the requirements and to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Engineer; d) to pay all charges of freight transportation and hauling; 2) that he or she indemnifies the City again.ut any loss or damage arising from any act of the undersigned as Contractor; and 3) that he or she will accept as full payment therefor the following stuns: BIDDING SCHEDULE In case of discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. ITEM QUANTITY DESCRIPTION AND UNIT PRICE BID AMOUNT FOR ITEM NO. 1. Lump Sum Surveying for the lump sum price of ~ °O/t.o° ($ -" .) $ 6,40 '-- R:SPEC_CHG 54 Spec. No. 96-17 2. Lump Sum Testing and quality control for the lump sum price of 3. Lump Sum Site Demolition for the lump sum price of 4. Lump Sum Site Grading & Earthwork for the lump sum price of (s ~s--oo-- ) $ 5. 190 CY 1-1/2" Drain Rockfor the price per cubic yard of i~ry S',., d ~ "%° / ($ db.oo ) $ ~7'-/o"' 6. ~ 4" PVC for the price per lineal foot of J ($ 7. oo ) $ //¢eo-- 7. 40 LF 6" PVC for the price per lineal foot of ~,,:: Tg.J:D ,, ($ /5",oo ) $ /vc~ "- 8. 30 LF 12" ?VC for the price per lineal foot of (s z.,'/,oo ) s 7zo R:SPEC CHG 55 Spec. No. 96-17 9. Lump Sum Bolted Steel Tank for the lump sum price of 10. Lump Sum Force Main Pump Station for the lump sum price of ! 11. Lump Sum Wet Well Pumping Station for the lump sum price of ($ lq/'Zoo ---- ) $ 1'~/ 7~ 12. Lump Sum Electrical for the lump sum price of ... <$ zg, z~- ) $ z~,~,o- We, the undersigned, further agree, if this proposal shall be accepted, to sign the agreement and to furnish the required bonds with satisfactory surety, or sureties, within fifteen (15) calendar days after written notice that the contract is read)' for signature; and, if the undersigned shall fail to contract, as aforesaid, it shall be understood that he or she has abandoned the contract and that, therefore, this proposal shall be null and void and the proposal guaranty accompanying this proposal, or the amount of said guaranty, shall be forfeited to and become the property of the Cit-).,. Othem'ise, the proposal guarani' accompanying this proposal shall be returned to the undersigned. Witness our hands this day of Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractor's License No. q~?,g'2~(o , expiration date c.//$ o/~ 7 THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE NUMBER AND EXPIRATION DATE STATED HEREIN ARE MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. Signature of bidder or bidders, with business addresses: 6209 LOCKWOOD DRIVE WiND$OH, CA 95492 (707) 836-0168 R:SPEC CHG ,, tv( e 56 Spec. No. 96-17 Notice: In the case of a corporation, give below the addresses of the principal office thereof and names and addresses of the President, Secretary, Treasurer. R:GENSPEC.DOC 57 No. 96-17 FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICA~ON TO: The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract, hereby certifies that he or she has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair Employment Practices requirements of the Special Provisions contained herein. City of Ukiah, Leachate Booster Station (Signature of Bidder) Business Address' STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 6209 LOCKWOOD DRIVE WINDSOR: CA ~15492 (707) 836-0168 Place of Residence: (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page prior to submitting his or her proposal.) R:GENSPEC.DOC 58 Sp~c. No. 96-17 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATF. I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. Witness my hand this .~ day of ~~,t_.. , 199 ~) Signature of Bidder, with Business Address: ST!LES CONSTRUCT!ON COMPANY 6209 LOCKWOOD DRIVE (707) 836-0168 R:GENSPEC.DOC 59 Spec. No. 96-17 CERTWICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents tha~(~r she(~faas not, participated ina previous contract or subcontract subject to 'eil~h r thee~ opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that{j~/or she~.a~as not, filed all requixed compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance prior to subcontract awards. Signature and address of Bidder: STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 620~ LOCKWOOD DRIVE WINDSOR, CA (707) 836-0168 (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity for implementing Executive Orders 10925 and 11114.) R:GENSPEC.DOC 60 Spec. No. 96-17 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the total bid and (b) the portion of the work to be done by each subcontractor. f6. o. f ox R:GENSPEC.DOC 61 Spec. No. 96-1'/ STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he or she has done and to give references that will enable the City Council to judge of his or her experience, skill and business standing and his or her ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. ~ ~ ,.t-,o~ tl,-/~o R:GENSPEC.DOC 62 Spec. No. 96-17 SIGNATURE(S) OF BIDDER Accompanying this proposal is I~,l>t>~ 5, (insert the words "cash ($)", "cashier's check" or "bidder's bond", as the case may be) in an amount equal to at least l0 percent of the bid. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as principals are as follows: IMPORTANT NOTICE: If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, provide the legal name of corporation and also the names of the president, secretary, treasurer and manager thereof. If a co- pannership, provide the true name of firm and also the names of all individual co-parmers composing the firm. If bidder or other interested person is an individual, provide the first and last names in full. Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors: License No. Signature(s) of Bidder: - --'-- NOTE: If bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall be set forth above together with the signature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership; and if bidder is an individual, his or her signature shall be placed above. If a member of a parmership, a Power of Anomey must be on file with the Department prior to opening bids or submitted with the bid; otherwise, the bid will be disregarded as irregular and unauthorized. Business address: Place of residence: Dated R:GENSPEC.DOC 63 Spec. No. 96-17 Z I0 '-------' '-- -- BOND NO. GE5802838 CITY OF UKIAH Mend~ino Count),, C~iforttia KNOW ALL MEN ilY THESE PEESENTS, STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY , ns PRINCIPAL and GULF INSURANCE COMPANY are held ~d firmly bound ~mto the City of Ulrich in ~¢ ~1 sum of I0 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE BID of the Principal above named, submitted by sifid Principal to the City of Uld~, ts the case may be, for the work described below, for the paymem of which sum ia lawful money of the United St~es, well a~d truly Io be made. to the City Clerk to wl~ich said bid was submitted, we bind ourselves, o~r heirs, executors. aclministrawrs ~nd successors jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. In no case shall the liability of the surer~'hereunderexceedtbe sumof$ TWENTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND N0/100- DOLLARS ($22,500.00/ THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that ~'bereas the Princip:fl has submitted the above mentioned bid to the City of Ukiah. as aforesaid, for certain construction specifically described as follows, lot which bids are to be opened at the Office of the City Clerk. Ukiah Civic Center, Ukiah, Caiiforma, on September 12, 1996 at 2:00 p.m. or soon thereafter for Leachate Booster Sxation at the Ukiah Landfall. NOW, THEREFORE. If the aforesaid Principal is awarded the contract and, within the time and ma.nncr required under the specifications, after the prescribed forms are pr~sent~! to him or her fox signatures, emers mtn a written contract, in the prescribed form. in accordance with the bid and Ides ~'o bonds with the City of Ukiah. one to guarantee faithful performance and the other 'to guarantee payment for labor and materia/s, as required by law, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have h~reunto set our hands a_rx~ seals on this 30TH ~y of A.D. 19 96 . ..._..------ OCTOBER STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (Sea~) (Seal) - c ,. Priactpal GULF INSURANCE COMPANY (seal) SHERRY' PHILL~Jps, ATT(]RNEY-IN-FACT (Seal) Surety, Address: 5550 WEST TOUHY AVENUE, SUITE 400 SKOKIE, IL 60077-3200 R:GENSPEC.DOC Sl~.C No. ~6-17 CALiFOR%'iA ALL.P0~RpOs£ 'AC~NOwLI~'I~'~NT No 5907 State of CALIFORNIA __ County of SONOMA On 10-30-96 DATE personally appeared before me, OACLYN T. C L , NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., 'JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC" SHERRY PHILLIPS NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) personally known to me - OR - I--] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s)is/are subscribed to the within instrument and ac- knowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ~ SIGNATURE OF NOTARY OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent traudulent realtachment of this lorm. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT INDIVIDUAL CORPORATE OFFICER TITLE(S) [-IPARTNER(S) LIMITED GENERAL ~'~ ATTORNEY-IN-FACT [--] TRUSTEE(S) [~ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR ~ OTHER:_ TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(lES) GULF INSURANCE COMPANY SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE ©1993 NATIONAL I',IOTARY ASSOCIATION ° 8236 Remrnet Ave., P.O. Box 7184 · Canoga Park, CA 91309-7184 .......... ~:-_n .... ~ ...... - ........... ',lUMBER KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI ~ NAME, ADDRESS POWER OF ATTORNEY PRINCIPAL: CITY. STATE, ZiP O~iGINAI.S (}F Tills POWER OF ATTORNEY ARE PR~N'rED ON B~,UE SAFETY PAPER WITtl TEAl, INK. DUPI, ICATES SllAI,I. llAVE liD: SAME FORCE AND EFFECT AS AN ORIGINAl. ONI.Y XVIIEN ISSUEI) IN C()NJUNCTI()N g'lTil Tile ORIGINAL. KNOWN Al.l. MEN BY TttESE PRESENTS: 'Fha~ thc Gulf Insurance Cmn- pan). a corporation duly .rganized under thc law~ of thc Stale ot Missouri. haxing sl~ principal ,ffice in Ih~' c'ilv of Irvinc. ~cxas. pursuant Io the I'olh,x~ lng rcstfluti~,n. adopled by Ibc Finance & E~eculive ~ommiltee of thc Board of l)trcctors ol thc ~aid Companx'on thc l(Xh dax of August. 1993, to wit' "R~SOLVED. ~hat (he President. Executive Vice Presidcm or an) Senior Vice President of thc Company shall have authority to make. execute and deliver a Power of Attorney constituting ~s Atlorne)'-in-Fact. such persons, firms, or corporati~m~ as may be selecled from time to lime: and any such Atlornev-in-~'act may he removed > an~ the authority granted him revoked b( the Presideni. or anx E~ectuivc V,ce President, or any Senior Vice President. 'or by the Board of D~rectors or by thc Finance and Executive Commiuce of thc Board of Directors. RESOLVED. that nothing in this Power of Attorney shall bc construed as a grant ) 1 0- 3 0- 9 6 of authorily to the auorney(s)-in-fact Io sign. execute, acknowledge, deliver or other- ~'isc issue a ~licv or ff~licies of insurance on behall' ot' Gull' Insurance Company. RESOLVED~ that the signature of the President. Executixe Vice President or any Senior Vice President. and the Seal of the Company may be affixed to any such P~wer of Attorney or any certificate relating thereto'by I~acsimilc. and anx such powers so executed and certified by facsimile signature and facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon thc Compfinv in the future with respect to any bond and $ 2~, ~00 00 documents relating to such bonds to ~'hich they are attached." ' Gulf insurance Company docs hereby make, constitute and appoinl STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 6209 LOCKWOOD DRIVE WINDSOR, CA 95492 EFFECTIVE DATE CONTRACT AMOUNT BOND AMOUNT SHERRY PHILLIPS its true and lav, ful attornev[s)-in-fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name, place and stead, to sign. execute, acknowledge and deliver in its behalf, as suretx, anx and' all bonds and undertakings of suretyship, and to bind Gulf Insurance Compan) thereby as fully and to the same extent as if an)' bonds. undertaking~ an~l d~c:uments relating to such bonds and,'or undertakings were signed bx the dui',' authorized officer'of the C~ulf Insurance Company and all the acts of said attornev~s~-in-fact, pursuant to the authority herein given, are hereby ratilled arid confirhled. . The obli~zation of the Company shall not exceed one million (SI .(XI0,000.0()~ dollar',. IN V(ITNESS WIIEREOF, the Gulf Insurance Compan.$ has caused these presents to be si~ned by an)' officer of the Company and its Corpnrate Seal to be hereto affixed. (;['I,F INSUR.-~NCI': Christopher E. '~Vatson STATE OF NEV( YORK ) President ) SS COUNTY OF NEXX YORK ) On this 1st da) of February, 1994 A.D.. before mc came Christopher E. Vs'atson. knn~n to me pcrsonall.x ~ho being b.~ me duly s~orn, did depose and say: that lie resides in the ('oont.x of ~A'estchcster, State of Nt'~' York: that he is the President of the Gulf Insurance ('ompan). the corporation described in a~d ~hich executed the abo',e in,~trument: that he kno,~s the seal of said corporati',m: that thc seal affixed to thc said instruments is such corporate seal: that it ~'as so affixed by order of Ibc Board of l)ireclors of said corporation and thal he sil2ned his name, thereto by like .frier. STATE ()i-' NEVL Y()RK ) ) SS Ursula Kerrigan No. 02 KE 5043950 Qualified in Nex~ York County Comm. Expires Ma.~ 15, 1997 COUNT~' ()F NEVi' YORK I, the under4Rned. Senior Vice President of the Gulf Insurance Compan.~. a ,Missouri Corporation. DO IlEREllY CER'FIFY thai the foregoing and attached p()'sVER OF ATTORNEY remains in full force. Si~2ned and Sealed at the Cit? of Nes~ York. I~a,,'d,h,' 30TH d.:,,f OCTOBER l.a**rt'ncc !'. \liniter 5cai-:' ~'icc I're,,iden! · !~ 96 NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT Note: Bidder shall execute the affidavit on this page prior to submitting his or her bid. To City Council, City of Ukiah: The undersigned in submitting a bid for performing Leachate Booster Station at the Ukiah Landf'fll by contract, being duly sworn, deposes and says' that he or she has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with such contract. Business Address: Sighature(s) of Bidder STILES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ,~,,~ ~,,~ D~IVE WINDSOR, CA 9~92 (707) ~6-0168 Place of Residence: NOTARIZATION Subscribed and sworn to before me thisbe7 day of C~)~ , 19c~. Notar) Public m and for the County of ,~-~"tL_Z~L_~ , State of California. My Commission Expires q -/,.5-- , 19 q ~'. R:GENSPEC.DOC 65 Spec. No. 96-17 The trench zone shall be placed and compacted in lifts to achieve the required 85 percent relative compaction. Maximuna effort shall take place at the upper limit of this zone to reduce the potential for surface erosion by reason of runoff. Contractor is advised that the roadway over the 4 inch PVC force main is an unimproved access road. Contractor is also advised that storm water impounded in the west sedimentation basin and the sedimentation basin at the east borrow area is available for compaction purposes only. This impounded water contains colloidal clay. The bid opening date of October 30, 1996, shall no! be changed by reason of this Addendum. If you submit a bid, acknowledgement of this Addendum No. I shall be made hereon and this Addendum must be submitted with your bid proposal. ISSUED BY: Rick H. Kenne. d.).' . ...... ..,/'. Director of Public Works/CityAEngineer BIDDERS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I hereby acknowledge that I have received this Addendum No. considered it before submitting my bid. I and have reviewed and SIGNATURE DATE B:I~SP£C3 LE. ACIIATE.ADI ADDENDUM NO. I TO SPECIAL PR()VISIlJNS AND PLANS FOR LEACHATE BOOSTER STATION PAGE 4 OF 4 AI)I)ENI)UM NO. 2 TO SPECIAL PROVISIONS, BID DOCUMENTS AND PLANS F'OR LEACHATE BOOSTER STATION AT TIlE UKIAH LANDI,"II,I. This Addendum No. 2 modifies tim indicated sections of tl~e Sl)ecial Provisions, bid documents and\or for Plans for the referenced project. Delete the in.,itallation of 4 incl~ i>VC force main pipe from the tee at Station 7+30+ to approximately 25 teat west of the steel leacl~ate storage tank. Contractor of this project shall mal,:e connection to existing force mai,'~ at 25 feet west of steel tank and complete installation of 4 inch force main to force ~nain pump station. Approximately 420 linear feet of 4 inch PVC pipe, Bid Item No. 6, is deleted from the estirnated quantity of 600 linear feet. Bidder shall line through estimatcd cluantity of 6(.)0 linear feet for Bid Item No, 6 and write 18(I linear feet on second page of Bid Propo.sal I'orm, Page 55. Example attached. The bid Ol.~cninlg (late, of October 30, 1996, sl~all ~ be changed by reason of this Adclendurn No. 2. If you submit a bid, acknowledgement of this Addendum No. 2 shall be made hereon and submitted with your bid proposal. Rick Director of Public Works/(.ity En~,incer BIDDERS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I hereby acknowledge that ! have received this Acldcndum No. 2 and have reviewed and I1.1 ~,~l'l C3 ADDENDUM N(]. I q't) SPECIAl. PR~IVISI~)×S AND PI.A.NS FOR LEACIIATE [t(}~ }STER .STATi~}N PAGE I ~)F 4 .iii,'/. '. 300 S£MIN~. RYAVE., UKIAH, CA 95482 II ^DMIN. 707/463-6200 · POLICE 463-6242 · FIRE 463-6274 October 29, 1996 ADDENDUM NO. 3 Subject: Leachate Booster Station, City of Ukiah Specification No. 96-17 Gentlemen' This letter is ADDENDUM NO. 3 for the subject project. This addendum modifies the specification pages ix and 66. On page ix delete the following: "The work is to be completed within thidy (30) calendar days." Please replace this sentence with the following: "The work is to be completed within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days." On page 66 delete the following sentence from Article 1 of the Agreement: "The Contractor shall complete the work within 90 calendar days." Please replace with the following: "The Contractor shall complete the work within 120 calendar days." Bids for this project will be opened and read at the City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA on _October_30, 1996 at ~;00 PM. IF YOU SUBMIT A BID_, ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE SHOWN ON THIS ADDENDUM. IN ADDITION THIS... ENTIRE ADDENDUM MUST BE .SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL, It should be noted it is the responsibility of the General Contractor to notify all subcontractors from whom he accepts bids of any and all changes in the drawings and specifications for this project. Sincerely, Richard J. Seanor Deputy Director of Public Works ACKNOWLEDGMENT I hereby acknowledge that l have received this Addendum No. 3 and have reviewed and considered it ' before submitting my bid. UJ 000oo0 ~oo0oo ~000o0 ITEM NO. 5c DATE: November 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION ABOLISHING ON-STREET PARKING SPACES AND ESTABLISHING LOADING ZONES ON NORTH OAK STREET NORTH OF HENRY STREET SUMMARY: Ms. Susan Meier of Evergreen Gardenworks has requested a yellow loading zone (for passenger loading and unloading and delivery of materials) adjacent to her property at 430 North Oak Street. In addition, the Mendocino County Alcohol and Other Drug Programs (AODP) facility at 302 Henry Street requested a white loading zone (for passenger loading and unloading and delivery of mail) on the west side of North Oak Street immediately south of the requested yellow loading zone. These zones will allow further parking enforcement on North Oak Street to control vehicles waiting for clients of AODP. The Traffic Engineering Committee considered this request at its regular meeting of October 8, 1996 and recommended approval of the loading zones to the City Council. Should this request be approved, a net loss of two on-street parking spaces will result. Staff has observed that adequate off-street parking currently exists at the Evergreen Nursery. AODP has made arrangements with the City to utilize parking spaces at the City parking lot on School Street at Henry Street. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Abolishing On-street Parking Spaces and Establishing Loading Zones on North Oak Street ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Request. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: Yes, Ms. Susan Meier has been advised of the meeting date. Requested by: Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City En.~neer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works ~L~~ Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager ' ~'~ Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Sketch of Proposed Loading Zones APPROVED: ~ace Horsleyl City ~(~anager RJS:AGLZOAK.SUM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9.1 22 23 24 25 9.6 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ABOLISHING ON-STREET PARKING SPACES AND ESTABLISHING LOADING ZONES ON NORTH OAK STREET NEAR THE FRONTAGE OF 430 NORTH OAK STREET WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8, of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) received a request from the Evergreen Gardenworks and Mendocino County Alcohol and Other Drugs Program that their operations could be improved by establishing loading zones on the west side of North Oak Street near the frontage of 430 North Oak Street; and WHEREAS, a yellow loading zone is recommended adjacent to Evergreen Gardenworks and a white loading zone is recommended immediately south of said yellow loading zone; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer recommends that the request be approved so that operations may be enhanced. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ukiah City Council that said loading zones be established on the west side of North Oak Street near the frontage of 430 North Oak Street. The City Engineer shall determine the length of the loading zones needed to accommodate the Evergreen Gardenworks and the County AODP facility. /// /// /// /// 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 19. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 9.2 23 25 26 27 28 PASSED AND ADOPTED this call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk B:RE$1 OAK.~gr __ day of , 1996, by the following roll Fred Schneiter, Mayor t~o~e 307.. T ~o~_T~ 0~ ST, NovemJoe.r 6~, Iqq la ITEM NO. 5d DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DENIAL OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM NCO HEAD START AND KIMBERLY AND DONALD RINEHART, AND REFER THEM TO CITY INSURANCE CARRIER, REMIF The claim from NCO Head Start was received by the City of Ukiah on October 15, 1996 and alleges damages related to inadequate power supply to their facility beginning on July 26, 1996. The claim from Kimberly and Donald Rinehart was hand delivered and received by the City of Ukiah on October 30, 1996 and alleges damages related to unlawful eviction from 1900 Elm Street on May 16 and 20, 1996. Pursuant to City policy it is recommended the City Council deny the claims as stated and refer them to REMIF, the City of Ukiah's insurance carrier. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny Claims for Damages received from NCO Head Start and Kimberly and Donald Rinehart; and Refer Them to REMIF, the City's Insurance Carrier. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A Yes Claimants ~.t~.~).-~ ~ Michael F. Harris, AICP, Assistant City Manager ~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of NCO Head Start, pages 1-3. 2. Claim of Kimberly and Donald Rinehart, pages 4-11. APPROVED: L..~ Candace Horsley, C~ Manager mfh:asrcc 11696CLAIM NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA This claim must be presented, as prescribed by ~arts"3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Title 1, of the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf. city Clerk's ~f~ice City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 RETURN TO: i · Number/Street and Post Office Box City State Zip Code Phone Number Work Phone Number · NAME. AND ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CAAIM'.SHOULD BE .SENT (if di. fferent than above~.;M* I ~ I - F · · · DATE OF TH~AC.CIDE. NT OR. OCC_.URRJ~NCE{ PLACE OF T~HE. ACCID.ENT~O~ OpCUR~R_.~Ng_E; GENE~L D~SCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR OCCU~ENCE (Attach additional pages if more sp~ce is n~eded).: : , . ·- ' NAMES" "i'F'~:N(~tJW~fi~"OFLoss: . , :. , ANY.,~ PUBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY OR · · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES (optional): N E ADDRES 3 , ?ELEPHONE B (~fl'~ O~q~ IOn 'I l N~ES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS/HOSPITALS WHERE TREATED: A· ADDRESS TELEPHONE S. 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE L®SS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: 11. 12. Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings.~ . Speciai damages for; ~ ' General damages Estimated prospe6tive dama~e~- as far as known: .-,'Future expenses, fQ~.'medical ~,~d hospital Care: i'. '~.~.'- .. '. Future loss of earnings: Other prospective special damages: ProsDective general, damages~ The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his[her, behalf. .A claim relating to a cause of action for death or · ~r injury' ~o fSe ~'~Og"or to personal proper~y or growing crops shall be presented not' later ~han sik (6)'.'da~enda~ months or 182 ~ d~y§ after'the acc~uaI'of the cause qf action, whichever is longer. Claims relating to any ~%her' ~a6ses~of ~ "" -action ShatI be presented not later than one (1) year after accrual of the cause of action. SIG-NATU~E OF CLAIMANT (S) / Received in City Clerk's Office this/~~-- day of ~~~ , :: .... ,", ~ 3 ~ ;. ~ .' . ~ ..: . ; ... · , ; ,. NOT~': Yhi~ ~orm o~ claim i~' ~or .your convenience only, and any other type of ~orm may be u~ed i~ ~esire~, ~o long a~ it ~atis~i~ th~ re~uirement~ o~ the ~overnment OoZe. ~he u~e o~ thi~ ~orm i~ not intense8 in any ~ay to a~vi~e you o~ your legal right~ or to interpret any la~. I~ you are in 8oubt regarding your legal right~ or the interpretation of any la~, ~e ~ugge~t that.you ~eek legal counseling o~ your choice. '..-' 3: FO RM~CLA IM Rev: 3/10/95 Number 6. On the afternoon of July 26, 1996 the Uninterrupted Power Source (UPS) at the Central Office of NCO Head Start at 550 N. State St. in Ukiah went off, meaning the alarm began to ring. This UPS is used for the file server for the program's network system. During the week that followed, the UPS went off every day, usually in the afternoon and for the entire afternoon. During that week, both an outside computer consultant and our electrician, Ron Bostwick, were called in to inspect the problem. Ron determined that we were receiving a very low level of power from the city into our building. He identified this as our problem. He returned later that week and informed us that he had learned that the City of Ukiah had been forced to cut back on the level of power flowing to this part of tOwn. As a result of these brown-outs, we lost the use of our UPS. It failed completely and could not be repaired. It had to be replaced at considerable expense. In addition, one of the computers on our network system began to freeze up and malfunction. After running extensive diagnostics on this computer, it was eventually determined that the power pack had been destroyed. It was the expert opinion of our outside computer consultant that the reason for the damage to the power pack was the brown-outs. The power pack had to be replaced. Failure on the part of the City of Ukiah to provide NCO Head Start with adequate power has resulted in damages to our computer hardware and has, in addition, cost us money in consulting fees to professionals to figure out what the problem was and to repair the hardware damage. We would like to be reimbursed for these expenses. Please find below a cost out of expenses incurred. Description Cost Hours of irt-house Computer Specialist devoted to identifying and resolving probleins created by July/August brown-outs Hours of outside computer consultant devoted to identifying and resolving problems created by July/August brown-outs Hours of electrician devoted to identifying and resolving problems created by July/August brown-outs UPS Unit that was replaced Power Pack that was replaced TOTAL $148.82 $450.00 $146.00 $489.00 $ 69.0O $1,302.82 (Jl'l Y CLi:.t~ DEP~tt~TM£N-i- NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFO This claim must be presented, as p~ Title 1, of the ~overnment Code o: by a person acting on his/her beh~ RETURN TO: i · · . . · · · City Clerk's Off, City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave: Ukiah, Californi; · 'escribed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of the State of California, by the claimant or · KIMBER[ CLAIMANT ' S NAME: CLAIMANT' S ADDRESS: 451 Num] FT. Cit~ 463- Home NAME AND ADDRESS OF PE CLAIM SHOULD BE .SENT (il REDWOOD LEGAL ASSISTANCE Lc· ~ue ~ 95482 RECEIVED CITY Jc'r 1996 CllY CLEt~t~ UkVi~P~ IMENT A· (707) 462-1471 DATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR O PLATE OF THE ACCIDENT OR GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF additional pages if more UKIAH POLICE OFFICERS: TO DAVID RAPPORT FOR DE EVICTION BY POLICE IS A THEREFORE DAMAGES & ATT NAMES, IF KNOWN, OF ANY t LOSS: GREG HEITCAMP, RAN NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ¢ A· NAME m · NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF E NAME NOT AppLICABLE Y & DONALD RINEHART NORTH MCPHERSON STREET - POB 2581 )er/Street and Post Office Box BRAGG, CA 95437 State Zip Code ]940; 961-1150 (message numbers) Phone Number Work Phone Number RSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS different than above): , P.O. BOX 747, UKIAH CA 95482 2CURRENCE: MAY 16 & May 20, 1996 }CCURRENCE: 1900 ELM STREET, UKIAH 95482 THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE (Attach space is needed): UNL~4FUL EVICTION BY GREG HEITC~P, RANDY JOHNSUN (S~ LETTER rAILS; ATTACHED A5 EXHiBiT i). ONLAWFUL CIVIL RIGHTS ViOLA'I'iOH UNDEM USUA § 1983; DRNEY FEES ARE AFFROFRLA'i'~. 'UBLIC EMPLOYEES CAUSING THE INJURY OR DY 30HNSON AND OTHER UKIAH POLICE OFFICERS. 'ITNESSES (optional): ADDRESS OCTORS/HOSPITALS. WHERE TREATED: TELEPHONE ADDRESS TELEPHONE lf. 10. 11. 12. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOSS, INJURY, OR DAMAGE SUFFERED: AS A RESULT OF THE WRONGFUL EVICTION, CLAIMANTS }lAVE LOST THEIR PERSONAL PROPERTY LEFT AT THEIR RESIDENCE. SAID PROPERTY IS VALUED AT $26,056.00 (LIST ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT 2). FURTHER CLAIMANTS WERE RENDERED HOMELESS FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD ?d~SULTING IN PAIN, SUFFERING AND EMOTIONAL TRAUMA. TOTALAMOUNTCLAIMED: $76~056.00 PLUS ATTORNEY'S FEES 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 PERSONAL PROPERTY (EXHIBIT 2) $ 26,056.00 General damages - $25,000.00 PER CLAIMAN~ 50.000.00 Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: $ Future loss of earnings: $ Other prospective special damages: ATTORNEY FEES Prospective. general damages: $ ACCORDING TO PROOF $...76,056.00 The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to the person or to 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 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. DATED: SIGNATURE OF ~LAIMANT(S) Received in City Clerk's Office this ~63 ~ day of ~)£~p~ ~ATU~E / NOTE: This form of claim is for your convenience only, and any other type of form may be used if desired, so 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. If you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, we suggest that you seek legal counseling of your choice. 3:FORM~CLAIM Rev: 3/10/95 REDWOOD LEGAL ASSISTANCE July 10, 1996 [~ Southern Office P.O. Box 747 Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 462-1471 FAX (707) 462-9483 [-] Northern Office P.O. Box 1017 Eureka, CA 95501 (707) 445-0866 FAX (707) 445-0935 David Rapport Ukiah City Attorney 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Re: KIM & DON RINEHART Dear Dave: The above-referenced clients had resided at 1900 Elm Street, Ukiah, California, since October of 1995. They lived there under a verbal rental agreement with the original tenant, Daryl Bates. Mr. Bates had an oral month-to-month lease with the owner, Henry Cooper. To my knowledge, subletting was not prohibited. Mr. Bates vacated the premises in January of 1996, with the knowledge of the owner. Also, with his knowledge, Mr. and Mrs. Rineharg, remained as tenants. Various disputes .about habitability and non payment of rent followed. On March 29, April 4, and April 12 "Notices" were served on my clients by the owners agent and daughter-in-law, Pat Brown. (Notices are attached as Exhibits 1 - 3). Mr. and Mrs. Rinehart contacted Redwood Legal Assistance. In addition to the obvious legal defectiveness of the "Notices", Unlawful Detainer Proceedings had not been filed (and were never filed). On May 16, 1996, with no court order and with no eviction or other action pending, Ukiah Police Officer Greg Heitkamp in the company of Officer Randy Johnson, ordered Kim and Don Rinehart to leave the 1900 Elm Street premises or be arrested for trespassing. When the question of civil proceedings was brought up, Officer Heitkamp said he believed the Rineharts had no right to be there and again ordered them to leave. Eventually, Officer HeitKamp allowed them until May 20th, to pack up their belongings and leave, or else be arrested. On May 20, 1996, with Police escort, the owner seized possession of the premises together with the bulk of the Rinehart's personal property. David Rapport July 10, 1996 Page 2 I have confirmed the events of May 16, 1996, with Deputy Probation Officer Stenback, who was present. Ms. Stenback was able to arrange some free storage for some of the Rinehart's property. However, due to lack of capacity and time, thousands of dollars of property remained when the Rineharts were ousted by the Police. It is clear that there was State action and that Officer Heitkamp had absolutely no authority to evict my clients from their household, nor to allow seizure ~f their personal property. However, neither my clients nor I have any present desire to sue the City, Officer Heitkmap, or any one else over this matter. They merely want their possessions returned. The owner and his agent have refused to return said personal property. The owner's agent, Pat Brown, has been selling their property for "past due rent". I have written the owner a demand letter for return of the Rinehart's personal possessions. (Copy enclosed as Exhibit 4). Since prior efforts have been ineffective I see little chance for its success. However, I wrote this letter to you in the hopes that you or the Ukiah Police Department may urge or suggest to the owner that it may be in every ones interest to return Mr. and Mrs Rineharts' possessions. · Otherwige, I will soon be obliged to proceed with a claim against the City and others. I hope this may be avoided. You may reach me at Redwood Legal Assistance between 9:30 - 4:30 on Tuesday, July 16, 1996. Or you may call me at home anytime. (RLA will give you my home phone). For your information, Henry Cooper, the owner, lives at 50 Mayor Way, Cloverdale. The phone number is 894-5622. Looking forward to your response. Sincerely, KIRK A. GUSTAFSON O~t.~ Emeritus Attorney KAG:mr enclosures cc: K&D Rinehart Inventory of Missing Household Items Belonging to the Rineharts . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. Antique wooden hall tree Antique maple bedroom set (4 pieces) Antique Singer sewing machine in wooden cabinet Antique red coffee grinder Antique spittoon Antique off-white chamber pot Antique white butter churn New Kirby vacuum with extra attachments Antique green rocking chair Antique 1 gal wine bottle Glass hanging lamp filled with antique marbles Antique child's red 16 inch Stingray bike Antique 3 pc. set of pictures Antique framed picture of grandmother Antique painting Antique 1920's china baby doll Antique stuffed rag doll clown 25- year old 6-drawer maple dresser with mirror Four antique paintings of ballerinas Antique paintings of flowers in vase Antique Barbie doll Garage full of boxes Antique metal desk Two antique wooden 4-drawer dressers Antique Skipper doll Ten fishing poles, two antique Antique carved walking cane Antique maple rocking chair Antique wooden step ladder Antique wooden yardstick Antique pull-string music box Framed family photos Homemade wooden fruit bowl VCR Two large metal boxed First Aid Kits Wind chimes Brass wind chimes Redwood wind hanger Large custom 21-speed men's mountain bike Men's Specialized mountain bike 18-speed boy's chrome mountain bike Heavy framed girl's 18-speed mountain bike Woman's ten-speed touring bike 21 inch girl's stingray bike 21 inch girl's BMX bike 4 piece canvas touring bike packs Complete California king-sized waterbed Twin-sized captain box-springs and mattress bed Desk, drafting table with light and chair Two 2-drawer bed-side tables Large upright freezer $ 3,000.00 2,500.00 500.00 100.00 20.00 100.00 .100.00 1,500.00 100.00 20.00 50.00 150.00 100.00 250.00 250.00 75.00 50.00 300.00 150.00 75.00 70.00 500.00 100.00 150.00 50.00 600.00 400.00 200.00 15.00 10.00 100.00 100.00 20.00 300.00 100.00 15.00 10.00 10.00 1,000.00 600.00 125.00 100.00 20.00 40.00 65.00 85.00 250.00 300.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. Two-year old refr'igerator freezer Two-year old double hide-a-bed couch New eight-person dining room table Green portable dishwasher Brown rocking recliner Blue rocking recliner Large box of cooking utensils Portable air conditioner New water pik New shower curtain Three-piece braided area rugs Two wooden octagon end tables Two table lamps, brass-plated and cut glass Moving dolly 40-gallon fish tank Various bathroom personal items 1200 watt hair dryer Corner shelf 10-channel scanner 10-person dining room table Round plexiglass table Six swivel-backed dining room chairs Eight high-backed dining room chairs ABSCO giant pencil sharpener Under cabinet clock mount Rock and gem tumbler Two long wooden crates of record albums Samurai sword Queen-sized dual control electric blanket Camel light tin, filled with camel lighters Large a.m./f.m, cassette recorder Wooden bird feeder Wooden bird house 4-H club memorabilia Engraved pig show cane Two tackle boxes Black fiberglass locker box Four nylon tarpaulins Large sack of sand toys Older dining room table New 32-gallon garbage can Homemade wooden step stool New 15-gallon bucket with lid Four-piece TV trays and stand New 10xl0 tent 8x8 tent Queen-sized foam futon mattress 24-inch Weber barbecue Two 3 ft..speakers Small am/fm cd player/cassette deck 10 cds and a cd cleaning kit Redwood burl clock Clock with pendulum Wooden clock '~ 500.00 500.00 100.00 100.00 350.00 350.00 50.00 150.00 50.00 10.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 40.00 50.00 100.00 10.00 20.00 150.00 100.00 20.00 150.00 50.00 20.00 10.00 55.00 1,000.00 60.00 45.00 100.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 20.00 20.00 150.00 10.00 60.00 30.00 50.00 15.00 50.00 10.00 20.00 90.00 80.00 35.00 150.00 200.00 20.00 100.00 100.00 20.00 20.00 106 . 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113 . 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124 . 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143 . 144 . 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. Oval wooden framed clock Framed hand-embroidery Painting Wooden picture Framed poster Several kitchen pictures Set of five small pictures Cardboard poster Worry balls and stone Three redwood burls Framed picture Gold-framed picture Framed poster board Unfinished redwood burl table top Three Coleman lanterns Three Coleman gas stoves Four closets of dress clothes on hangers Large laundry basket of dirty clothes Four dismantled Coleman lanterns Two five-gallon potted pine trees Whiskey barrel New outdoor decorator flag with pole New round outdoor thermometer Rain gauge Jar of pennies Set of queen-sized sheets 4x2 outdoor mat rug Tall kitchen garbage can Three wooden shelves Large wooden rabbit hutch Adult male black satin show rabbit 30x30 wire rabbit cage Gray adult male Flemish giant show rabbit Baby scale Decorator straw hat with flowers Outdoor tv antenna Large suitcase filled with fish tank equipment Large suitcase with wheels Rainbow butterfly mobile Two 4 inch. houseplants With drain plates TV rabbit ears antennae Two 8-inch car stereo woofers in custom box Brass three-light lamp stand Complete weight-lifting bench, .3 sets of weights Wedding bouquet Gold duel adjustable wall lights 8 inch uncut crystal Dust mop One pair rubber work boots Halogen outdoor light with heavy-duty cord New 100 foot garden hose Spoked Cadillac car rim Three five-gallon gas cans Dodge van bench seat 50.00 100.00 40.00 30.00 5.00 40.00 10.00 15.00 40.00 '100.00 5.00 20.00 10.00 100.00 75.00 100.00 500.00 75.00 20.00 5.00 40.00 15.00 8.00 2.00 2.00 30.00 5.00 2.00 20.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 70.00 50.00 20.00 30.00 100.00 50.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 50.00 20.00 400.00 20.00 10.00 50.00 10.00 30.00 35.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 50.00 160. Two gold double d~ors for Dodge van 161. Two silver double doors for Dodge van 162. Two front rotors for Dodge van 163. Front coil spring for Dodge van 164. Complete interior window trim kit 165. Complete interior paneling kit and head liner 166. Galvanized metal spare tire back for Dodge van 167. Dishwasher, faucet adapter 168. Two Black and Decker rechargeable drills 169. 318 oil pan for Dodge van 170. Miscellaneous hand tools 171. Extension cords 172. Metal box filled with drill bits 173. Two sets of climbing ropes 174. One set of 28 inch Point Deer antlers 175. Kenwood car stereo 176. Kenwood equalizer for car stereo 177. Two Kenwood car speakers 178. Two Alpine car speakers GRAND TOTAL: 75.00 75.00 80.00 30.00 300.00 250.00 50.00 2.00 150.00 ioo.oo 400.00 30.00 50.00 80.00 10.00 250.00 200.00 100.00 ,100.00 $26.056 ITEM NO. 5e MEETING DATE: November 6. 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION TO COUNCIL REGARDING PURCHASE OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE PRODUCTS REPORT: Each year it is necessary to purchase approximately 24 tons of sodium hydroxide for use at the wastewater treatment plant. Sodium hydroxide is used to raise the pH of the water in order to meet the discharge requirements of our operating permit. Total quantities are an estimate of annual usage. Orders are placed on an as needed basis by wastewater treatment plant personnel. Requests for Quotations through the informal bid process were sent to six chemical suppliers. The bids were opened by the Purchasing Department on October 10, 1996 and evaluated by staff. The Iow bidder is Pressure Vessel Service, Inc. with a bid of $298.00 per dry ton totaling $7,152 for the estimated 24 tons. A purchase order has been issued to Pressure Vessel Service, Inc. Based on our purchasing policies, we are giving the City Council the required notification of this action. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report regarding the purchase of sodium hydroxide product. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if not budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 612-3580-520 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by: George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent ~,/~ Coordinated with- Candace Horsley, City Manager j. Attachments: Tabulation of bids APPROVED: :~',~ Candace Horsley, Cit~ Manager ITEM NO. .~ f MEETING DATE: November 6. 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR SODIUM BISULFATE PRODUCTS REPORT: Each year it is necessary to purchase approximately 24 tons of sodium bisulfate for use at the wastewater treatment plant. Sodium bisulfate is used to neutralize the chlorine in the treated effluent to meet the wastewater discharge requirements of our operating permit. Total quantities are an estimate of annual usage. Orders are placed on an as needed basis by wastewater treatment plant personnel. Requests for Quotations through the formal bid process were sent to six chemical suppliers. Bids were opened by the City Clerk on October 29, 1996. The only bid received was from Pressure Vessel Service, Inc. for the amount of $560.00 per dry ton totaling $13,440 for the estimated 24 tons. $122,000 was budgeted in the Sewer account 612-3580-520 for the purchase of chemicals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the City Council award the bid for Sodium Bisulfate to Pressure Vessel Service, Inc. for the amount of $560.00 per dry ton. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Take no action. 2. Postpone award of bid. Acct. No. (if not budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 612-3580-520 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities ~"~" Prepared by: George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent Coordinated with- Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Tabulation of bids APPROVED~._~--~ .'i~ - ) '~.j.~ ,..% ~" :.~...-, Candace ~(~sieY,-Ci!y U anager I- 0 I- 1.1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Item No. 59 Date: November 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Replacement Vehicles. REPORT: The city distributed requests for quotation (RFQ) for the purchase of the following three new 1996 or 97 vehicles: 1) 2) 3) Full size 1/2 ton pickup, 6 foot bed, no air conditioning. Full size 1/2 ton pickup, 6 foot bed, with air conditioning. A 3/4 ton truck with service body Bid packages were mailed to twelve (12) suppliers. A tabulation of the bid results are summarized on attached bid sheet. Replacement of one (1) 1/2 ton pickup and one (1) 3/4 ton truck with service body are identified in the 1996-97 budget under 800-3646-800. One (1) 1/2 ton pickup is to go to the Metering Services Attendant position for the meter change out program. This was budgeted in the 1996-97 budget under 800-3650-800. All bids satisfy City of Ukiah specifications and are within budgeted amounts. In all cases, staff is recommending award of bid to the lowest bidder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bid to Lasher Auto Center for: One (1) new, full size 1/2 ton pickup, 6 foot bed without air conditioning @ $15,131.69 One (1) new, full size 1/2 ton pickup, 6 foot bed with air conditioning @ $15,802.00 Award bid to Silveria Pontiac/Buick/GMC for: One (1) new, 3/4 ton truck complete with Iow profile service body @ $22,324.89 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and direct staff to re- advertise and re-solicit bids. Citizen Advised: Public Notice by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Requested Prepared by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment: 1) Bid Tabulation 2) Excerpts from Adopted 1996-1997 Budget C"~-~d~.ce Ho~'sley, City IV~nager MAKE DEALER BID PRICE FINAL COST BIDS ON 3/4 TON TRUCK WITH SERVICE BODY GMC SILVERIA $22,550.39 $22,324.89 GMC MANLY OLDSMOBILE $22,411.62 $22,411.62 CHEVROLET THURSTON CHEVROLET $22,800.78 $22,800.78 FORD UKIAH FORD $23,237.86 (1 TON) $23,237.86 GMC LASHER AUTO CENTER $23,894.23 $23,394.23 CHEVROLET THURSTON CHEVROLET $23,817.63 (1 TON) $23,817.63 BIDS ON 1/2 TON PICKUP WITHOUT AIR CONDITIONING DODGE- (opt. 2) LASHER AUTO CENTER $15,631.69 $15,131.69 DODGE- (opt. 1 ) LASHER AUTO CENTER $16,023.15 $15,523.15 FORD UKIAH FORD $15,622.04 $15,622.04 CHEVROLET THURSTON CHEVROLET $16,425.04 $16,425.04 GMC LASHER AUTO CENTER $16,719.20 $16,219.20 GMC MANLY OLDSMOBILE $16,874.93 $16,874.93 GMC SILVERIA $17,082.78 $16,911.95 BIDS ON '112 TON PICKUP WITH AIR CONDITIONING DODGE- (opt. 2) LASHER AUTO CENTER $16,302.00 $15,802.00 DODGE- (opt. 1) LASHER AUTO CENTER $16,693.46 $16,193.46 FORD UKIAH FORD $16,355.63 $16,355.63 GMC LASHER AUTO CENTER $17,362.70 $16,862.70 CHEVROLET THURSTON CHEVROLET $17,188.74 $17,188.74 GMC MANLY OLDSMOBILE $17,617.42 $17,617.42 GMC SI LVERIA $17,824.95 $17,646.70 0 00000 00000 00000 ILl I, UZ 0 0 .IJ W I.IJ O0 O0 O0 0 0 0 00000 00000 00000 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 5h DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1996 REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT REGARDING PURCHASE OF POLICE VEHICLE AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $10,500 TO THE FIXED ASSET REPLACEMENT NO. 698 Late last spring four Police vehicles were sold as surplus, with the proceeds ($10,500) deposited in the Police Department account within Fund 698, Fixed Assets for General Fund Departments. With these revenues, the Police Department was able to secure a used 1992 Ford Tarus necessary for the Administration function. Since the purchase price was $ 9,999.01 (Purchase Order No. 28496), this report is submitted to the City Council in compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code (UMC) Section 1522. This section requires notification to the City Council of purchases which are more than $5,000, but less than $10,000. After two unsuccessful informal bid processes, an appropriate vehicle was located through a local dealer. Telephone contacts with other dealers revealed no other satisfactory vehicles were available and thus the purchase was made. Neither the revenue nor the expenditures were included in the adopted budget and thus a budget amendment is necessary. The revenue is reflected as an increase of $10,500 in the Beginning Fund Balance of Fund 698. The expenditures for the vehicle ($9,999.01) and appurtenances ($501) are identified in Account 698.2001.800.000. The appropriate budget documentation is attached. Staff recommends receipt and file of the expenditure report and approval of the budget amendment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. . Receive and file UMC §1522 report regarding purchase of police vehicle. Approve budget amendment of $10,500 from Beginning Fund Balance of the Fixed Asset Fund (698) to Account 698.2001.800.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine budget amendment must be modified, identify changes, and approve revised amendment. 2. Do not approve bud~let amendment and direct staff as to desired action. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): 698.2001.800.000 Acct. No.: N/A Appropriation Requested: $10,500 (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Fred Keplinger, Director of Public Safety , · ~ ~.---..,.~ Michael F. Harris, AICP, Assistant City Manager~~.,~~ Gordon Elton, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget amendment work sheets, pages 1-3. Candace Horsley, City I~anager mfh:asrcc 11696pd b o o ~ Z ,-~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- t '" 0 ASSET REPLACEMENT RESERVE - FUND #698 Bud,qeted amounts: Beginning fund balance 7/1/96 From Gen Govt Buildings Proceeds from lease financing (ambulance) From Street Maintenance Fire tower Ambulance purchase Transfer to General Fund (unused fire tower reserve) Budgeted ending fund balance 6/30/97 199,350 4,000 88,200 10,000 (62,000) (88,200) (40,000) 111,350 Adjustments made durinq the fiscal year: Date Approved Proposed 11/6/96 Sale of surplus vehicles 6/96 Proposed 11/6/96 Purchase of used vehicle Proposed 11/6/96 Appurtenances for vehicle Account No. Begin Fund Bal. $ 698.2001.800.000 $ 698.2001.800.000 $ 10,500 (9,999) (501) Revised ending fund balance 6/30/97 $ 111,350 RESERV97.XLS 11/1/96 Page 3 Funds 696; 697; 698 I.i.! i 1.1.1 I- Z I.IJ Z November, 1996 The following individuals and groups are asking for your support in building a cmmnunity center. We feel fliat such a facility is imperative if we are to move towards a healthier (integrated) commuity and a better life for our clfildren and families. Our vision includes a multipurpose indoor gym, large enough for two basketball/volleyball courts. This would be attached to a similar sized building used for an array of functions by a variety of groups (i.e., senior citizens, parenting classes/groups; exercise classes, etc.). Surrounding the building (or possibly at a different site) there would be fields for soccer, baseball, volleyball/basketball, as well as a much needed skateboard/roller- blading park. Integrating this with existing bike/hike trails would also be good. We will have an opportunity to present this plan at 9:30 a.m. on November 16th, at the Ukiah Conference Center, to the Wellness Foundation who will be receiving the public's input for their grant (which could provide fimding for the above described project). We hope that you will sign the attached letter supporting the need for this vision. We invite you to join us on November 16th and request that you include any suggestions or ideas with your letter of support. Sincerely, Marvin Trotter, Mendocino County Public Health Officer S.P.A.C.E. Boys & Girls Club of Ukiah Ronnie DeSoto, Athletic Coach Ukiah Valley Youth Soccer League P.A.L. Nuestra Casa Chapman's Pro Comer November, 1996 ., requests the Wellness Foundation to support the creation of a cmnmunity center in Ukiah. Tiffs center would provide a safe, fun and healthy enviromnent, year round, providing activities for all members of our community, i.e., sports, recreational and social gatherings, classes, and arts and crafts. Tiffs center is needed if the inland corridor is to change from its present path of drug use, increasing violence and polzarization. We need to increase our childrens' options, not denying healflfful opportunities because of lack of facilities. Please be the catalyst necessary to spark our community to come together and truly change the future of our community. Sincerely, Community Meetings Free lunch . Door prizes 4~ Spanish Translation . WILLITS SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 2 9'00- I 2'00 Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints ;:>65 MARGIE DRIVE, WlLLIT$ UKIAH · REDWOOD VALLEY · · HOPLAND · POTTER VALLEY SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 16 9'30- 12'30 Ukiah Valley Conference Center 200 S. SChOOl STREET, UKIAH The Mendocino Community Health Partnership is a program of the Mendocino County Public Health Department with funding provided by The California Wellness Foundation. The Partners are collaborative organizations who represent more than 100 local business, health, social services, government, special interest and ethnic groups. Co-sponsors of the community meetings include the Mendocino County Public Health Advisory Board, the Healthy Start Policy Council, the Communities Can/Managed Care Coalition, MendocinoWorks, the City of Ukiah, and a number of local businesses. For more information call 463-5686. ITEM NO. ?a DATE: November 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE REVISING THE PROVISIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) ZONING DISTRICT SUMMARY: On October 30, 1996, the City Council accepted the Planning Commission and staff recommendation and introduced an ordinance rezoning 83 parcels along Dora Street to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial). This action was taken, in part, with the understanding that staff would bring back amendments to the "C-N" text to make it a Iow intensity, neighborhood-serving commercial district, and not a general commercial district as it is currently constituted. On October 23, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered staff's proposed modifications to the "C-N" district text. After considerable discussion and a number of changes, they voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance amending the "C-N district text to make it genuinely Neighborhood Commercial. The recommended text revisions include 1) adding a Purpose and Intent Section; 2) reducing the number of allowed uses; 3) adding residential uses to the allowed uses; 4) revising the permitted uses; 5) modifying the development standards; 6) adding a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard for commercial development; and 7) adding additional requirements to assure the compatibility of land uses. A working copy of the proposed changes, which illustrates the text modifications by ~ii~i added language and striking out deleted language is included as attachment #2. RECOMMENDED ACTION- Introduce by title only the ordinance amending Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code, revising the provisions of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Do not introduce the ordinance and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Legal notice published in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by' Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. . 3. 4. 5. 6. Candace Horsley, City Manager; and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Ordinance amending Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code Illustrated working copy of proposed changes to the "C-N" Zoning District Planning Commission Staff Report, dated October 23, 1996 Planning Commission Minutes, dated October 23, 1996 Map depicting the Dora Street "C-N" zoned parcels Map depicting the Orchard Avenue area "C-N" zoned parcels. Candace Horsley,~City Manager 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 6 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE The purpose of this amendment is to revise the provisions of the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning district to encourage and promote a balanced mix of Iow intensity professional office, commercial, residential, and quasi-public land uses. Additionally, the provisions are intended to provide Iow intensity commercial services, such as medical offices, small retail stores, and personal services to the adjacent and integrated residential community. Additionally, the provisions of this Chapter are intended to assure that development is compatible with the surrounding community, in terms of both design and use. SECTION TVVO Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended as follows: CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE 6. REGULATIONS IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-N) DISTRICTS SECTION: 9060: 9061: 9062: 9063: 9064: 9065: 9066: 9067: 9068: Purpose and Intent Uses Allowed Uses Permitted with Securing of a Use Permit Building Height Limits Building Site Area Required Front Setback Lines Yard Requirements Parking Requirements Additional Requirements 9060: PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Zoning District is to encourage and promote a balanced mix of Iow intensity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 professional office, commercial, residential, and quasi-public land uses. Large and incompatible commercial retail stores, such as supermarkets, chain drugstores, convenience stores, and discount clothing stores, are not allowed or permitted. Similarly, highway serving commercial uses, such as motels, large restaurants, and gas stations/automotive repair businesses are not allowed or permitted. The C-N district is intended to provide Iow intensity commercial services, such as medical offices, small retail stores, and personal services to the adjacent and integrated residential community. Additionally, the provisions of this Chapter are intended to assure that development is compatible with the surrounding community, in terms of both design and use. 906'1: USES ALLOWED: The following uses are allowed in Neighborhood Commercial Zoning Districts: A. Professional and medical offices, barber shop, beauty shop, drugstore, florist, delicatessen (seating/tables permitted), small grocery store, and all other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Director, are similar. The Planning Director may refer a determination regarding similar uses to the Planning Commission for a decision. B. Small homeless facilities, subject to Section 9171. C. Accessory uses to any of the uses allowed in a C-N District. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982; amd. by Ord. 921, Section 1, adopted 1991) E. Single family dwelling. F. Home occupations, as defined in Section 9301. G. A mix of any of the above allowed uses. 9062: USES PERMITTED SUBJECT TO FIRST SECURING A USE PERMIT: The following uses may be permitted in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, subject to first securing a use permit, as provided in this Chapter, in each case: A. Large homeless facilities, pursuant to Section 9171. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Bo C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. 9063: Sit-down Restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants shall be permitted). Second dwelling unit, pursuant to the requirements of Section 9024. Public/private schools. Medical care facility or hospital. Retail stores not listed in Section 9061. Church Personal service establishment. Bakery. Bookstore. Tailor shop. Coffee Shop. Day care facility. A mix of any of the above permitted uses. Other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Director, are similar. The Planning Director may refer a determination regarding similar uses to the Planning Commission for a decision. Rental dwelling units, when combined in a mixed development with any allowed or permitted use(s). BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: The following shall be the maximum limits for height of buildings in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts: A. For main buildings, a maximum height of thirty feet (30). B. For accessory buildings, a maximum of twenty feet (20). (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). C. To exceed the height limit, a Use Permit must first be secured. 9064: BUILDING SITE AND LOT AREA REQUIREMENTS: In Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, the building site area shall be as follows: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A. For each main building a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet of area. B. Existing lots as of the date of this Ordinance under seven thousand (7,000) square feet are considered legal building sites. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). C. All newly created parcels shall have a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet of area. 9065: FRONT SETBACK LINES: The provisions for front setback lines in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be as follows: A. On interior lots, the front setback line shall be a minimum of five feet (5) measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot. B. On corner lots, there shall be a front setback line on each street side of a corner lot. The front setback line shall be a minimum of ten feet (10) measured from the street right-of-way line adjacent to such lot. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9066: YARDS REQUIRED: In Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, yards shall be required in the following widths: A. Front Yards: The minimum depth required shall be five feet (5). B. Side Yards: The minimum depth required shall be five feet (5) for single-story structures, and ten (10) feet for two-story structures. C. Rear Yards: The minimum depth required shall be ten feet (10) feet. 9067: PARKING REQUIRED: The minimum parking area required in Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be that determined by Section 9198 (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). If parking is to be provided on the rear or sides of lots, fencing and landscaping shall be required to effectively screen the development from adjoining properties. 9067.5: FLOOR AREA RATIO: The cumulative square footage of all buildings (main and assessory) intended for commercial use, including storage, shall not exceed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 thirty percent (30%) of the lot size. To exceed the thirty percent (30%) standard, a Use Permit must first be secured. 9068: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: The following additional requirements are applicable in the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts: A. All new construction, exterior modifications to existing buildings or on-site work shall require a site development permit. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). B. Second story development shall be designed to preserve the privacy of adjoining property owners. C. Landscaping plans shall be required for all projects requiring Site Development Permits and Use Permits. D. All commercial land uses shall be limited in hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except where the Planning Commission approves alternative hours through the discretionary permit review process. E. Existing development as of the date of this Ordinance inconsistent with the provisions listed herein, shall be considered legal Non-conforming, provided that they were legal at the time of their creation, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 9209. SECTION THREE This ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. SECTION FOUR 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: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Passed and adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk , by the following role call vote' Fred Schneiter, Mayor CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE 6. REGULATIONS IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-N) DISTRICTS SECTION' 9060: 9061: 9062: 9063: 9064: 9065: 9066: 9067: 9068: Uses Allowed Uses Permitted with Securing of a Use Permit ~ff~.~ll~.~ll~l ,ilt~Jr~'~,;~ Height Limits ~,,~1,4~,.,......,,..,,,,~, Site Area Required Front Setback Lines Yard Requirements Parking Requirements Additional Requirements 9061' USES ALLOWED: The following uses are allowed in Neighborhood Commercial Zoning Districts: Ao I ~V[~ll V~Vl vvI ~Vl VVI I~I :::::::::::::::. :::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ;:::::;:::;: lll~l~lll~. ~l~l] ~ll~l~ "~ *~'" ~ ........ ; ..... '~ for -"*'-;~ ......... ~ ~'""~' barber shop beauty shop r~ ~ ~ ~ r o ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ I ~ r o ~ ~ ~ x ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ o ~ r~~~:~ ~:~~:~:~ ::':' :':'::F ~?:::':':~' ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ===================================================================== ......................................... -, ,....,.,.....,........,...,.,.,,.,,,.,..,..,..:..,:.:...:,:.:,:.:.:.:., :.:.:.:.:,:,:.:.:,: ............ > .:.:.>:.:.:,:.:.:.:,:.:..: ..... *********************************************** ..:.:....,:.,.,..,..,,......:..... ~~~s~ and ail other uses'""~hi~h'~ ..... ih ..... ~h~'""6'~i'ni6'fi ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *'~'"['"*':':'""~ .:.....:.-.~ · . ~' ~ ~' :.:::*:.::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '" .:~ .:.:::.:.:::.:.:.. :::*:.:::.:.:::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::-:-:.:.::: ' ============================= ............... ~el~, are mmdar. ~ ........... ~lan:n~n~ ..... D~m~t~ :::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::: ...... :....:... ::::::...:.:.:.. ::: ....:...:.....:..::::::::::::......:....~...::::::.: .......... ::::::... :.:. :.:.:.:.. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:+:.:.:.:.:...:.. :.~ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '::::: ?:;:::;::;: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::' -:-::: :.::: :......: :.::: :.::::: ~:::::: :.:: :.. · ..::::::: :-: :.:.:.:.:.:.~:. :.::: ~::::: ::: ::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :..:::::: :~::: ~::::::: ... :::::::::: ::: :;: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ======================================================================================= :;; :::::::::::::::;::: ::: ::: ::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: B. Small homeless facilities, subject to Section 9171. C. Accessory uses to any of the uses allowed in a C-N District. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982; amd. by Ord. 921, Section 1, adopted 1991) 9062: USES PERMITTED SUBJECT TO FIRST SECURING A USE PERMIT: The following uses may be permitted in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, subject to first securing a use permit, as provided in this Chapter, in each case: VVI Vl~./~,.~ Vkl.,Ikl~./l I~./I ~.IIIVV Ill IV~,i/LIidI,.II [iii lk~.~, I.~I l~,,d J~/li. Jl I~ I ll.ll~.dlVl [V~.~. ~.~i~!i Large homeless facilities, pursuant to Section 9171. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: :::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :' ' ' =============================== ' ' ' =========================== ':::::::::' ::::::::::::::::' ' ==============================:: :~:'::::::::::::":::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ':::::~:::: :':::: ':: ~: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :5:: :';;:;;;;;:: ":: : - ' :: ::: :~.',: '::::::: ' ' ';: ::::::::: :-: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~::.~.~::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:::~::::::~.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. =============================================================================== ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~0~3: BUILDING HfiIGHT LIMITS' tho followin~ shaiI bo tho maximum limits for height of buildings in neighborhood Commercial (C-~) Districts· Ao B. For main buildings, a maximum height of ~'-'+" ~'-~'* ~.~m ,,,.,,.......~.,,**~... an R ! thirty (30) "'- R ~ '"'+ ',n '"~';"~' .... a maxlmum of feet For accessory buildings, a maximum of twenty feet (20). (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9064' BUILDING SITE ~NiD',iiiii',EQT'?,i',!iAREA REQ Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, the building site area shall be as follows: In For each main building a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet of area. Existing lots as of the date of this Ordinance under seven thousand (7,000) square feet are considered legal building sites. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9065· FRONT SETBACK LINES: The provisions for front setback lines in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be as follows: A, On interior lots, the front setback line shall be a minimum of five feet (5) measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot. B· On corner lots, there shall be a front setback line on each street side of a corner lot. The front setback line shall be a minimum of ten feet (10) measured from the street right-of-way line adjacent to such lot. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9066: YARDS REQUIRED: In Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, yards shall be required in the following widths: A. Front Yards: The minimum depth required shall be five feet (5). B. Side Yards: I~1,..,.,,-. ,-.-,-,, ,i,-,-,,-I ,.-v,-,-.n+ .,h,-.,-,-, +h,-. ci,-l... ,-,~: ,~,-,,, I,,%+ UDU~.~.J l.l I.~ I.~11~41,.~ Vl I...~I.41 '~,,~l ~,4 l~.~l. Ill 1.411,~ 1% II I · 4.I VI 1% v I,.~11.11. i lVl.I Ill lllll'~,~ll · . .-.....:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,(.:.:.:.:,(.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.: -.:.:.:.:.:.:.:..: .:.:. ] ~,.~l ,,,.,, vi i i iii ,,, , ,~.,,, , , ,, .~.,.., i,~.~.~.~/ ~, , w. i~.l~.l , ~.~l 1~,.411 ~.,~,., , ',-,,~4,,.,,ll ,~...,~a. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .... '- -'-" - - -" ' '"'" ...... ' ..... '-' ...... '...' ...... '-'-'- .'.'-' .'.x.:.:.' ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: C. 9067: PARKING REQUIRED: The minimum parking area required in Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be that determined by Section 9198 (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9068' ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: ~',~li~i~',~i~i~!~,'~i~~',~i~ ~ili~6I~i~ ~ ~fi~ ~ N~i~ fi~B ~fi ~B~ ~[~i~]~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j~j~j~ ........................................................................................................................................................... : ::: :..: :..::::::: :::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: =============================================================================================================================================================== ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: All new construction, exterior modifications to existing buildings or on-site work shall require a site development permit. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). ................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. E~ ~i~ ~i~:: ~ ~ll~ ::~ :::: ?:~::~ i::~a~ ~ ::~?~1~i:: ::::~ ~ ~j~t~::~ ::~ ~i~i~~ Si~ ~l~::::::~ ~~:~:~~...~f~:~:~:~:.~.~.~?:~..~?:~:~?:~:]::::~:::~::~:~:~::~::~::~:~:.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .......... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::.~::::~:~.=========================================== .......... ~ ...... . ================================================================= ............. ~ ............. ~:.:~:.:.:.::.::: ................................. ~::::::~]~?:~::~::~:: ....... :?:::::[~ ........ ~ ...... }~::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~ ....... ~::~ ....... ~ ........ ~ ......... ::~::::~ ...... :::~::.~::.:.::::~:.:.:.~.:.:?:~.:.:.:~:.:~:.:~ ........ ~ ........ ~...~ ......... ::L..::~:..~..:::::J..~ .......... ::~::~L~ ....... ~::~'"" ' '"'"'"'"'""~'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"'"":'":':':':~ .......... [~::~~ ~[::~":':':':':':':': ~ ~ ~::~ ~ ~::~ ~ ~::~ ~ ~ :: ~m' ':':':':':':':': ' :':':':':':':':':':':4':':':':':':':':':':" ===============================================~~] :: ::~::~:::: ~::~ ~ ::::::;;::::::::::: ;~~~::: :' ":::::::;;:::: :" ¥:::::::: :~'::::::: ~ ~ cs\CN4-ZON.TXT CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: DATE: 7C. 10-23-96 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: October 23, 1996 City of Ukiah Planning Commission City of Ukiah Planning Department Neighborhood-Commercial (C-N) Zoning District Text Amendments City of Ukiah PROJECT SUMMARY: On September 25, 1996, the Planning Commission discussed, and formulated a recommendation to the City Council for Phase 5 of the Citywide General Plan rezoning program. This program, entitled, "The Dora Street Corridor," involved a variety of rezoning actions, and the Commission received considerable public testimony. The primary action, and the focus of public concern involved the application of a commercial zoning district to many of the parcels fronting Dora Street, between Holden Street on the north, and Beacon Lane on the south. While the Commission ultimately accepted staff's suggestion to recommend rezoning these parcels from "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial), it was with the understanding that staff would bring back amendments to the "C-N" text to make it truly Neighborhood Commercial. This project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners to visit the site prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council. PROJECT LOCATION: The "C-N" zoning district text amendments apply to all "C-N" zoned property within the City limits. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendments to the "C-N" zoning district text. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: It has been determined that the refinement of the "C-N" zoning district text does not constitute a "Project" according to CEQA, because it would not cause or result in an adverse physical change in the environment. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Properties assigned the "C-N" zoning classification are designated as "C" (Commercial) in the General Plan. ZONING DISTRICT: "C-N" PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The current provisions for the "C-N" zoning district do not differ much from those for the "C-1" (Light Commercial) zoning district. Staff has prepared revisions to transform the "C-N" zoning into an actual neighborhood serving commercial district. These changes include 1) adding a Purpose and Intent Section; 2) reducing the number of allowed uses; 3) adding residential uses to the allowed uses; 4) revising the permitted uses; 5) modifying the development standards; 6) adding a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) standard for commercial development; and 7) adding additional requirements to assure the compatibility of land uses. STAFF ANALYSIS: The following text describes and analyzes the proposed revisions to the "C-N" district: 1. Purpose and Intent The current "C-N" district provisions do not include a Purpose and Intent Section, which provides an up-front statement regarding the objectives of the district, and the reasons for its creation. This is a "standard" section for zoning district provisions, and important for explaining the rationale for the classification. 2. Allowed Uses Based upon discussions with the Planning Commission and concerned citizens, staff has concluded that the Allowed Uses in the "C-N" district need to be limited to Iow intensity commercial and residential land uses. Accordingly, we are proposing to eliminate a number of allowed uses in the existing version that do not fulfill these criterion. The proposed allowed uses are generally neighborhood serving Iow-intensity land uses. 3. Single Family Residential Single family residences have been added as an allowed use to reflect existing development, and to promote the blending and mix of Iow intensity commercial and residential land uses. 4. Permitted Uses The listing of Permitted Uses has been revised to preclude the possibility of certain commercial uses that seem inappropriate for the neighborhood commercial theme of the district. Some uses have been added to reflect existing land uses, as well as uses that are potentially compatible with residential land uses. 5. Development Standards The development standards have been modified to assure compatibility between residential and commercial land uses. For example, the height limit of forty (40) feet has been eliminated. To provide continuity and additional compatibility between land uses, the new maximum height permitted is the average height of existing structures along the one side of the block proposed for development. While the front yard setback remains at five (5) feet, the side yard has been increased from zero (0) feet to a mandatory five (5) feet, except where a second-story is proposed, in which case, a ten (10) foot side yard setback is. 6. Floor Area Ratio Floor area ratio is defined as the ratio of gross floor area on a parcel to the gross parcel area. For example, using a thirty percent (30%) floor area ratio standard, the maximum allowed square footage of building on a 7,000 square foot lot would be 2,100 square feet. This tool is commonly used to govern the density of the built environment, and to assure that development projects are compatible and consistent with surrounding developments. The Floor Area Ratio standard, coupled with the height, yard setbacks, parking, and landscaping requirements, will assure compatible development, and meet the purpose and intent of the "C-N" district. 7. Additional Requirements Four (4) new provisions have been added to the Section entitled, "Additional Requirements." These provisions include requiring second-story developments to be designed to not adversely impact adjacent development; they require the submittal of landscaping plans with Site Development and Use Permit applications; they limit commercial business hours of operation; and they confirm the legal non-conforming status of existing development at the time of ordinance adoption. CONCLUSIONS: Staff is proposing to amend the "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) zoning classification text to make it truly "Neighborhood Commercial." Staff has received direction from the Planning Commission, and has seriously considered comments and input from concerned citizens. We believe that the proposed modifications meet the direction provided by the Commission, and address the concerns expressed by the public. The revised provisions encourage and promote a balanced mix of Iow intensity professional office, commercial, residential, and quasi-public land uses, and provide Iow intensity commercial services to the adjacent and integrated residential community. ZONING DISTRICT INFORMATION ZONING DISTRICT R-1 R-2 MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot DENSITY REQUIREMENT 1 unit per 6,000 square feet (7 units per acre) 1 unit per 3,000 square feet (14 units per acre) R-3 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot 1 unit per 1,500 square feet (28 units per acre) C-1 None None C-N 7,000 square feet 1 unit per 7,000 square feet COMPARISON OF "C-N" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Height OLD "C-N" DISTRICT NEW "C-N" DISTRICT 40 feet / 30 when abutting an R-1 or R-2 lot The average height of buildings on the side of the block proposed for development Front Yard Setback 5 feet / 10 on both sides of a 5 feet / 10 on both sides of a corner lot corner lot Side Yard Setback 0 feet / 5 feet when abutting an R-l, R-2, or R-3 lot 10 feet Rear Yard Setback 0 feet / 10 feet when abutting an R-l, R-2, or R-3 lot 10 feet Floor Area Ratio None 30% for commercial developments ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance Amending the Neighborhood-Commercial (C-N) Zoning District text provisions ACKNOWLEDGMENTS' The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning CHAPTER 2 ZONING ARTICLE 6. REGULATIONS IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (C-N) DISTRICTS SECTION' 9060: 9061: 9062: 9063: 9064: 9065: 9066: 9067: 9068: Uses Allowed Uses Permitted with Securing of a Use Permit ~,,a,4;,.,-,~.~,,,,.,,, ,~, Height Limits ~,,a,4~,,,~.....,,...,, ,~ Site Area Required Front Setback Lines Yard Requirements Parking Requirements Additional Requirements 9060: ~.,=,,.=_u=,nounnn r.n...~=or,^~ OR C N DISTRICTS' I IIiil~lil~l I~Vlll IVV~ VVIIIIII~I tVln~ -- :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Phonier Th~ ~,,~ ~ m~ n.~ ~ ~ ~~.~ +h~ ~.~ Plan ~~ for ~i i~[~l , I I I~ ~uI ~ ~i ii Ii~ i ii [i~i~ I~ [~ II I I~I~I I I~I It II I~ ~I I~I ~i ~ii~i~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::: .::::::::.:,:::::.. :. ::::.:::: .:: ::::.:::; :.; ::.:: :,.. · '.;.::: .,,,:: ,:: .:. ', · ,;. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :;;:.:.; ;:.:; .:: ::;: .:..:.. :., :.:;. :v: ,.; ;,..:.:-..:,;,..:,:,:.:.........' .~:~....~.~.~..~:..~.:~.~:~:.~.~;~::~.:.~.:~.~;~.::~.~.:::.. 9061' USES ALLOWED: The following uses are allowed in Neighborhood Commercial Zoning Districts: A. ~11 .... :.".A ..... ;'l'hin ,~ hl,il~lin~l in~,l, iA;n.. ======================================================================= , ~ii ~i i i~ ~iI lllLlllll ~ ~II~IIi~I IIIVI~III~, ~I~I ~ ~III I~I~ ~[ l~g[ ~II~ ll~II the ~ ~n~o. i. ,,~4 f~ .~t.i~ n,,.n~.~.~ h-nb barber shop, h~l i~l, ..... ~ shop~ ~,~,,,~,.,~, .... ,,,~,, o,,,r,, ,.,...,,,i,,,, /,,,, ,.,,, ,.:,~, ,,, ..... i,,,,~ drugstore florist ~ !,-~..n,',l,-,r,-,H',-, I;,~...hr c. fnr,~ n~A,~',f,'~n~-,I nh,-~fnnr.'~nh,-,r r,-,c,f,-~..r-~nf ~',hnn repair c~hnn f,~ilnr c, hnn ~,c~ri,~f~, .... ~,, .......... ~,, ...... , ..... an ::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::;::: ::::::::::: :..: :::: ::~:: ::::::::::::::::::::: ..::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::. =================================================== all other uses which, in the opinion of the Planning Commission i~i~~, are B. Small homeless facilities, subject to Section 9171. C. Accessory uses to any of the uses allowed in a C-N District. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982; amd. by Ord. 921, Section 1, adopted 1991) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :.. :;::;:::::::::::'.: :::::::'.:: ::::;;:::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 9062' USES PERMITTED SUBJECT TO FIRST SECURING A USE PERMIT- The following uses may be permitted in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, subject to first securing a use permit, as provided in this Chapter, in each case: D~.~ii Large homeless facilities, pursuant to Section 9171. ........................................ :- :.. -.;:;:::::::::;:;:;: ::::::::: ·...:: :.;:::: ::;:: ;.;:; ':::;.: ::;.: ;:; :.::; :.;;::: ;.::;:; :,: ;:; :.;; ;. ·; ::-:;;; ¥ ':; ;.; :.;.;;: :.::: - :.;; :.::; ::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::: :::::~:~:::::~:~:::::::::~:::::::::::~~~::::~:::::::~~.~~:::::~:::::::::~:::;:::::.:~::::~.~~~~~~~`~..~~~~~.~:~:~:~:~~~:~: ..:::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::;:: ::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: ::::: ::: ::::::::::::: .. :::: :::;: :::;:: ::::::::::: ::::::: :::::::;::::: :::::: ;::: ;:;:::: ...::: :::;. ::: :::.:.:.:.: ;.:.:.:.: :.:.: :.:.:.::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 9063: BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: The following shall be the maximum limits for height of buildings in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts: A. For main buildings, a maximum height of ~'-~" ~-"-*/,~m u"' .... ~',,**~'-'" ~~:~!~ji~i~ii!!~!~i~~i~i~i~!i~i~{i~!~~i~iii~!!i~i~ii~i~ii:i:i:i'':i:!:i:!:i:i:!:i:i:i:i:''!:i:!:i:i:i:''!:i:i:i:i:! ?"!:i:i:!:i:!:!:i:i:i":i:i:i:i::' i:"!:i:i:i:i:i:!:!:i :::::::::::::::::::::::: :i:i:i:!:i:!:!:i:i:i?i :i:i:i:i :i :;:i:!:i:i'"i: !::'::i:i :i:i: !:!'" i: i:i :i:i:!":i:i:i :i:i:i :i:::i::' ::i: i:i:i: i: i:! :!:i: i:: :i:i:i:i :: :i::":i:!:i: !:i:i'"" !:i:"!:!:!:i:::i :! :i:i":"i:i :i:i: :: i:i:i:: '::i:i: i:::!: ~:i:::i:"!:!:~'"i: i:i":;i:!:i:i:!:i~::'!:!:'" ii~ i~i ........................... .................... '"'"'"" B. For accessory buildings, a maximum of twenty feet (20). (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9064: BUILDING SITE ANDi',i',i',iEO~',ii!',AREA D[~f'~IIIDEr~ REQUi;REM'EN~S: ............ : ...... :-:-:.-..;.:- .:.:.:.:..:.: ! · I,,., ~ ~ I I · I,.,= i,,a, ............... : ....... :.:.;.:..;.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:-:-:.: Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, the building site area shall be as follows: In For each main building a minimum of seven thousand (7,000) square feet of area. Existing lots as of the date of this Ordinance under seven thousand (7,000) square feet are considered legal building sites. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9065: FRONT SETBACK LINES: The provisions for front setback lines in neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be as follows: A. On interior lots, the front setback line shall be a minimum of five feet (5) measured from the street right-of-way line fronting such lot. Bo On corner lots, there shall be a front setback line on each street side of a corner lot. The front setback line shall be a minimum of ten feet (10) measured from the street right-of-way line adjacent to such lot. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9066' YARDS REQUIRED: In Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts, yards shall be required in the following widths: A. Front Yards: The minimum depth required shall be five feet (5). B. Side Yards: ~" ........ ;,.,.a ..... , ,,,~,,..,-.., ,~,- ..;a,. ,.,~: ..,,.,,, ,,.,, in I I%.~i i~.~ i %,,~ %~I u i i ~,~ %JI %.~ A %~%.~ I,.~ L III I I..~ 1%~.~ I.I I%,~ ~,.~ I ~.l ~,.~ VI MI1s UUUI. I..~ Li iI~.~ ~.~IU%.~ UI II~.~Ul UI u iu~ Ill Ull] I · II I · ~I UI I · U ~I~LII~LI Ill lllll~ll 9~ ~ ~l~ C, Rear Yards: ~" i 1%.~ l i.~.~ in R ! R 2 R 3 ' ;~,'h~Ch side MgM~V ~l IV VI~V Vl I ~k~ I ~/. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :':':-:-:-:':' =============================== 9067: PARKING REQUIRED: The minimum parking area required in Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) Districts shall be that determined by Section 9198 (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). 9068: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: All new construction, exterior modifications to existing buildings or on-site work shall require a site development permit. (Ord. 793, Section 2, adopted 1982). cs\rezoning\CN-ZON.TXT "DRAFT" MINUTES 7C. Neighborhood-Commercial (C-N) Zoning Text Amendments to revise the language of the "C-N" (Neighborhood-Commercial) zoning classification. The proposed new definition and provisions for the "C-N" district are intended to encourage and promote a balanced mix of Iow intensity professional office, commercial, residential, and quasi-public land uses. The proposed revisions to the development standards for the "C-N" zoning district are intended to ensure compatibility between residential, commercial, professional office, and quasi-public land uses. Senior Planner, Charlie Stump, referenced the written Staff Report for this item, which was prepared at the Planning Commission's direction, with the Council's concurrence. Mr. Stump opened the discussion for comments and questions from the Commission. Commissioner Pruden questioned how Staff interprets zoning code language written, "such as" and lists types of businesses that are or are not allowed and permitted. Senior Planner, Charlie Stump referenced Page 2, Section 9061-A. of the C-N Zoning text, noting the Planning Director would make the determination regarding similar uses, and may refer a determination to the Planning Commission. When an applicant comes in with a proposed use that is similar but is not articulated in the ordinance, the Planning Director makes a call as to whether or not that is a project that can be pursued. If the Planning Director is uncomfortable with that call he may refer it to the Planning Commission for a determination. Commissioner Pruden inquired if Staff is comfortable with such a broad definition. Mr. Stump stated if every use permitted or not permitted, allowed or not allowed, was listed by name the ordinance would be too voluminous. In the "Purpose and Intent" section of the zoning ordinance Staff felt it was important to rule out, up front, the obvious uses allowed or not allowed. Commission Pruden referred to Page 2, Item C, Second Dwelling Units, and inquired if this could be defined as apartments over commercial establishments. Mr. Stump indicated they could, provided they meet the development standards. Commissioner Pruden clarified the possibilty that this type of building would not be a second unit, but it would function much like a second unit. Mr. Stump explained it is a second dwelling unit on the property. Commissioner Larson stated it wouldn't strictly fall under that category, because in order to have a second dwelling unit you have to live in the first one. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 18 October 23, 1996 Mr. Stump stated if you have a commercial property with a shop down below, and you propose a dwelling unit on top, that would be something that would be an allowed use with a Site Development Permit, under Section 9061 .E -"Single Family Dwelling". Commissioner Larson also noted it would be an allowed use under Section 9061.N - "A mix of any of the above allowed uses." Commissioner Pruden stated her question was that even though a property owner was not living above his business, he could in fact rent the space as a rental apartment to a second party. Mr. Stump indicated that is what the intent is. Discussion followed regarding second dwelling units and it was determined that Section 9062, Item C. should be more specifically clarified in the C-N Zoning text since they are somewhat different that single family dwelling second units. Commissioner McCowen added he wouldn't limit second units to be above commercial units. The owner could be in the back of a building and it could allow for rental or owner occupied residential unit. Mr. Stump agreed this item needs to be clarified. Staff can prepare that language upon recommendation by the Commission to the Council. Commissioner Pruden questioned why retail stores and so many other types of business establishments were struck from Section 9061. Mr. Stump explained the purpose for not including them under Uses Allowed, is that if someone were to come and propose a commerical use that is not listed in "Allowed Uses", they could propose it with with the securing of the Use Permit. Commissioner Pruden inquired about the separate listings of delicatessens, coffee shops, and sit-down restaurants. Commissioner Larson stated a deli is perceived as more of a neighborhood use than a sit-down restaurant or a coffee shop. Mr. Stump clarified that the intent behind listing coffee shops and sit-down restaurants in Section 9062, is to avoid having a large chain-type coffee shop, like Denny's, which would be inappropriate for Dora Street in Staff's opinion. Commissioner Pruden referred to the drive-up espresso shops that are currently around and asked if this it the type of building that would be allowed. Mr. Stump indicated the drive-up espresso shops would qualify as a coffee shop and would be considered if a Use Permit was secured. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 19 October 23, 1996 Commissioner Pruden addressed the issue of dry cleaners and the environmental laws regarding containment. Mr. Stump indicated that the fire department and the Uniform Building Code are very stringent on the requirements for dry cleaning facilities. They would interact with the County Environmenal Health Department as well. Discussion followed regarding the requirements for ventilation of noxious fumes and odors, the possibility of air contamination and proximity to residences, and the existing State and local laws which govern the establishment and operation of dry-cleaners. Mr. Stump referenced Item H, Section 9062, Personal Service Establishments, and clarified that it would include hair-cutting and nail establishments. He noted if the Commission wanted that item further defined, they could recommend it to Council. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:46 P.M. Commissioner McCowen indicated that one of his favorite uses is the little neighborhood market and noted there was not a provision for that in this Neighborhood-Commercial Zoning text. Mr. Stump referred to Section 9060, Purpose and Intent, wherein it indicates small retail stores are among the allowed uses. He stated Planning Staff supports the idea of a mom-and-pop type grocery store, market and/or combination deli. Commissioner Larson addressed the issue of the square footage and the sit-down resturant item. Commissioner Puser suggested that hours of operation should also be considered. Mr. Stump indicated that there are hours of operation requirements included in the proposed revisions. Mr. Lohse clarified that the intent of this item was to have smaller markets that would contribute to the surrounding neighborhood and not draw people in from neighboring areas. Commissioner Pruden indicated that convenience stores are generally poorly run, and the trash and problems in the area are so severe. A store similar to Foothill Grocery is appropriate in the C-N District, but commercial stores just don't fit in. Commissioner McCowen suggested that is why the Planning Commission are contemplating these types of operations with Use Permit and limiting hours of operations. Commissioner Puser inquired how this concern could be addressed in the Regulations. The public does not want this type of commercial store in their neighborhood, but a mom-and-pop type store would be appropriate. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 20 October 23, 1996 Mr. Stump stated the concerns of the public in regard to convenience stores were also heard at the last Planning Commission meeting. Planning Staff agrees with the Commission that convenience stores are inappropriate for the Dora Street corridor. The Iow intensity, Iow use market, like the deli currently located there, is what we want to achieve. The hours of operation were also addressed, which is the main purpose of putting them in the regulations. As Commissioner McCowen pointed out, the Use Permit process would assist in putting restraints on the operation, such as, glaring lights. If these kinds of items are going to be detrimental to the public health and safety, the Planning Commission can deny the project. That is the purpose of the Use Permit. Commissioner Larson inquired about liquor stores being deleted from consideration and asked if this would affect the mom and pop store by not being able to sell these items. Mr. Stump indicated that it would not. A liquor store primarily sells liquor, which is not the case in a small market. Mr. Lohse addressed the issue of the Use Permit process, indicating that Planning Staff would be taking a closer look at projects during this process. Certain aspects of the operations that we disagree with would be clearly defined during this process. If the applicant does not comply with the conditions of the Use Permit, Staff can re-enforce that it is in volation, and the Use Permit is revoked. Commissioner Larson inquired about the problem currently existing with enforcing conditions that are placed on the Use Permits. Mr. Stump concluded that changing the wording of the Ordinance will not solve that issue. Commissioner Pruden requested clarification with Planning Staff on the issue of the residential unit that is part of the total commercial unit. Mr. Stump indicated that it was clear. Chairman Ashiku also asked for clarification was made that this does not indicate that the unit has to be owner occupied. Commissioner McCowen referred to Permitted Uses, Section 9062, noting Planning Staff seemed to be more specific in this Section, except for Item F where you listed "Retail stores not listed in Section 9061". He noted dry cleaners and tailor shops were listed, but no shoe repair shops; bookstores were listed, but not newsstands. There is not the inclusion of "or similar uses" to these items. Mr. Stump indicated that upon looking at this section Staff viewed newsstand and shoe repair shops as antiquated uses. Newsstands are no longer utilized in Ukiah. These types of operations were commonly requested in the past and are generally no longer being requested. Mr. Stump suggested the wording "or similar uses" could be incorporated in this Section. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 21 October 23, 1996 Commissioner McCowen stated the professional photographer was deleted from Section 9061 .A and suggested this could be a compatible use in the Neighborhood-Commercial District. Chairman Ashiku indicated that this would be considered a professional type service. Mr. Stump concurred. Chairman Ashiku referred to the laundry-mat issue and the issue of placing this in a neighborhood commercial district was a concern. Discussion followed regarding the size of a dry cleaning establishment in proportion to the lot, and if it would be appropriate in the Neighborhood-Commercial District. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to delete Dry Cleaners from Section 9062, Item K, as a permitted use. Commissioner Pruden suggested deleting barber shops from Section 9061, Item A, Uses Allowed, and including it in Section 9062, Item H, Personal Service Establishment. Discussion followed regarding Use Permits on these types of establishments. It was the consensus of the Commission that barber shops and beauty shops whould both be included in the Section 9061.A, Uses Allowed. Commissioner Puser asked for clarification on Item A, Section 9062, regarding Large Homeless Facilities. Mr. Stump indicated that there is a State Law that requires local jurisdictions to allow for provision of small and large homeless facilities. With a Use Permit, large homeless facilities would be allowed in this Zoning District. Commissioner Puser addressed the issue of changing the older homes that are currently on Dora into office facilities. Mr. Lohse indicated that it would require a Use Permit. Mr. Stump indicated that in this proposed ordinance it would be a Site Development Permit. Commissioner Larson referred to Section 9064, Item A, Building Site and Lot Area Requirements expressing concern about the 7,000 square feet minimum for single family housing, in this area of Neighborhood Commericial Zoning, and 6,000 square feet in other areas. Mr. Stump indicated this was a statute that was established in 1982. Discussion followed regarding Section 9064 and the 7,000 feet of area for a building in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning. It was indicated that the current residential lot size is 6,000 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 22 October 23, 1996 square feet. The Commission concluded that the reason for the 7,000 square feet area was for the provisions of parking and landscaping in commerical businesses. The Planning Commission concurred with the text as written. Commissioner McCowen referred to Section 9063, Item A, regarding building height limits of 30 feet. He noted the height limits seem to be more restricted. Chairman Ashiku concurred that this would be particularly important because of the restriction of plan of the building, one needs to build upward to expand. Commissioner Pruden indicated that the 30 feet height limitation seems appropriate for this area. In order to attain useage from these buildings we will need to go upward, and there are currently homes in this area that have second floors. Mr. Stump indicated that Planning Staff's original approach on this issue would be 30 feet, which is consistent with the residential area height limits. Neighbors in the area are concerned about the height. There is a difference between a single family residence going to two stories and having a view of a commerical business, in terms of privacy invasion, than a commerical building going up two stories and having a view on a single family residence. After discussion the Commission concluded that upon the completion of design of a project, Commissioners would take into consideration the position of windows. The Commission concurred that Section 9063, Item A should remain as written, with the exception of striking the shaded area. Commissioner McCowen asked the Commission if they were comfortable enough with this to review it once more, or perhaps take a second look at this Amendent. Chairman Ashiku indicated that he was comfortable with Staff's ability to reflect the Commissioner's desires. Commissioner Larson referred to Section 9068, Item D regarding scheduling the hours of operation, and expressed concern that businesses with evening hours would not be able to function under this item. Mr. Stump indicated a Use Permit would be required to establish broader hours of operation. ON A MOTION BY Commissioner McCowen, seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve the proposed text changes to the C-N (Neighborhood- Commercial) Zoning Text Amendments, as revised based on the comments by the Planning Commission, and recommend that it be adopted by the City Council. AYES: NOES: ATSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioner Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku. None None None MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 23 October 23, 1996 C2,~C C ~N/r_R YOKAYO SCHOOL S 0~. ~.'.s.~.; ~;. · ^~o.~. oo~ ST...T w.;..~.~ .... c...,,.~. ~ R:Ez.O:NED..TO C-N (i"N:-:Eli:.G H'.B O'-.1~ H O-O D COMMERCIAL). · THESE 49 PARCELS ARE CURRENTLY ZONED "C-N" (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL). THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THEIR REZONING TO "C-1" (LIGHT COMMERCIAL) ON DECEMBER 11, 1996. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REZONING WILL BE TO ASSIGNA ZONING THAT IS CONSlSTENTWITH THE HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTTHAT EXISTS OR IS ASSUMED ON THE PARCELS, RATHER THAN LEAVING THEM WITH THE MORE RESTRICTIVE NEW "C-N" ZONING DISTRICT~ November 1, 1996 City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 RECEI fE:I) NOV - 5 CITY OF UglA~4 PLANNING Ukiah City Council/Planning Commission Subject: Building Height Limits of R1, R-2, R-3, and C-1 - Reference is made to the City Council meeting of October 16, 1996 at which time the Mayor advised Mr.. Stump to review the wording on subject matter. Believe Mr. Stump replied along the line of his quotation from the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting at September 25, 1996, Page 22. "Mr. Stump stated if staff can preserve what is existing with identical height limits between the single family residential and the neighborhood commercial, it would be most appropriate." We understand that the Planning Commission has rejected this proposal. This rejection means the Planning Commission sent a message to 1500-2000 single story residential home owners. Approximately 90% of these homes range from 14 to 18 feet in height. They're saying YEA, it' s OK for you to add another bedroom on top and increase the height to thirty feet. Just make sure you are 15 feet from fence line. Yes, you can have windows, it will give you the opportunity to look down on your neighbor's yard. But your neighbor lost what little bit of privacy he had. That' s OK. I stayed within the code and the Planning Department OK'd it. I think he mentioned something about R-1 Section 9018 or something like that. Planning Commission- COMMITMENT TO PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS? We, as home owners, in residential areas would like to propose that the following statement be added to the building height limits of R-l, R-2, R-3 and C-N: For dwellings, a maximum height of thirty feet (30'). Then add to above Unless abutting an R-1 or R-2 lot, in which case preserve what is existing with identical height limits. Sincerely, Leonard Jo~on Property Owner Additional Property Owner's Signature Attached. ITEM NO. ?b DATE: November 6, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING MAP TO REZONE TWO PARCELS ALONG CLAY STREET IN THE DORA STREET CORRIDOR REZONING AREA FROM "R-3" TO "R-I" SUMMARY: On October 16, 1996, the City Council introduced three separate ordinances rezoning a total of 93 parcels in the Dora Street Corridor rezoning area as a part of the citywide General Plan rezoning program. At that meeting, it was determined that the Council could not discuss or take action on 2 parcels because of potential conflicts of interest of 2 (Councilmember Wattenburger and Mayor Schneiter) of the 4 Councilmembers present, and the resulting lack of a quorum. The 2 parcels are located in the City's westside residential area at the southwest corner of Clay and Dora Streets, and are developed with well maintained single family residences. Accordingly, the General Plan has designated them as LDR (Low Density Residential), and directs their rezoning from "R-3" (High Density Residential) zoning to the corresponding "R-I" (Single Family Residential) classification. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Conduct a public hearing to consider the rezonings; and 2) introduce by title only the ordinance amending the City Zoning Map rezoning two parcels on Clay Street from "R-3" to "R-I." ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the proposed ordinance, and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Affected property owners Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Ordinance amending the City Zoning Map 3. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated September 25, 1996 4. Planning Commission Minutes, September 25, 1996 APPROVED: Canda"-~e Hor~ley, City M~ager 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 9009 of the Ukiah City Code, the Official Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah is amended to change the zoning on Assessors Parcel Number 001-266-14 located at 404 Dora Street, and Assessors Parcel Number 001-266-18 located at 611 Clay Street from "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) to "R-I" (Single Family Residential). SECTION TVVO This ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. SECTION THREE This rezoning action and amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the City of Ukiah is necessary to bring the zoning for the subject properties listed in Exhibit "A" into conformance with the new General Plan adopted on December 6, 1995. SECTION FOUR 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: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Passed and adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk , by the following role call vote: Fred Schneiter, Mayor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT "A" The Dora Street Corridor Neighborhood Rezoning Project (96-43) "R-3" to "R-I" Assessor's Current General Plan New Parcel No. Zoning Designation Zoning 001-266-14 R3 LDR R1 001-266-18 ,5 7OO CLAY STREET 610 618 612 610 HOLDEN STREET -i :;13 ITl ITl --I CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA iTEM: 8C. 9-25-96 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: September 25, 1996 City of Ukiah Planning Commission City of Ukiah Planning Department Dora Street Corridor Rezoning Project (96-43) City of Ukiah PROJECT SUMMARY: Phase No. 5 of the city-wide General Plan rezoning program involves 161 lots situated in what is referred to as the Dora Street Corridor area (see map attached to the draft ordinance). This portion of the community is predominantly comprised of residential zoning classifications with nearby commercial and public zoning districts. The General Plan assigns a Commercial Land Use Designation to the properties fronting Dora Street, and the majority of these properties are currently zoned "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) and "R-3" (General Multiple Residential). Also, a number of properties in the area are designated Medium Density Residential, and are currently zoned "R-3." Additionally, a significant number of single family residentially zoned parcels in close proximity to Dora Street are designated as Medium Density Residential. One large parcel in the center of the project area, just north of Luce Street, is currently zoned "R-l," yet has been designated as Commercial in the General Plan. Finally, at the corner of Clay and Dora Streets, two "R-3" zoned properties developed with single family residences have been assigned a Low Density Residential Land Use Designation, and the "R-3" zoned parcel situated on the northwest corner of Clay and Holden Streets has been designated as Low Density Residential. This project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners to visit the site prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council. PROJECT LOCATION: The Dora Street Corridor rezoning area is generally bounded by Clay Street on the North, Beacon Lane on the south, and South State Street on the west. On the east, the affected parcels generally include those with Dora Street frontage. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council APPROVAL of the rezonings and ADOPTION of the ordinance amending the City Zoning Map. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The City Council has adopted a programmatic Negative Declaration for the General Plan rezoning project. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LDR (Low Density Residential), MDR (Medium Density Residential), and C (Commercial). ZONING DISTRICT: R-1 (Single Family Residential), R-2 (Multiple Family Residential), "R-3" (General Multiple Residential), and C-1 (Light Commercial). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: In the Dora Street Corridor rezoning area, the General Plan directs the rezoning of 46 parcels from "R-l" (Single Family Residential) to "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential); 3 parcels from "R-3" (General Multiple Family Residential) to "R-I"; 23 parcels from "R-3" to "R-2"; 90 parcels from "R-3" to "C-1" (Light Commercial); 4 parcels from "R-2" to "C-1"; and 1 parcel from "R-I" to "C-1 ." A map(s) indicating the locations of the subject properties, and their current and proposed zoning is included with the attached draft ordinance. STAFF ANALYSIS: The parcels proposed to be rezoned have been grouped according to what the existing and proposed zoning classifications are, as described in the project description above. 1. "R-I" to "R-2" This grouping includes 46 parcels in three separate sub-areas within the Dora Street Corridor rezoning area. The three sub-areas are discussed and analyzed separately. Sub-Area No. 1: This sub-area involves the seven single family residential parcels situated along the west side of Carolyn Street just east of the Mill and Dora Street intersection. These parcels are relatively small at approximately 5,000 square feet, and are developed with single family residences. The reason they were designated "R-2" in the General Plan is because of their close proximity to commercial and high density residential land uses, their small size, and their close proximity to designated collector streets. Based upon detailed field work, staff has determined that the "R-2" zoning district is inappropriate for this quiet single family residential neighborhood. The lots are small, and the single family residences are well maintained. It does not appear that this neighborhood is likely to evolve into a typical medium density residential neighborhood, or provide opportunity for additional dwelling units in the future. Accordingly, staff recommends that this area not be rezoned. Sub-Area No. 2: This sub-area includes 14 single family residential lots located on Court Street south of Gobbi Street between Oak and Dora Streets. The residences are well maintained, and the neighborhood is quiet. The reason it was designated medium density residential in the General Plan is because of nearby high density residential land uses, and its close proximity to both commercial land uses and designated collector streets. Similar to sub-are No. 1, staff has determined that the "R-2" zoning district is inappropriate for this quiet single family residential neighborhood. The lots are small, and the single family residences are well maintained. It does not appear that this neighborhood is likely to evolve into a typical medium density residential neighborhood, or provide opportunity for additional dwelling units in the future. Accordingly, staff recommends that this area not be rezoned. Sub-Area No. 3: This sub-area is located along Beacon Lane between Dora Street and South State Street. These single family residential lots range in size from approximately 5,000 square feet to 18,000, and are served by Beacon Way, Berkeley Way, and a private street. Commercial land uses, apartments, and a convalescent hospital surround the area, and it is in close proximity to a major collector street and arterial roadway. Field review of this area reveals a predominantly well established, quiet neighborhood surrounded by higher intensity land uses. In addition, there are four newer homes along the private drive west of Berkeley Way that seem to help stabilize the single family residential flavor of the neighborhood. Even though the area is surrounded by higher density/intensity of land uses, staff is able to conclude that it represents a stable and valid single family residential neighborhood that does not appear to be eligible for an "R-2" zoning district. Accordingly, staff recommends that this sub-area not be rezoned. 2. "R-3" to "R-I" These 3 properties are located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Clay and Dora Streets. The two parcels with Clay Street frontage are developed with well established single family residences, while the parcel at the corner of Holden and Dora Streets is developed with a small apartment complex. 3, Staff recommends that the Clay Street parcels be rezoned to "R-I" and the Holden Street parcel retain the "R-3" zoning to reflect existing development. "R-3" to "R-2" This grouping includes 18 parcels situated in three separate sub-areas. Sub-Area No. 1: This area is situated along the eastern side of Oak Street between Mill and Gobbi Streets. The 8 lots are moderately sized and developed with single and multiple family residences, and one church. Existing high and medium density residential development is located in close proximity, and commercial land uses are adjacent to the south and east. Staff is able to conclude that based upon the existing land uses on the parcels, as well as those in the surrounding area, and the close proximity to multiple family residential and commercial development, the "R-2" zoning classification is reasonable and appropriate. Sub-Area No. 2: This sub-area includes 6 parcels situated along Gobbi Street between Dora and Oak Streets. Five of the parcels are located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Oak and Gobbi Streets, and are developed with single family residences. The sixth parcel is situated on the southwest corner of the intersection of Court and Gobbi Streets, and is developed with an insurance office. The five parcels developed with single family residences are adjoined by high density residential to the south and west, and commercial to the east. The current "R-3" zoning classification seems inappropriate given the small size of the parcels, as well as their seemingly stable use as single family residences. The "R-2" classification appears more appropriate as a contribution to the mixed density and intensity of land uses in the area. Staff recommends the rezoning of these parcels from "R-3" to "R-2." Staff has concluded that the final parcel included in this sub-area should be zoned "C-1 ," rather than "R-2," because it is developed with a commercial office. Sub-Area No. 3: These 4 parcels are situated at the northeast corner of Dora Street and Beacon Lane. The largest parcel is developed with medical offices, while the corner parcels are developed with 2 small apartment complexes. The parcel to the east of the medical offices is vacant. Minutes from the General Plan Steering Committee reveal that consensus was reached to assign the medical office parcel a commercial land use designation. It appears to be a mapping error that designated the parcel as medium density residential. 1 The proposed "R-2" zoning is basically reflective of the existing uses, and therefore staff is recommending this rezoning for the parcels developed with apartments and the vacant parcels, which is served by Beacon Lane. We are recommending the "C-1" zoning classification for the medical office parcel, consistent with the direction of the General Plan Steering Committee. "R-3" to "C-1" These 90 parcels are situated along both sides of Dora Street from Holden Street on the north to Washington Avenue on the south. Also along Wabash Avenue east of Dora Street, and along Washington Court east of Cresta Drive. The majority of these parcels are currently being used for medical and professional offices. Others are developed with Iow, medium and high density residential units, small commercial businesses, and health care facilities. The land uses along Dora Street have evolved from primarily residential to primarily commercial offices. The proposed "C-1" zoning is intended to reflect the existing land uses, as well as the assumed continuation of the commercial conversion of residential land uses. Staff is able to conclude that the assignment of a commercial zoning classification to the subject parcels is appropriate, and therefore recommends the rezoning. Concerning the 8 parcels situated along Washington Court, and the one large parcel adjacent to the south, staff has concluded that the "C-1" zoning classification is inappropriate. The parcels are developed with high density apartments and a mobile home park, and we have concluded that the appropriate zoning classification would be the "R-3" district to reflect the existing development. "R-1 to "C-1" This parcel is located along the east side of Dora Street just north of Luce Street, and is developed with Saint Mary's School. While both the "R-I" and "C-1" zoning districts treat private schools the same, the "C-1" classification appears to make more sense because of the property's location and long frontage on Dora Street. Staff is able to conclude that the "C-1" zoning is appropriate, and therefore recommends this rezoning. 6. "R-2" to "C-1" These 3 parcels are located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Dora Street and Washington Avenue. They are elevated above the street and developed with single family residences. Staff does not support or recommend that these parcels be rezoned to "C-1", because of their higher elevation and lack of appropriate access and parking for commercial purposes. ZONING DISTRICT INFORMATION ZONING DISTRICT R-1 R-2 R-3 MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6,000 / 7,000 on a comer lot 6,000 / 7,000 on a comer lot 6,000 / 7,000 on a comer lot DENSITY REQUIREMENT 1 unit per 6,000 square feet (7 units per acre) 1 unit per 3,000 square feet (14 units per acre) 1 unit per 1,500 square feet (28 units per acre) C-1 None None CONCLUSIONS: The newly adopted City General Plan provides new Land Use Designations for a number of properties in the Dora Street Corridor area of the community. The purpose of redesignating some properties is to acknowledge and protect important existing land uses, and to help facilitate the evolution of land uses that have either become out of context with their surroundings, or because of nearby changes in land use patterns and street classifications, fulfill criteria for a different and much needed land use. Staff supports a number of the rezonings, but recommends against others, because of existing development, neighborhood character, or the physical characteristics of the property don't make sense for an intensification of land use. Accordingly, staff is recommending 97 of the 161 rezonings. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance Amending the City Zoning Map ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: Bob S or If any condition, special or standard, is violated or if any required approval is not obtained, then the use permit granted shall be null and void; otherwise to continue in full force and effect indefinitely until otherwise terminated and shall run with the land. (SC//8) Except as otherwise specifically noted, any use permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving such use permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. (SC//9) Access to the project site shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fire Code and subject to the approval of the Ukiah Fire Marshal. 10. 11. All conditions be completed prior to release of final inspection and issuance of use and occupancy permit. (SC//24) Antenna panels and support poles shall be painted in non-reflective colors that are consistent with the colors of the existing antenna tower and microwave dishes. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None 8C. Rezoning Application No. 96-43, as Fried by The City of Ukiah Planning Department, to rezone 161 parcels of land along the Dora Street Corridor to zoning classifications consistent with the Land Use Designation assigned in the new General Plan. The project involves the potential rezoning of properties generally located along the west side of Carolyn Street, the west and south sides of Court Street, and along Berkeley Way and Beacon Way, north of Beacon Lane; parcels along Dora Street, mid-block between Mill Street and Gobbi Street, along Gobbi Street between Oak and Dora Streets, and along the eastern side of Dora Street between Wabash Avenue and Beacon Lane; parcels on the corner of Clay and Dora Streets, along Dora Street from Holden Street south to Washington Avenue, and along the southern side of Wabash Avenue mid-block between Dora Street and South State Street; parcels fronting Washington Court; parcels along the west side of Dora Street north of Washington Avenue, and a parcel located along the east side of Dora Street between Luce Avenue and Gobbi Street. Charley Stump, Senior Planner, introduced Phase 5 of the city-wide General Plan rezoning program, stating it involves 161 lots situated in what is referred to as the "Dora Street Corridor". Mr. Stump described the project location and cited the General Plan designations and Zoning Districts involved in the project. He noted that the affected property owners received maps and legal notice of the proposed rezoning actions. Mr. Stump clarified, for the benefit of the audience and the Planning Commission, three areas proposed for rezoning by the General Plan that Staff is recommending against, all of which were originally proposed from "R-I" to "R-2". These areas were referenced as Item 1, Sub-Areas 1-3 in the Staff Report and include the west side of Carolyn Street, south of Mill just east of Dora Street; the west side of Court Street and a portion of Freitas Street south of Gobbi Street, between Oak and Dora Streets; and Beacon Lane between Dora and South State Streets. These areas represent quiet, stable, well-maintained single family residential neighborhoods and, in spite of their close proximity to higher density land uses, the lots are small and do not appear likely to evolve into a typical medium density residential neighborhood, or provide for additional dwelling units in the future. In Staff's opinion retention of the R-1 zoning is appropriate for each of these three neighborhoods. Mr. Stump also noted in Item 2 of the Staff Report the three parcels located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Clay and Dora Streets, which are proposed to be rezoned from "R-3" to "R-I", the two MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 September 25, 1996 parcels with Clay Street frontage are developed with well established single family residences, while the parcel at the corner of Holden and Dora Streets is developed with a small apartment complex. Staff recommended that the parcels fronting Clay Street be rezoned to "R-1 ", and that the Holden Street parcel retain the "R-3" zoning to reflect existing development. Item No. 3 consists of 18 parcels suggested by the General Plan for rezoning from "R-3" to "R-2". Sub- Area 1 of Item 3 is along the eastern side of Oak Street just south of Mill. There are single family homes in this neighborhood, multi-family apartments, and commercial uses. Staff has concluded that it is a mixed residential-commercial area of the community. In some instances an "R-3" to "R-2" does make sense, and Staff does recommend the rezoning. Mr. Stump noted there is one property owner has contacted staff who owns a single family residential development on that block, who wants to retain the "R-3" zoning. Sub-area 2 of Item 3 is located on Gobbi Street between Dora and Oak Streets. There are five parcels currently developed with single family homes, but surrounded by high density residential. Staff believes that "R-2" is more appropriate than "R-3" in this particular case. One parcel situated on the southwest corner of the intersection of Court and Gobbi Streets is currently developed with an insurance office. Staff recommended this parcel be rezoned from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood-Commercial), rather than "R-2" (medium density residential), to reflect its existing development. The third Sub-Area of Item 3 suggested for rezoning to "R-3" from "R-2" are four parcels located on Dora Street and Beacon Lane. The General Plan suggests that the medical offices on one of the parcels be rezoned to Commercial, which Staff supports, to reflect the existing development. On the corner are two small apartment complexes, which the General Plan suggests rezoning to "R-2" from "R-3". Staff recommends that the Commission consider retaining the "R-3" zoning for these apartments. Item No. 4 contains the largest grouping of approximately 90 parcels that the General Plan suggests rezoning from "R-3" to "C-I" along Dora Street. Mr. Stump explained the intent of the General Plan process is to evaluate the evolution of areas such as Dora Street, which has been going from residential to professional offices and neighborhood commercial-type uses. The Staff Report suggests a "C-1" zoning to be consistent with the General Plan, however, Staff is strongly suggesting that the Planning Commission consider the C-N (Neighborhood-Commercial) zoning district for Dora Street. He emphasized that Staff is prepared to bring forward text amendments to the C-N zoning district at the next Planning Commission meeting to coincide with their approach on this rezoning. Mr. Stump explained this is in response to Staff's concerns about the future of the Dora Street corridor, in response to concerns expressed by the community, and in response to concerns expressed by the Planning Commission about zoning districts getting ahead of the text amendments. Therefore, Staff is proposing not to rezone Dora Street to the C-1 zoning district, but rather a Neighborhood-Commercial Zoning District (C-N), which is less intense, more consistent with what is existing, and Staff believes more appropriate. Item No. 5 consists of the St. Mary's School parcel. It is suggested to rezone from the current "R-1" to "C-I" Staff is similarly recommending the Neighborhood-Commercial (C-N) zoning for that parcel. Item No. 6 is a grouping of three parcels to be rezoned from "R-2" to "C-1" These parcels are located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Dora and Washington Streets. These parcels are elevated above the street, across the street from a care home. Staff does not feel that these parcels are logically or reasonably considered Commercial because they are elevated above the street. Staff recommends retaining their current zoning of "R-2". MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 18 September 25, 1996 Commissioner Pruden described to the audience how the Land Use Designations were arrived at, explained the difference between the Land Use Designations and zoning, and the rationale behind the Steering Committee's actions. Commissioner McCowen advised some of the parcels proposed for rezoning are within 300 feet of his residence - particularly in Item 2 of the Staff Report, "R-3" to "R-1" on Dora & Clay - on which he will recuse himself from discussions. He further suggested on Item 4 the creation of Sub-area 1, to consist of parcels north of Jones Street, from which he will recuse himself, and Sub-area 2, to consist of parcels south of Jones Street. Chairman Ashiku agreed with the subdivision of Item 4 and stated he will have a similar problem, and asked for Staff's identification of properties he would have a potential conflict of interest on. Mr. Stump addressed Chairman Ashiku's concern stating it is his understanding a potential conflict of interest might exist with parcels from Mill Street to Yokayo School on both the west and east sides of Dora Street. He stated Staff would attempt to separate them out as the hearing proceeds. Discussion followed regarding how to conduct the public hearing to accommodate Commissioner McCowen and Chairman Ashiku's need to recuse themselves. Commissioner McCowen inquired about Item 3, Sub-Area 3, in which Mr. Stump stated there were two apartment complexes at the corner of Dora Street and Beacon Lane. Mr. Stump explained there are two separate apartment complexes at that corner and stated he believes them to be on two separate parcels. Commissioner McCowen stated the map indicates one parcel with two vacant parcels behind the medical facility. Mr. Stump consulted the Assessor's Parcel Map and clarified there appears to be two parcels, which he believes to be for tax purposes, and one parcel for land use purposes. He stated if there is a recommendation to rezone that site Staff will make sure it is identified correctly as it goes on to Council. Commissioner McCowen asked to clarify that Staff is now recommending that "R-3" be retained on this particular parcel, although the Staff report recommended going to "R-2". Mr. Stump stated that is correct. He further clarified there is a letter on file from the property owners of this parcel, of which the Commission received a copy. Commissioner McCowen inquired about the parcels in Item 1, Sub-Area 3, specifically the parcels along Beacon Way that were initially proposed to be rezoned from "R-i" to "R-2". In regard to the parcel to the west that runs from Beacon Way back to the C-1 property behind it if that is actually the parcel that was developed into four new single family homes. Mr. Stump stated that was correct. Commissioner McCowen also inquired about Section 3, Sub-area 2, at the corner of Gobbi and Court Street, which is now the insurance office, asking if any contact was received from the property owner specifically requesting that it remain C-1. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 19 September 25, 1996 Mr. Stump stated that parcel is currently zoned R-3, and there has been no contact from the property owner. Commissioner McCowen expressed his concern of taking this program parcel by parcel and winding up with a map that is all over the place. He noted in many areas a designation is used that broadly reflects what exists in the neighborhood and he questioned why, from a planning standpoint, that doesn't make sense with this parcel. If it is generally an "R-I" neighborhood and one parcel is an anomaly, he questioned why you would change the map to accommodate one parcel. Mr. Stump stated Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider a Neighborhood-Commercial zone for that particular site. It may be more appropriate to reflect the existing development, and because it is located adjacent to the corner parcel between Dora and Gobbi. It seems to be a logical extension of neighborhood commercial-type land use. Commissioner McCowen indicated that would be the only parcel zoned Neighborhood-Commercial in that area of Gobbi. Mr. Stump stated it would be adjacent to the corner of Gobbi and Dora would also be Neighborhood Commercial. The Neighborhood-Commercial zoning would not be solely fronting Dora, but would extend one parcel onto Gobbi. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:00 P.M. Bob Wattenburger, 611 W. Clay Street, stated he lives on the corner of Clay and Dora, which is proposed for rezoning from "R-3" to "R-I". He suggested rezoning the parcels from "R-3" to "R-2", or "R-3" to "C-I" He stated with a six unit apartment building there it doesn't make sense to rezone it to "R-1" Chairman Ashiku requested that those coming forward to speak clearly identify their property before speaking to allow the Commissioners time to recuse themselves, if necessary. Cook Wattenburger, 161 Court, stated he had initially come in to speak against the proposed rezoning from "R-1" to "R-2" on Carolyn Street, but was pleased to hear Staff recommend that the "R-1" zoning be retained. He stated, for future reference, no matter whose neighborhood it is if it consists primarily of single family residences, why cram people in like cattle and create more problems. He stated he is unaware of anybody on Court Street that is against the church going in, stating it is a beautiful, well-done project. He noted at the end of Court Street on the north side there is a large empty lot and in the future there are eleven low-income HUD houses proposed to go in there. There is already a traffic problem on Court Street and that will create more. He stated it doesn't matter who moves in, but the number of people that would be added to the traffic would create a problem. Jack Reising, 733 S. Oak, stated this property is currently R-3, and is directly across the street from a 35 unit apartment building. It is his understanding that Staff does not have a problem with leaving it "R- 3". This property currently has a single family residence developed there and he would desire to tear it down and put in five or six, attractive, garden type apartments. He stated it would seem to be appropriate to the area because of the density across the street. He presented photographs to the Commission of the neighborhood. Mr. Reising also noted the property directly to the south of his parcel is the Ukiah Dental Lab. He stated the owner of that property would also like to remain "R-3" Commissioner Larson asked staff to identify Mr. Reising's parcel on the map. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 20 September 25, 1996 Mr. Stump referred to the Assessors Parcel map and described the location to the Commission. Mr. Reising noted the three parcels to the north would be appropriate as "R-2", but his parcel and the two parcels south of his would prefer to remain "R-3" Margaret Lohse, 158 Carolyn Street, stated she is concerned with the proposed changes from "R-1" to "R-2" on Carolyn Street, noting that Staff has now indicated they are recommending retention of the "R-1" zoning. She expressed her appreciation for Staff's sensitivity to the small size of their lots and stated they are already surrounded by apartment buildings. An additional concern expressed by Mrs. Lohse were the homes on the west side of Carolyn Street which back up to medical and dental offices on Dora Street. Chairman Ashiku recused himself at this time and Vice-Chair Pruden conducted the public hearing. Mrs. Lohse continued stating her concern, and the concern of other residents of Carolyn Street, for which she presented a signed petition. She noted the current zoning is "R-3" and the uses that are there are permitted with a Use Permit that specifies hours of operation and types of use. If that area changes to a "C-1" zoning the doctor's office that her property backs up to can become a convenience store that will not be limited to hours of operation. She stated their lots are very small and to propose making Dora Street a commercial corridor is very upsetting to those people who have to live with it day-to-day. Mrs. Lohse stated they are already woken up at night with police flashlights shining through their back windows as they check out the doctor's offices. It would only become worse if it went to a general commercial use. In regard to Staff's recommendation for Neighborhood-Commercial zoning in that area, she urged the Planning Commission not to change it to C-1 while waiting to rezone it to Neighborhood-Commercial. She expressed her concern about the types of businesses that could move in while it was a C-1 designation. The neighbors she talked to on Carolyn Street would prefer that until such time that it can be zoned to Neighborhood-Commercial, or commercial offices, that it not be allowed to go to general commercial use. If the vote has to be "C-1" or nothing, she urged the Planning Commission to err on the side of caution because our homes are right there. She stated if it is zoned Commercial and a deli goes in where kids can hang out, it will ruin her home and the homes of other people. Mrs. Lohse also stated that Ukiah is a'small town and they want to preserve the integrity of it. If Dora Street is turned into a commercial corridor it will be a disservice to Ukiah. The City is not so large that people can't easily get to State Street for commercial services. A commercial corridor is not necessary in that area of Ukiah. She stated the doctor's offices don't bother them because they are restricted and go in with Use Permits. They would much prefer that the City has a chance to review what is going to be there with specific hours of operation and use. Cook Wattenburger stated the Court Street neighbors agree with Mrs. Lohse. A citizen in the audience stated the Alice Street neighbors also agree. Vice-Chair Pruden asked Staff to describe the Neighborhood-Commercial zoning and what it means. Mr. Stump stated the intent of the General Plan is not to create a situation where Dora Street would change. The intent of the General Plan is to acknowledge what has occurred and what exists, such as doctor's offices, a deli, an Optometrist, a mix of church, schools, and residential densities. Staff's suggestion is to rezone it to Neighborhood-Commercial. The Neighborhood-Commercial Zoning District, as it is currently crafted in our current zoning ordinance is not much different than the C-1 zoning designation. Staff is concerned about that, and Mr. Stump reiterated that Staff is prepared to bring forward text amendments to the C-N zoning at the October 23rd Planning Commission meeting, to amend the language to match the vision that Ms. Lohse spoke about and the vision of the General Plan Steering MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 21 September 25, 1996 Committee, in making this a true neighborhood commercial district, reflective of what is existing there today. Mr. Stump noted there will be a brief time period between the time the Council acts on this and designates it C-N that the text amendments will follow. Within that two-week time frame someone could come in and propose a convenience store. As a Planner, he does not want that two weeks out there, but with the normal time it takes to process an application, he feels it is safe. Commissioner McCowen added that the hearing bodies and Staff will have discretion if a convenience store is, in fact, proposed. Marvin Basil, Carolyn Street, stated he agrees with Margaret Lohse. Why change Dora Street and create more problems, which is what he fears will happen. Jessie Walsh, 729 Pomolita Way, stated she is concerned about the zoning and height, because her property is also small. The commercial buildings along there don't have alot of room between them and our small yards. She doesn't want two story commercial buildings to be allowed and inquired if they would be allowed in the proposed zoning. Mr. Stump explained the C-N (Neighborhood-Commercial) Zoning District has a 30 foot height limit, when it abutts an R-! or R-2 District, which is identical to the height limit in the R-1 Zoning District, as the Pomolita Way houses are currently zoned. That would allow a second story, in the same way Ms. Walsh could add a second story to her house. Mr. Stump stated he has heard from several neighbors on Pomolita and Alice Street on this issue. Staff agrees that "R-3" is an inappropriate zoning district for that area because of the potential for large, second story apartment buildings. Mr. Stump stated if Staff can preserve what is existing with identical height limits between the single family residential and the neighborhood commercial district, it would be most appropriate. David Johnson, 903 Alice, stated he was speaking for the majority of homeowners on Alice Street. He and his neighbors are opposed to any change along the Dora Street corridor. They feel it would be an erosion and degradation of the existing neighborhoods. He stated any time you put in commercial apartment buildings or light industrial, you force an exodus out of neighborhoods that exist now. People feel less secure because they have an apartment building right behind them. Traffic flow on Dora is too high as it is now, and the proposed rezoning will only make it worse. There are three elementary schools on the Dora Corridor, within this proposed plan with children all over place; traffic overflows into their neighborhoods because people can not safely drop their kids off at school on Dora. Then the children come down our street to be picked up by their parents. When you put in an apartment building you invite a bad element into the neighborhood, which will force people to move, then the land will be bought up by speculators or real estate agents who will turn houses into rentals. We are opposed to this plan in every way. It is too vague and lacks definition. If you plan to proceed with this plan it needs to be focused, it needs to be clear, and without ambiguity. Everybody should be notified, not just the properties fronting the potential rezoned property. You're not talking about just the houses that border the rezoned property, you're talking about the blocks surrounding Dora Street. Mr. Stump thanked Mr. Johnson for his comments and clarified that his properties are currently zoned R-3, high density residential. Apartment buildings could be built under the current zoning. Staff is proposing a zoning that would not allow apartment buildings and Mr. Stump stated he wanted to make that clear to everybody. In regards to the public noticing, as has been discussed before, legal notices were sent to the property owners and all those adjoining. Staff also published the required legal notice in the newspaper. Mr. Stump stated it is a difficult balance between notifying thousands of people and spending tax payers money to do so. Staff is endeavoring to increase the noticing as much as possible without burdening the taxpayers. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 22 September 25, 1996 Commissioner McCowen added word of mouth is one of the best methods and, as this gentleman told his neighbor, presumably people did find out about it. By noticing the affected property owners and the adjacent property owners, hopefully that starts a ripple so that hopefully people who feel they will be affected do receive notice of it, at least from their neighbors. Justin Lohse, 158 Carolyn, spoke on behalf of his whole family stating he disagrees with this rezoning. He stated Ukiah is perfect the way it is and does not need another McDonald's or deli right behind his house. He doesn't want people driving by and saying, "Oh, there is Carolyn Street. It's such a nice street, it doesn't have Chucky Cheese's behind it." If it is rezoned people will drive by and comment negatively about those who live on Carolyn Street. Susan Keegan, 1367 S. Dora, stated she owns one of the medical offices on Dora near Beacon Lane. It is currently zoned "R-3" and is proposed for "R-2", though Staff is recommending "C-1" Ms. Keegan spoke against down zoning her property to "R-2" stating she has medical offices that are a legal conforming use. They are built to "R-3" specifications, if you take the zoning down to "R-2" and something were to happen and it ceased to be occupied for six months she would have unusable property, due to the way it is built. It would be a legal non-conforming use as medical offices in an "R-2" zone. She requested that the zoning not be taken to "R-2", especially since it is right on the Dora Street corridor, has good access, MTA access, and is a property well-suited to it's current use. She stated she would have no objections to zoning it "C-1 ", or leaving it at "R-3", but requested that it not be down zoned to "R-2". Commissioner Pruden inquired of Staff if zoning it from "R-3" to "R-2" would make the property legally nonconforming, or can it be taken under Use Permit. Mr. Stump stated rezoning to "R-2" could jeopardize the property if, for example, the building were to burn down. Staff is suggesting Neighborhood-Commercial for that parcel which would acknowledge the current use. Wayne Morris, 144 Court Street, stated the property behind him is a doctor's office that is currently zoned "R-3". He inquired what zoning to "C-i" would allow in that area. Mr. Stump clarified Staff is recommending "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) for that property. Mr. Stump stated as the "C-N" zoning stands today a retail store, bakery, food store, or liquor store would all be allowed uses that could go in without a Site Development Permit. Mr. Morris inquired if the zoning went to Neighborhood-Commercial if a liquor store could still go in. Mr. Stump stated the way Staff envisions the text going and the way the General Plan vision was, was to acknowledge the existing uses there and not introduce a plethora of new commercial type uses that are not suited to neighborhood type settings. He stated a liquor store would be one that would not be suited to a neighborhood setting. Leonard Johnson, 739 Pomolita Way, stated he doesn't think Ukiah has a code to fit this rezoning. He stated he took a walk today down Dora Street from Clay to Observatory Streets and tallied the number and types of commercial businesses and single family and multi-family residences. He noted 90 % of one type of zoning use and 10% of another and asked why we have zoning codes. It seems they are trying to satisfy the people. He stated it seems if the Planning Commission or the Council thinks it fits they approve it. David Smith, 741 S. Oak, stated this property backs up to the Lantern Inn on State Street. He plans to buy a portion of the Lantern Inn property to use as additional parking behind his building, to decrease the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 23 September 25, 1996 parking problems on Oak Street. He and the owner of the Lantern Inn property have already worked out a rental arrangement for this parking space in the meantime. Before he can purchase this additional property he has to verify the zoning. He stated he believes the current zoning on Oak Street is "R-2" and the adjacent parcel on State Street is zoned "C-l". He previously requested a zoning amendment of that 35 foot extension of the C-1 property down to "R-2" because there can not be two zoning designations on one parcel. Commissioner McCowen asked if that could be accomplished by a Boundary Line Adjustment. Mr. Lohse clarified this is being required as a condition for a Boundary Line Adjustment that has already been approved. It is a situation where Staff indicated they would proceed with the General Plan Amendment and rezoning on behalf of the applicants because it was a minor adjustment and they were trying to save the applicant money. The end result is it has ended up costing the applicant time because of delays in getting the General Plan approved. The parcel is included in this rezoning phase and it would go to "R-2" to allow the applicant to eliminate a split zoning situation. It will be adjusted on the Land Use Map and the zoning map once this entire process is completed. Mr. Stump stated it is coincidental that the applicant's request coincides with the General Plan steering committee's work on the General Plan in designating this property. Mr. Smith added their primary concern is that they requested this in 1994 and it is well past that now. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:35 P.M. Vice-Chair Pruden returned the meeting to Chairman Ashiku. Discussion followed relative to the manner in which each of the six items/areas should be acted upon. At Staff's suggestion the Commission agreed to proceed in order with each item, with Commissioner's recusing themselves as necessary on areas that might pose a potential conflict of interest to them. Item No. 1 - "R-I" to "R-2" - Sub-Areas 1,2 and 3 ON A MOTION by Commissioner McCowen, Seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote to support Staff's recommendation for Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 1, Sub-Areas 1,2 and 3, to retain the current R-1 Zoning: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None CommiNO. 2 - "R-3" to "R-l_" ssioners McCowen and Pruden recused themselves from participation on Item No. 2. Mr. Stump summarized the properties involved in Item No. 2 and Staff's recommendation to rezone the Clay Street properties to "R-I" and the retention of "R-3" for the Holden Street/Dora Street apartment building. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 24 September 25, 1996 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Larson, Seconded by Chairman Ashiku, it was carried by the following roll call vote to support Staff's recommendation for Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 2, to retain the "R-3" zoning on the parcel at Holden and Dora Streets and to recommend rezoning the two parcels on Clay Street, west of Dora, from "R-3" to "R-!" Discussion followed the motion regarding the current and proposed zoning of the three parcels in Item No. 2 and the concerns expressed during the public hearing regarding second units in an R-1 zoning district. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None Commissioners McCowen and Pruden Commissioners McCowen and Pruden rejoined the Planning Commission on the platform. Item No. 3 - "R-3" to "R-2" - Sub-Areas 1 and 2 Mr. Stump summarized Item No. 3 includes the parcels along the east side of Oak Street. Sub-Area 1 includes eight parcels along the east side of Oak Street. He reminded the Commission there were two speakers during the public hearing: Mr. Reising, who requested retention of the R-3 zoning for the larger parcel in the middle of this grouping, and Mr. Smith, who is in favor of R-2 for the Lantern Inn property. Mr. Stump stated Staff is recommending "R-2" for these parcels, but they are not adverse to "R-3" for the property Mr. Reising is recommending, primarily because of its larger size and its proximity to other large multi-family complexes. Staff thinks "R-3" would be appropriate given the mixed uses in that neighborhood. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, Seconded by Commissioner McCowen, it was carried by the following roll call vote to support Staff's recommendation for Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 3, Sub-Areas 1 and 2, to rezone these parcels from "R-3" to "R-2". Discussion followed regarding proposed rezoning to "R-2" and the possibility of using the "C-N" designation in Sub-Area 1 and other "R-2" areas. Mr. Stump stated Sub-Area 2 of Item No. 3, although it is off by itself, has high density residential all around it. Therefore, Staff will hold to their initial recommendation of "R-3" to "R-2", other than suggesting "R-3" as appropriate for the Reising property, given the mix of properties in the area. Discussion followed regarding existing problems with traffic and parking in the neighborhood that would potentially be increased with a higher density zoning designation. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None Item No. 3 - "R-3" to "R-2" - Sub-Area 3 Mr. Stump summarized Sub-Area 3 consists of four parcels at the corner of Dora and Beacon Lane. Staff is recommending C-N for these parcels, and stated Ms. Keegan, who spoke during the public hearing, is MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 25 September 25, 1996 agreeable to the C-N designation for the parcel containing the medical buildings, but would be against the "R-2". This item also includes two parcels to the south containing apartment buildings. Commissioner McCowen inquired if Staff would be agreeable to proposing the two vacant parcels east of the medical building parcel, which contains four new homes, as "R-1 ", rather than "C-N". Mr. Stump stated, given the new, existing development along that street, it could be appropriate to zone the parcels "R- 1 ", as an alternative. Chairman Ashiku expressed his concern relative to a possible down zoning of these two parcels, without notice to the property owner. Commissioner Larson stated notice had been given for this meeting and additional notice will be given before it is heard by the City Council. Mr. Stump added, at the Commission's direction, Staff would be happy to attempt to notify by telephone and letter any property owner who receives a different zoning designation as a recommendation from this Commission, particularly when it is a down zoning, so they will be aware of the Council meeting, where it will be decided. Chairman Ashiku stated his concern is that it would seem to be a stronger recommendation when it is made from the Commission to the Council. Commissioner McCowen stated he is looking at the fact that there is vacant land that is accessed by a road that exclusively serves single family residences, and it makes sense to keep it that way, providing that Staff does contact the property owner of the date of the Council meeting. Mr. Stump reminded the Commission of a letter they received about the corner parcels at Dora and Beacon Streets where apartments currently exist. He suggested that "R-3" is an appropriate zoning for these parcels. Chairman Ashiku stated "R-3" is appropriate for those parcels and that the property owner makes some valid arguments about their ability to maintain the property. Discussion followed relative to zoning this parcel "R-3", and the square footage of the existing fourplexes. ON A MOTION by Commissioner McCowen, Seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote to recommend retaining the "R-3" zoning on Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 3, Sub-Area 3, for the apartment buildings at the corner of Dora Street and Beacon Way, and to rezone the medical office parcel to the north of the apartments from "R-3" to "C-N" (Commercial- Neighborhood), to reflect existing development: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None ON A MOTION by Commissioner McCowen, Seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote to rezone the two vacant parcels east of the medical office parcel on Dora Street, on Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 3, Sub-Area 3, from "R-3" to "R-I": MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 26 September 25, 1996 Commissioner Larson expressed his agreement with the "R-I" zoning for these two parcels, based on their proximity to the Beacon Lane neighborhood, which is zoned "R-I". He noted the property owner will have another opportunity to speak to the proposed down zoning at the Council meeting. Commissioner Larson stated consideration should be given to access to these parcels. Chairman Ashiku stated he has no problem with the logic behind this rezoning but stated it is a big assumption that since the property owner did not appear at this meeting that he is not interested in his property. Though the Commission is only making a recommendation, he stated one layer of due process is being removed by denying the property owner the ability to respond to this rezoning recommendation without noticing them. Commissioner McCowen stated that particular concern will be addressed when Staff notifies the property owner of the Council meeting date. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, and Larson Commissioner Puser and Chairman Ashiku None None Item No. 4 - "R-3" to "C-N" - Sub-Area 1 (North of Jones Street) Mr. Stump stated Item No. 4 may be a potential conflict of interest to some of the Planning Commissioners. Item No. 4 contains approximately 90 parcels along Dora Street for potential rezoning from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood-Commercial). Chairman Ashiku requested to recuse himself from this Item, stating it may pose a conflict of interest to him. Commissioner Larson inquired if it would be appropriate to discuss as a Commission the proposed "C-N" zoning designation while Chairman Ashiku is still present to participate in the discussion. Chairman Ashiku stated he would not feel comfortable participating because his opinion is significantly colored and he would not be very objective on the entire zone. Commissioner McCowen encouraged Chairman Ashiku's participation, particularly in view of his strong concerns over the rezoning of the two parcels in Item No. 3. Chairman Ashiku stated he has some strong, negative feelings about creating a commercial district on the Dora Street Corridor. Use Permits are highly appropriate and what is at risk is the character of the entire neighborhood. He cited Clara Street as a good example of how a neighborhood can change back to a residential neighborhood with character. He stated it is very possible that Dora Street could retain that same potential. There is always the potential that even the offices he occupies on Dora Street could return to residential. He does not want to condemn that whole district, though it would be great for property values for a number of people. Mr. Stump stated he understands Chairman Ashiku's position, which was echoed by a lot of people during the public hearing. Mr. Stump reiterated that Staff's proposal for the "C-N", or at least the text amendments that will be presented on October 23rd, are going to be for a Neighborhood- Commercial District that will reflect what is there, that encourages both single family residential uses, as well as true neighborhood-serving commercial uses, but would allow for conversion back to residential if that is the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 27 September 25, 1996 evolution. Mr. Stump stated he was speaking from the General Plan and wanted to reflect the true nature of a mixed, low-intensity residential, low-intensity commercial corridor to preserve what is there, and to allow equally single family residential and low-intensity commercial uses that would serve those single family residential uses. Commissioner McCowen stated there is a lot of commercial use on the Dora Street corridor now and inquired if Chairman Ashiku was comfortable with the level and type of commercial development as it exists currently. Chairman Ashiku stated in light of Staff's clarification he can support those type of changes. Mr. Stump stated Staff concluded, after looking at this rezoning, talking to property owners, becoming familiar with the intent of the General Plan, and reading the General Plan minutes in detail, that after preparation of the Staff Report, "C-N", rather than "C-I" was most appropriate. Staff is trying to avoid the situation of having to prepare zoning amendments after the district is created. Staff would like to keep this program moving by designating this area "C-N" and following at the next meeting with the text amendments. Another option to the Commissioner's is to continue this matter until the October 23rd meeting when they have had a chance to look at Staff's proposed revisions to the text amendments. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of continuing this matter until October 23rd and it was the consensus of the Planning Commission to proceed with this proposed rezoning in anticipation of reviewing the "C-N" Zoning amendments to text at the October 23rd Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner McCowen recommended Item No. 4 be divided into three Sub-Areas to enable Commissioner McCowen and Chairman Ashiku to recuse themselves in those areas where the potential for conflict of interest might exist. Sub-Area 1 was designated Dora Street, North of Jones Street, from which Commissioner McCowen would recuse himself; Sub-Area 2 would be from Gobbi to Jones Street, from which Chairman Ashiku would recuse himself; and Sub-Area 3 would be south of Gobbi Street, in which all Commissioners could participate. Commissioner McCowen recused himself at this time. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, Seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve Staff's recommendation on Rezoning Application No. 96-43 to rezone Item No. 4, Sub-Area 1, (Dora Street north of Jones Street) from "R-3" to "C-N": AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None Commissioner McCowen Chairman Ashiku recused himself at this time and Commissioner McCowen rejoined the Commission on the platform. Item No. 4 - "R-3" to "C-N" - Sub-Area 2 (Gobbi to Jones Street) ON A MOTION by Commissioner Larson, Seconded by Commissioner McCowen, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve Staff's recommendation on Rezoning Application 96-43 to rezone Item No. 4, Sub-Area 2 (Dora Street, between Jones and Gobbi Streets)from "R-3" to "C-N": MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 28 September 25, 1996 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners McCowen, Puser, and Larson, and Vice-Chair Pruden None None Chairman Ashiku Chairman Ashiku rejoined the Commission on the platform at this time and Vice-Chair Pruden continued chairmanship of the meeting. Item No. 4 - "R-3" to "C-N" - Sub-Area 3 (South of Gobbi) Mr. Stump reminded the Commission that Item 4 also includes the eight parcels situated along Washington Court, which Staff has concluded the "C-N" zoning would be inappropriate for and recommends retaining the "R-3" zoning. Discussion followed regarding appropriate zoning for the Washington Court parcels. ON A MOTION by Commissioner McCowen, Seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve Staff's recommendation on Rezoning Application 96-43 to rezone Item No. 4, Sub-Area 3 (Dora Street, South of Gobbi Street) from "R-3" to "C-N", and to retain the "R-3" zoning for the Washington Court properties: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners McCowen, Puser, Larson, Pruden, and Chairman Ashiku None None None Item No. 5 - "R-I" to "C-N" (St. Mary's School) ON A MOTION by Commissioner McCowen, Seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote to support Staff's recommendation on Rezoning Application 96-43 to rezone Item No. 5 from "R-i" to "C-N": AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None Item No. 6 - "R-2" to "C-N" ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, Seconded by Commissioner McCowen, it was carried by the following roll call vote to support Staff's recommendation on Rezoning Application No. 96-43, Item No. 6 (northwest corner of the Dora Street - Washington Avenue intersection), to retain the R-2 zoning- AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Pruden, McCowen, Puser, Larson, and Chairman Ashiku None None None MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 29 September 25, 1996 Commissioner Pruden commented on a matter heard earlier that she did not feel was properly delineated. Commissioner Pruden referenced Page 4 of the Staff Report and referred to the insurance office located on Gobbi Street. She stated she made a motion that was approved to rezone that parcel "R-2". She noted that Staff had a different conclusion, but stated she is tempted to let that slip through because she wants to see that parcel zoned "R-2". Discussion followed relative to possible reconsideration of this motion and the discussion that took place prior to the motion which resulted in the recommendation to zone the commercial insurance office "R-2". The Commission agreed that the motion and the resultant zoning recommendation were appropriate. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS Charley Stump indicated to the Commission there are four rezoning phases now in progress, either at the Planning Commission or the City Council levels, and therefore he will not be bringing the next phase forward on October 9th. Mr. Stump also stated there are no current planning projects ready for presentation to the Commission, therefore, no meeting will be held. City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports No reports submitted. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Pruden stated she recently reviewed discussions from former meeting minutes on the Redwood Business Park and the Airport Industrial Park. She noted the documents do not correspond to the Applicant's statements at recent public hearings and offered to circulate the minutes to the other Commissioners. Chairman Ashiku encouraged the Commissioners to review the materials. Commissioner McCowen commended Mr. Lohse and Mr. Stump on their consistent, high quality Staff Reports stating they reflect a lot of work. Commissioner Larson concurred with Commissioner McCowen. He also mentioned his planned attendance at the Living Communities Conference to be held in Boonville on September 4. Chairman Ashiku mentioned the League of California Cities Conference on October 13-15 in Los Angeles stating he has information if anyone is interested in attending. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:39 p.m. Melody Harris, Recording Secretary 2:\pcminutes\m92596.pc Phillip Ashiku, Chairman MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 30 September 25, 1996 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8a DATE: November 6, 1996 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING INSTALLATION OF A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC BARRICADE ON MARLENE STREET AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MARLENE STREET AS A ONE-WAY EASTBOUND STREET BETWEEN LORRAINE STREET AND ORCHARD AVENUE SUMMARY: At the regular City Council meeting of October 16, 1996 a public hearing was held to discuss traffic diversion and calming on Lorraine Street south of Marlene Street. After hearing public testimony, the Council voted to install a temporary barricade on Marlene Street to prevent through traffic from South Orchard Avenue. On October 24, 1996 staff distributed notices to residents of Marlene Street, Betty Street, Lorraine Street, Talmage Frontage Road, and Henderson Lane. Since then staff has spoken to several residents concerned about the installation of the temporary barricade. On October 30, 1996 staff received a petition signed by 110 residents of the neighborhood. The residents expressed concern about safety for vehicles using Waugh Lane as a northerly exit from their neighborhood. The Waugh Lane/Gobbi Street intersection can be very difficult for vehicles turning east or west onto Gobbi Street from Waugh Lane. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Rescind the decision to install a temporary barricade on Marlene Street; 2. Adopt the attached Resolution establishing Marlene Street as one-way eastbound between Lorraine Street and South Orchard Avenue. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. No Action; 2. Postpone installation of temporary barricade pending further evaluation of traffic flow patterns and solutions. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with- Candace Horsley, City Manager Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Petition to the City Council 3. Location Map \ Candace Horsley, City M~nager RJS:AGMARLNE.SUM Page 2 November 6, 1996 Discussion Regarding Installation of a Temporary Traffic Barricade on Marlene Street and Adoption of Resolution Establishing Marlene Street as a One-way Eastbound Street Between Lorraine Street and Orchard Avenue In addition the petition requested that Marlene Street be made a one-way street, eastbound, between Lorraine Street and South Orchard Avenue. This would allow residents to exit their neighborhood in a more safe manner through the Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street intersection which has a 4-way stop as opposed to the Waugh Lane/Gobbi Street intersection which only has a stop sign on the Waugh Lane leg of the intersection. Staff concurs with this recommendation and believes it will substantially decrease southbound traffic through the neighborhood as well as continuing to allow a safe northern exit from the neighborhood through Orchard Avenue. As noted in City Engineer Rick Kennedy's report dated October 8, 1996, southbound traffic on Lorraine Street post-Orchard Avenue Extension/Pre-Wal-Mart was 594 vehicles per day compared to 1,416 vehicles per day after Wal-Mart was opened. A significant decrease in the number of vehicle trips southbound will likely be noticed with the proposed one-way traffic on Marlene Street. The northbound traffic on Lorraine Street post-Orchard Avenue Extension/Pre-Wal-Mart was 440 vehicles per day compared to 314 vehicles per day after Wal- Mart was opened. Northbound traffic does not appear to be a problem according to these traffic counts. Staff believes the one-way street is a better solution to the proposed temporary barricade and recommends it be implemented rather than the closure of Marlene Street to South Orchard Avenue. Since this proposal was not included in the previous Council discussion of this matter, and in the presence of a petition by a substantial portion of the neighborhood, additional Council consideration is requested. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 9.3 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING MARLENE STREET AS A ONE-WAY STREET EASTBOUND BETWEEN LORRAINE STREET AND ORCHARD AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate one-way streets pursuant to Article 6, Chapter 1, Division 8, of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer received a petition requesting a one-way street, eastbound, on Marlene Street between Lorraine Street and Orchard Avenue; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer recommends that the said section of Marlene Street be designated as a one-way street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ukiah City Council that a one-way street, eastbound, on Marlene Street between Lorraine Street and Orchard Avenue be established. The City Engineer is hereby directed to place and maintain appropriate and necessary signs designating the one-way street. PASSED AND ADOPTED this roll call vote. day of , 1996, by the following AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Fred Schneiter, Mayor ATTEST: Marge Giuntoli, City Clerk B:RE81 MARLENE OCT ~',. 0 1996 O~3k~ o , / /_5 /? ! 7:1 .~. I 5-L~ 5'"'1 7~ ?/ ! PEACIt PLUM S1. C.H.P. I CIT. IERRY ii. sT. ~IOM^$ $1.~ RUPE AV. YOSEMITE EL RIO ST. OAK MANOR Cl. ~ 1~l I 5 TALMAGE m HASTINGS! DEBO RD. MANOR OAKS MOB. ESr'S. ~ Do~ ,lan ,r" CALDWE C__FRNT. R, RD. r Mi, UKIAH CORP. YAI~D COMMERCE DR. U.S.G.S. LIMIT o AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8b DATE: November 6, 1996 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES ON CLARA AVENUE AND FORD STREET SUMMARY: On June 15, 1994 the City Council adopted resolution no. 94-54 which required City staff to produce a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program for Clara Avenue and Ford Street. Staff has worked with Ms. Donna Roberts and Mr. Eric Larsen to develop and implement traffic calming measures on Clara Avenue and Ford Street. The Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC) discussed various layout plans for traffic calming measures at its May 14, 1996, September 10, 1996, and October 8, 1996 meetings. During the Budget Hearings Council requested that the release of funding for this project be brought back to the Council for consideration given the current budget situation. If Council authorizes release of funding the attached designs are recommended for traffic calming. If Council does not authorize release of funds for this project then funds could be utilized for other gas tax projects. Staff believes implementation of the designs attached will positively enhance calming of traffic. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Authorize release of funds in the amount of $40,000 for construction of the project; 2. Direct staff to prepare plans and specifications for the traffic islands and the neck down; 3. Direct staff to obtain bids for materials and install three temporary traffic circles on Clara Avenue and Ford Street; and 4. Direct staff to prepare a traffic report identifying before and after traffic volumes, vehicle speeds and traffic accidents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not approve staff's recommendations and direct staff to consider alternate measures for traffic calming. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 301.9827 Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 94-54 2. Sketch of Proposed Traffic Islands, traffic circles and neck down 3. Description of Wagensellers Neighborhood Traffic Calming Pilot Project 4. FY 1996/1997 budget sheet 5. 'Calming' Traffic article APPROVED' Candace Horsley, City Manager RJS:AGCLARA.SUM Page 2 Discussion and Approval of Traffic Calming Measures on Clara Avenue and Ford Street November 6, 1996 At the May 14, 1996 TEC meeting traffic islands were recommended for City Council's approval. One island would be located on Clara Avenue at Orchard Avenue. A second island would be located on Ford Street at Orchard Avenue. A third location, not actually an island, would be on the west leg of the Clara Avenue intersection with Mason Street. At this location, a neck down is proposed. Please refer to the attached sketches. At the October 8, 1996 TEC meeting, three traffic circles were recommended for City Council's approval. The circles would involve three different designs. At Myron Place and Ford Street large concrete planters approximately 2.5 feet in height will be assembled in a circle in the intersection. At Clara Avenue and Sidnie Court pre-cast stone blocks will be placed in the intersection to form a traffic circle. The third circle, at the intersection of Sidnie Court and Ford Street, will be a large equipment tire casing. All circles will contain landscaping to attract the driver's attention. All locations will be fitted with reflectors to enhance night visibility. The main emphasis of the installation of the traffic islands, circles, and neck down will be that of traffic calming and the reduction of vehicular speed. With the addition of the traffic calming devices in the streets the driver will reduce his vehicular speed to negotiate the street. The devices have the additional benefit of improving the visual appearance of the street to make it more pleasing to drivers. Approved landscaping will be planted on the islands and circles to make the street more appealing to the neighborhood and to drivers. Before and after vehicle speed surveys will be conducted on Ford Street and Clara Avenue to determine the influence of the circles on driver's behavior. Traffic volumes will be collected before the project is constructed and after the project is implemented. In addition traffic accidents will be monitored during the pilot project period. Staff proposes to report back to council after the circles have been in place for 6 months. After this initial trial period staff will prepare a report and make a recommendation to Council whether or not to proceed with permanent installation of traffic circles at the three locations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the traffic islands on Clara Avenue at Orchard Avenue and on Ford Street at Orchard Avenue be designed and constructed. Staff also recommends that the neck down be constructed on the west leg of the intersection of Clara Avenue and Mason Street. Staff recommends that three traffic circles be constructed at the locations indicated on the sketches. Since the traffic circles are not permanently affixed to the pavement the circles can be moved and modified during the six month trial period. The fiscal year 1996/1997 budget for fund 301 department 9827 includes $40,000 for this project. It is anticipated that the $40,000 will afford construction of all items described in this agenda summary. Actual engineer's estimates will be written at the time the project is advertised for bids. RESOLUTION NO. 94-54 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF UKIAH DECLARING ITS INTENT TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO LESSEN TRAFFIC IMPACTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS ON FORD STREET AND CLARA AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah recognizes that the Wagenseller and Orr Creek Neighborhood (the Neighborhood) and its streets have been devoted historically to residential and other uses; and WHEREAS, Ford Street and Clara Avenue have become "collector" streets, being the only east-west streets currently available north of Perkins Street able to accommodate traffic to and from shopping areas developed along Orchard Avenue; and WHEREAS, it is recognized that recently approved expansion plans for KMart along Orchard Avenue will be completed prior to infrastructure improvements to Orchard Avenue and Brush Street; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this resolution is to assist in the preservation of residential uses in the Wagenseller/Orr Creek Neighborhood by discouraging the use of Clara Avenue and Ford Street as primary routes for cars and trucks trying to reach businesses on Orchard Avenue; and WHEREAS, nothing in this resolution is intended to, or has the effect of, limiting the City Council's discretion in adopting or amending general plan documents or zoning ordinances, or otherwise performing the planning and zoning functions assigned by law to the legislative body of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah: 1. Declares its commitment to have the Public Works, Planning, and Public Safety staff work with representatives of the Neighborhood in a timely and effective manner to develop and implement a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program to reduce impacts of traffic on Clara Avenue and Ford Streets. 2. The City's commitment shall include immediate steps to enforce the 25 MPH speed limit on Clara Avenue and Ford Street to ensure continued observance of safe driving in the Neighborhood. 3. The City's commitment shall include efforts to discourage increased use of the Neighborhood streets by any traffic generated by new developments along Orchard . Avenue in excess of projections by Barton-Aschman Associates' Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the KMart project. 4. The City's commitment includes considering and implementing, where practical and financially feasible, any other mitigation measures deemed appropriate to lessen impacts, as mutually worked out by City staff and Neighborhood residents over time, and as appropriately phased with other regional traffic improvements which individually and cumulatively lessen the need for Clara Avenue and Ford Street to be utilized as "collector" streets to accommodate cross-town traffic. 5. In considering and implementing any mitigation measures which may include physical alterations to right-of-way segments, the City and Neighborhood residents shall refer to applicable resource material and literature to guide their proposals, including, but not limited to, "Traffic Calming" written and published by CART (Citizens Advocating Responsible Transportation). 6. Any proposals which require physical alterations to existing street right(s)-of- way shall be evaluated and approved by the City Engineer and Traffic Engineering Committee prior to implementation to assure that the public safety and welfare are not compromised. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st of June, 1994, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mastin, NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker and Mayor Schneiter WINWORD/RO2/SAWYER CLARA ST, MEDIAN CITY OF UKIAH TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES CLARA/ORCHARD INTERSECTION ~TE: JUNE 1996 ' FORD ST. '-3 11/16~ 55'-5 9/16' A~£~ 3SI,g ~o,r I. FORD ST. MEDIAN CITY OF UKIAH TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES FORD/ORCHARD INTERSECTION ~Are JUNE 1996 ~Z P~ 2__ Wagensellers Neighborhood Traffic Calming Pilot Project As we discussed with you at the previous Traffic Engineering Committee Meeting, we have made some modifications to the pilot project proposed for our neighborhood. We believe these modifications will address some of the safety and visibility concerns expressed by the Committee. The neighborhood committee has come up with three different designs, in addition to the original curb type design, for each of the three locations requested. These designs reflect choices and options available in terms of cost and aesthetics. All three designs provide a higher visual profile which is anticipated to attract the drivers attention. Each design is movable and portable to varying degrees. Two of the designs can be enlarged or reduced in size to accommodate different situations. We feel that it is imperative that the project be approved for all of the intersections in order to provide valid statistical informations regarding the overall effect of slowing traffic over several blocks of residential streets.. With the assistance of public works and public safety personnel, we will conduct "before" and "after" surveys of traffic volumes and average "high" and 85th percentile speeds and traffic calmed intersections and mid-block segments. We will also gather information from residents as to their reactions to the project. Design gl - Large reinforced concrete planters - Proposed location: Myron and Ford St. A grouping of 3 - 8 large concrete planters (with landscape plantings) will be arranged in the center of the intersection in a circle roughly the same diameter as the originally proposed 12' concrete curb rings. They will be 24" - 30" in height. This will effectively block clear vision of the roadway ahead, while presenting the drivers with a visually pleasing effect, causing them to slow down as the negotiate the intersection. Necessary night reflectors or reflective paint and directional indicators will be discreetly incorporated into the planter grouping. Maintenance of the landscaping will be the responsibility of the residents. Although relatively expensive, this design represents the most portable, flexible, and aesthetically pleasing design idea we have seen. It is also the most susceptible to damage from careless drivers and vandalism, thus representing a potentially greater risk to our investment of capital improvements. Design//2- Pre-cast "retaining wall" blocks- Proposed location: Clara and Sidnie St. Interlocking stone faced block segments approximately 6" X 12", will be arranged to form a 12' diameter circle approximately 18" - 20" in height tapering back approximately 6" at the top. The ring will be filled with moisture retentive material and top soil mounded to approximately 24" - 30" in height with landscaping. This design will contain the same reflectors, landscaping, and signage as the concrete planters. While less unique than the planters, this design has the ability to be expanded and contracted by removing or adding blocks. Cost of this design is roughly 1/2 that of the planters and is less susceptible to vandalism or other damage. Design #3 - Large Diameter Heavy Equipment Tire Casing - Proposed location: Sidnie and Ford St. This design may stir controversy, but it offers an inexpensive, safe, and virtually indestructible solution to calming traffic. The concept is to acquire a large diameter tire casing (8' - 10' in diameter) and modify it by cutting away one wall and turning it inside out, if possible, to look something like the tire planters used in some home gardens. It would be painted white and possibly have a colorful mural painted around the outside. The office of Empire Waste in Petaluma is very interested in this design and has agreed to provide such a tire. This design will contain the same reflectors, landscaping, and signage as the concrete planters. Although this design is not easily modified in terms of size and shape it will cost next to nothing and would be impervious to damage. We would like the Traffic and Engineering Committee to approve installation of these temporary traffic circles for these sites under the supervision of the Public Works and Public Safety Departments along with the technical evaluation and public survey information which will be forwarded to this committee. i TRANSPORTATION 'Calming' Traffic For decades, traffic engineers have worked to make neighborhood streets more efficient. Now, to slow down cars and restore neighborhood quality, they're working to make some streets less efficient. BY DOUG LEMOV M ead,wbrook Avenue, which r~ns east-west between 12th and 16th streets .ear downtown 11., cilv's ..~sl s~cccsslhl rcc'c.t road- c'~t f~.' c'~m~.~tcrs, it Imd inadequate I~all.'r Ilu~l l)avi~ tl~' slrcct, I~owever, the city ~pli.ns with residc~ts, l'h~c~fix's Nei~h- ctn'l)s on the southwest and northe~st comers the i.tersection with a ban~cr that restricts Slt~(' l'l'()lll (Hie side the otl~er arid results lwo rctlectin~ ~-de~ree lur.s. Ei'tZ, ctively, it co~m~ter traflle. That may have annoyed commuters, but the nei~hl~orhood is delighted. Befi~re the diverter was put in, recalls tterb K~nter, president of d~e Me~dow- brook Neighborhood Association, motorists mated down fl~e ~mlined stn~et at twice the posted speed limit miles per hour. Parents were reluctant to allow d~eir children to walk to nei~hbor- hood schools. Soon al~er it was installed I~st year, ~e dive.er had deerensed ~e daily m mfl~er of vehicles using Meadow- brook by B~ percent on the east side of the diverter nnd by 87 percent on the west side. The solu~on cost ~e ei~ next to no~- tcmpora~ ban'ier, a few days of' tcsting~ especially compared with the cost of repaying or widening. And since fl~e ei~ does not pay fi~r permanent neighbor- hood Iritfl~c Iixtures, lhe price tag fin' ll~c structure that will ~X'l)htce the temporal3, barrier~$15,000 to Sg0,000, including the cost of the permanent harriet's (lesert-s~le landscaping--will l)e borne by Meadowl)rook residents. Kanter says the e()mnmni~ is applying fin' a e()mmu- ni~ 1)lock grant to fund fie project. If tn~e problems like Meadowbrook's m'e old news, the solution reflects a new l)rand of thinking, known generally as Traffic cahning in theory and in practice: a two-lane angled slow point (a variation on the choker), as designed and in use in a Florida neighborhood. "tratlk' c, ah~fi~," thaI' is ~ti~i~ I~lhl~'~c'~' nors. l~crcasi~ly, tratilc' pr~dd~,~.s arc tralllc, i. a se.sc, tratlk, cah~li~ decades of work toward speed al~d ettlcicncy .t' url~al~ al~d suitor- ban roadways. While it may seem to some like a sys- tematic program fi~r messing up perfectly good streets, nrbml plmmers increasingly see tral~c cahuin~ as a hmo-term way redirecl traille lo more efficient lhof ougjffm'es and, in the bargain, restore a bit o~ nei~hbodiood qudiW to residential areas that have become high-speed eom- muter speedways. In a ]ar~er sense, interest in lrafl~c edmiu~ comes in d~e w~e of d~e rediz:~- Uon flint building one's way out of tn~e problems e~n be an unre~ehnble ~oal. "For years, we genuinely believed that Photograph and drawing comte? of Glatting Jackson Kerrher Ang/in l,opez Rinehart August 1996 G O V E R N I N G 25 INTI3~ECTION SLOW POINT we built adequate roadway space, it would alleviate our congestion problems," says Cynthia lloyle, a consultant fi)r the A~n(,rican I'lmming Ass(~:iali(),. "We l.till r()atls g() years ago wilh the l)romise thai they would keep traffic nmning sm(~>thly into the next centmy, but they were filled to captmi¢ ~thin a few years." With more roads encouraging more h't~Bc, says Hoyle, and studies sho~ng that higher speeds do not always mean greater carrying capacity, planners began to fi~cus on building roads that encouraged sustainable use and appro- priate driver behavior. "Liveable traffic" is the term used by Walter Kulash, a principal at an Orlaudo, Florida, plan- ning firm whose prqjeets have eahned streets in Florida, Califi>rnia and N l innes()ta. There are a lot of ways to create "liveable traffic," aud not all of them close off streets the way Meado~v- brook's (livcder does. Inthet, the close-it- (h)wn alq)r()ac, h is a c()~)lcnli()~s among traffic calmers. Kulash suggesb that ifs more e~eient t() keep most roads ()l)cn, with thc caveat that "troy can (lfivc the way we want in neighl)orhoods or take the hi.er roads. It's l)ehavior we're after." Changing driver behavior "means changing perceptions of space," says l)avid Suchcr, a Seattle url)an planning expe~. "People respond to desi~, even ff they're not aware (ff what ~ey're doing." Engineers who built residential streets long, ~de and sm~ in the interest of s~e~ and then posted speed limits of ~ mph were sending mixed messages to drivers. Even cautious drivers "read" such streets and think highway, says Sucher. "Ifa mad is originally designed fi)r 45 miles per hour and marked fin' 30, people pick up on the contradic- tion ant{ they drive 45." Traffic calmers, by contrast, try to encourage slow driving with an environmental approach. To create that environment, traffic engineers have come up ~th a vari- ety of tools. They include relatively new devices, with such names as the "choker" and ~e "curb-bulb"; variations on more fitmiliar ideas, such as speed "humps" (redesigned and sul)tler ver- sions of the speed bumps that have rat- tled tail pipes in shopping-center parBng lots for decades); aud even banks of well- placed ~ees. Betrofitting exis~ng roads to e~m tr~- ftc most often involves craning ~e dri- ver's path fix)m the straight, and fitstest, line I)elwecn l)(}i~lls. Mclh()(ls ()f vehMe c()nh'()l are divided into vertical and h()ri- zontal categories. Vedical (levites include speed tables (raised crosswalks that cars p~s over comfo~ably at ~ mph but jar- fin~y at 35), speed hmnps (now desired with a cu~ature gentle at slow speeds but exponentially disruptive at higher speeds), anti a vafie~ of natundistic tech- niques. A series of three or fi)ur hill crests, ordinarily removed from a roadbed during con- stmction, can be used tc slow tra~c and soothe drivers naturally, says Kulash, breaking nF long sight lines that fos- ter disengagement ~om the roadway environ- ment and cliP,se sensa- tions of speed. Simi- larly, a change in paVClllelll [{~X[lll'~, SIIC~I as bfieBng over a cross- walk, eau signal drivers to slow dom~ in anticil)alion ofpedestrians. Speed humps can be installed for as little as $1,500 each and include little maintenance cost other than periodic repaintiug. In Fact, says C. Edward Wal- ter, chief of the traffic engineering divi- sion in lloward County, Mawlm~d, up to 30 percent of the cost associated with installing speed humps comes ~om the signs neeessa~ to advise drivers of their presence; once speed humps are on a s~eet and "si~ed," ~e ad~on~ cost of more humps is lessened. The affordahility of speed humps, however, can lead to their over-use. To be effective in reducing speed, says Wal- ter, speed humps must be spaced regu- larly on a roadway surfitce, and this, ironi- cally, can work to make drivers more aggressive. "We don't like to see more than one or two at a time," says Kulash. 'They have a hostile, aK~'essive connota- tion fi)r drivers," and an angry driver is more likely to be a problen~ driver. For that reason, says Kulash, many cahuers would rather employ horizontal approaches, which offer more design flex- ibility and subtlety. A fav()rite horizontal technique for Kulash is the "mid-hlock diverter," which adds a landscaped obstacle in file middle of a residential street, forcing cars to divert around it and signaling them to slow. "It deflects a driver's course, breaks up the long street view and creates pro- teeted on-street parking and public green space," lie says. What's Iht)re, lhe mid- l)lock (liverler can most often i)e inst~dled without widening streetS or rebuilding drainage systems. Diverters can be used at intersections as well as mid-block, steering cars into designated turning patterns--picture small versions of the traffic circle--and creating enough of a detour to fo]re dri- vers passing through the iutersection to slow down, in some cases just enough to SINGLE-LANE SLOW POINT allow municipalities to do away '~4th net- tlesome fi)ur-way stop sigus. That can make streets more e~cient even while lowering speeds, and it can help cut back on the excessive use of stop signs as speed-control devices, a practice traffic engineers frown on because it fosters genend disrespect fi)r traffic signals and leads some drivers to speed up be~een signs to make up for lost time. Cities such as Seattle and Portland, Oregon, have made such mini-tr~c circles mainstays of their residenfi~ tr~c systems, result- ing not only in success~l ~c m~age- 26 GOVERNING August 1996 Drawings courtesy of Glatting Jackson Ketrher Anglin Lope~ Rinehart mcnt lint in a system of attractively land- scap('d m'igld~orho{~d markers. A hlwizonlal (h'siRn lind S~chcr thvors slt~win~ cars. 'l'l~t' c~rl~ I~v~ll~ I1.' fi.' ('(1~' ~d'l);.'ki~~ I:..'s. slr('('l I)('(h'slri:u~s 1.~v(' h)('mss, il i~l('rs('cli<n~s 1)v rc(lucinE l~n'ninE ra(lii A vc,'si<),~ ()f Ih(' cml) lmll) can als() ~s(.(I mi(I-l)h)('k, wl~('rc it's known as thc "i)cdcsh'ian l)cninsula." and where it often works in concert with a "slow point" or "choker." an area where the road hed is nam)wed (and o[ten angled) enough to fi)me drivers to slow at pedes- trian crossings. In some cases, a choker will na,'r()w Iht mad hod (m(.,gh t()allow (rely ()~(~ car h) pass at a lime, fi)rcin~ (mc(m,in~ cars h) yicl(1. While this may sccm like a rccil)c Ibr hca(l-()n collisions. eahncrs say thc opposite is tree. The sin- ~le-lane choker reduces accidents 1)y slowing drivers and forein~ them to aeknosvled~e and interact with other vehicles on the roadway. Such interae- 6o,,s "dcn..,d eye contact fi'om (ldw~rs, a,,(I arc l)(.s(),,al a,.! ,'a,'('/y h()slih~." says K,,lash. "ll's Iht ki,,(! ()1' Ihi,~ lhal's ()n fi'()m Ii,no im,,~emo,~al on nei~hbor- h()od slrocls where there's parkin~ and (rely one car can ~el !%" ven traffic cahners agree that, for it to work in the long mn, making the slow slower has to he balanced by making tile fast lhster. "We want t(, make h,cal r(,ads slower and major roads more efficient," says Michael Frisbie, a traffic (.'n~in(;(.' fi,r the city (,f Phoenix who hms Il,('. N(,i~ld)ori.)()(I 'l'rallk'. Mana~cm(,.t Ih'()~ram. "so we also look at commuter I)()lllcnccks. IctLtum phases, light timing. They go hand in hand." Thc prohlcm is that not everyone a~rccs on where t() draw thc linc hctwecn collector road and residential street. In M()ntgomery County. Maryland. for eXaml~lc, a tra[]]c calming program has installe(l more than 500 speed humps since July 1994. many oF them on roads once frequented 1)y commuters. The county ~11 consider u~ng acaon ff test- lng shows there to be more than ~ cars per day on a ~ven street; otherwise, says INTT:.RSECTION DIVERTER Scott Wainwright, the program's director, "it's just not justified for the money." Phoenix uses 1,000 vehicles per day as a critt;ria, an(1 if Mcath)wl)rook Avenue were in Montgomery County, its western half (lested at 574 vehicles per day) would still he nearly eligible fi)r addi- tional cahning--even after the diverter's installation. Some jurisdictions are more interested in measuring speed of traffic than volume of cars. Howard County relies heavily on 24-hour mechanical speed counters: If 15 pcrc('nl of Ill(: (lrivers are traveling at mm'c than 10 miles per hour over the posted limit, the county will take action. That is, if that's what the neighborhood wants. "We go to the community and let Even traffic calmers agree that, for it to work in the long run, making the slow slower has to be balanced by mak- lng the fast fasten them vote for or against it," says Walter. "We require 60 percent approval of those who actually vote." Montgo~('rv (;,,unty focuses its comn, ~, fi~v ;il q~roval process on specific pr()l~lvm areas. A petition ~.~st 1.. sit~.~ed 1)y ~vo- thirds <~t' ll~c, 1)<~]ses on the affecte(~ ldo<,k ¢,,~ <)pposcd to thc wh(,h, ].,i~l d ~< ,fl.)od, which Ilowar(I t;<~)tv'g procedure hy thc h)cal civi(, a~s(:¢,i;di,,~ ~. Like Howar({ (>,~tx. !q.)enix polls entire nci~hl)orl. ,¢ ~1~. ;t~,l ~dll~ough gen- erating consensus:; i~ ~<~,allx' ~()t hard for communities, thc pr<)ccdurc sometimes reve~s loc~ anger to be h)calized to a few voc~ residenb. Along Phoenix's ~eside Boulev~d, for example, a su~ey w~ ~s- ~buted to 7~ households in res~nse to the complaints of about 30 residents proposing res~ctons to ~e hea~y ~v- eled thoroughfare. The suwey, Frisbie says, reve~ed 'q)uge op~siaon" to d~- tic restrictions on Lakeside. Speed humps and enhanced ~lice enforcement were employed instead. The choices available to the residents along Lakeside Boulevard illustrate traffic calming's flexibility--fiscal and otherwise. 'q'here's a lot of bang for the bucks," says Kulash. Since many approaches to calming can be installed cheaply, he adds, "you can proceed in tiny increments, five thousand dollars at a time." That provides plenty of room for trial and error. The Meadowbrook project, for example, begm) with a temporary struc- ture. If it had turned out to have been a mistake, the city could have removed it and cut its losses immediately. "The big thing is, you can experiment," says Sucher. "Fry ()ne intersection and maybe it'll work. It doesn't have to be a re/~on- wide policy. You can put one idea in and see what happens." One thing that happens, of course, is that commuters lose some of their favorite shortcuts. While that may ratchet up their level of aggravation, it may even offer something for them as well. Sucher suggests that traffic calming provides enough structure to automobile h'afflc allow it to continue to be a part of cities without overrunning them. "A lot of new urbanists are anti-car," he says, "but that scares ordinary citizens. Traffic calming is a compromise that people can accept." [] August 1996 G OV E R N I N G 27 ITEM NO. 9a DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1996 AGENDA ,~UMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR REGULAR ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION CANVASSING RESULTS OF NOVEMBER 5, 1996 ELECTION AND SWEARING IN OF NEW COUNClLMEMBERS AND MAYOR At the October 30, 1996 meeting the City Council discussed the potential date and time for the swearing in of the newly elected Councilmembers and Mayor. At that time it was believed that 2:30PM on Friday, November 15 would be the designated time and date. Due to a conflict with a presently scheduled event in the Council Chambers in the afternoon, a morning meeting is necessary. To allow adequate opportunities for the newly elected councilmembers to schedule their calendars, Staff is requesting that the window of 10:00AM to 12:30PM be reserved for the swearing in ceremonies. Staff is still attempting to secure a precise time from Marsha Young, the County Recorder when she would be available. We will present that time at the November 6 meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set November 15 Between 10:00am and 12:30pm as the Date and Time the Regular Adjourned City Council Meeting to Adopt Resolution Canvassing Results of November 5, 2996 Election and Swearing in of New Councilmembers and Mayor ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): Appropriation Requested: Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A (if budgeted) N/A Michael F. Harris, AICP, Assistant City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager None Car~d-ace'l--I~rsley, ~'it Manager mfh:asrcc 11696swe